Bibi Defeats the Dhimmis

https://belleofliberty.wordpress.com/

The book I’m currently reading is a nightmare.  I picked it up after finishing Curt Weldon’s 2003 “Countdown to Terror.”  This current book, I believe was referenced in “Countdown to Terror.”

When we think of Islam, we think of the Koran.  But the Koran is only one part of a trilogy, according to author Bill Warner, who has transcribed two of the other volumes for Western digestion:  “The Hadith: The Sunna of Mohammed” and “The Sira” which is the biography of Mohammed.  The book was published in 2010 by the Center for the Study of Political Islam.

Warner doesn’t transcribe the entire Hadith, but only the parts which refer to Kafirs, “an evil, disgusting [creature], the lowest form of life.  Kafirs can be tortured, killed, lied to and cheated.  So the usual word “unbeliever” does not reflect the political reality of Islam.

“The Koran,” Warner tells us, “says that the Kafir may be deceived, plotted against, hated, enslaved, mocked, tortured and worse.   The word is usually translated as ‘unbeliever;’ but this translation is wrong.  The word ‘unbeliever’ is logically and emotionally neutral, whereas, Kafir is the most abusive, prejudiced and hateful word in any language.

“There are many religious names for Kafirs:  polytheists, idolaters, People of the Book (Christians and Jews), Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, and pagans.  ‘Kafir’ covers them all because no matter what the religious name is, they can all be treated the same.  What Mohammed said and did to polytheists can be done to any other category of kafir.”

According to Warner, a collection of hadiths is called a “Hadith” – capital H.  “There are many collections of Hadiths, but the most authoritative are those by Bukhari and Abu Muslim” the ones used in Warner’s book.  Evidently, Muslim’s book must have been quite influential since Islamists are common called “Muslims” rather like the Lutherans naming their religion after Martin Luther, even though they practice a Protestant form of Christianity.

The Koran are the words of Allah to his prophet Mohammed, the Hadith are the words of Mohammed to his followers, and the Sira is a biography of Mohammed.

“Most people” writes Warner, “think that the Koran is the ‘bible’ of Islam, but it is only about 14 percent of the total textual doctrine.  The Trilogy is the foundation and totality of Islam.”

He also notes, “Islam devotes a great amount of energy to the Kafir.  The majority (64 percent) of the Koran is devoted to the Kafir, and nearly all of the Sira (81 percent) deals with Mohammed’s struggles with them.  The Hadith (Traditions) devotes 32 percent of the text to Kafirs.  Overall, the Trilogy devotes 60 percent of it content to the Kafir.

“Muslims tell Christians and Jews that they are special,” he continues. “They are ‘People of the Book’ and are brothers in the Abrahamic faith.  But in Islam you are a Christian, if and only if, you believe that Christ was a man who was a prophet of Allah; there is no Trinity; Jesus was [neither] crucified nor resurrected and that He will return to establish Sharia law.  To be a true Jew, you must believe that Mohammed is the last in the line of Jewish prophets.

Warner tell us there are three schools of thought in Islam.  “If you believe Mohammed is the prophet of Allah, then you are a believer.  If you don’t, you are a Kafir.”  The third school of thought holds that a kafir who is an apologist for Islam, who doesn’t believe in Mohammed but doesn’t want to pick a fight, either, is a dhimmi.

“Dhimmis do not believe that Mohammed was a prophet, but they never say anything that would displease a Muslim.  Dhimmis never offend Islam and condemn any analysis that is critical of Islam as being biased.”

Islamists believe that through jihad, if they are not killed in battle and rewarded by Allah, then they are entitled to half the land of the people they have conquered.  They then tax the subjugated people, making themselves incredibly wealthy, until the dhimmis are murdered, imprisoned, or run off.

“’Jihad’ is a unique word.  Its actually meaning is struggle or effort.  Islam[ists] talks of two kinds – the lesser and greater jihad.  The greater jihad is spiritual effort or internal struggle, to stop smoking or control one’s greed.   However, the term ‘lesser jihad’ never occurs in any authoritative hadith.”  About two percent of the hadiths  in Bukhari’s collection  holds up other things as equal to jihad.

“The other 98 percent of the jihad hadiths refer to armed violence.  It was violence that gave Islam its success and that is why nearly every hadith calls jihad the best action a Muslim can perform.

There are two phrases known to every Muslim, Warner tells us:

Dar al Islam – “Land of submission”

Dar al Harb – “Land of war”

“The land of war – [dar al harb] – is the country that is free of Islam, free of Allah.  The land of the Kafir must become the land of those who have submitted and are the slaves of Allah [the name “Abdullah” means “the slave of Allah”].  The Trilogy repeatedly stresses that Islam should be in a state of constant pressure against Kafirs; therefore, the relation between Islam and the rest of the world is sacred war or temporary peace.  This struggle is eternal, universal, and obligatory for all Muslims.  The only pause in jihad comes through the need for Islam to strengthen itself.  Peace is temporary. War is permanent…. Peace comes only with submission to Islam.”

“The Hadith summarizes all the key elements of jihad.  (Only the fourth item, the Day of Resurrection, is purely religious in nature.)  It tells us that the whole world must submit to Islam; Kafirs are the enemy simply by not being Muslims.  To achieve this dominance, Islam may use terror and violence.  It may use psychological warfare, fear, theft.  It may take the spoils of war from Kafirs.  Violence and terror are made sacred by the Koran.”

Warner devotes all of Chapter 6 in his book to the Dhimmis.  He begins by telling a story about Mohammed.

“Mohammed took his army a hundred miles [north] from Mediana to Khaybar and attacked the Jews.  Islam was totally victorious.  After taking the property of the Jews as the spoils of war, the Muslims made an agreement called a “dhimmi” with the Jews in Arabia.  The Jews could stay and farm the land if they gave Islam half their profits.  They then became Dhimmis who were under the “protection” [the editor’s quotes] of Islam.

“Thus the word ‘dhimmi’ came to mean permanent, second-class Kafir citizens in a country ruled by Islam.  Dhimmis paid a special tax, and their civil and legal rights were greatly limited.  The only way out of being a dhimmi was to convert to Islam or flee.  The taxes from the dhimmis made Islam rich.

“There are very few hadiths about dhimmis, but it was another of Mohammed’s unique political inventions.   The scorched-earth policy of killing all Kafirs was satisfying to the warrior, but it had an inherent problem:  once everyone was killed, the warrior had to find other work.  Mohammed therefore created the policy of the dhimmi to deal with the Jews.  Dhimmi status was later to include Christians, Magians, and others.”

Warner then goes politically incorrect on the reader.  “It can be argued that the glory of Islam came not from Islam but its dhimmis’ wealth and knowledge.  The dhimmis were the scholars, since the Arabs of Mohammed’s day were barely literate and their classical literature was oral poetry.  The secular knowledge of Islam came from the Christians, Persians, Jews, and Hindus.

“Islam is credited with saving the knowledge of the Greeks from extinction,” Warner writes.  “This is ironic in two ways.  First, it was the jihad against the Byzantine/Greek culture that caused its collapse.  Secondly, it was the  Syrian Christian dhimmis who translated all of the Greek philosophers into Arabic.

“The Hindu numbering system was credited to Islam.  The Muslims took the zero from Hindu mathematicians, and today we call our numbers Arabic numerals.  From carpets to architecture, the Muslims took the ideas of the dhimmis and obtained [plagiarized] the historical credit.  The lists of great Islamic scholars includes the dhimmis with Arabic names living under Islamic dominance.

“Over time, as the dhimmi population decreased, the ‘Golden Age’ of Islam disappeared.”

Warner appears to do a good deal of editorializing.  But he backs up his assertions with valid quotes from the Trilogy, such as B4,53,380:

“Umar drove all the Kafirs from Arabia.  After Mohammed conquered Khaybur, he considered expelling the Jews from the Land of Allah, Mohammed, and the Muslims.  However, the Jews asked Mohammed if they could stay in exchange for their servitude and half of each harvest.  Mohammed said, ‘You may stay on these terms as long as it pleases us.’  The Jews remained until Caliph Umar drove them from Arabia.”

Warner tells us in the next paragraph, “After jihad comes dhimmitude:  Jihad cracks open the culture; dhimmitude replaces it with Islam.  Afghanistan was a Buddhist nation until conquered by Islam; Pakistan was Hindu; Egypt was the culture of the Pharaohs even though it had become Christian; and North Africa was [Coptic] Christian.”

“The actual attitude of Islam toward the dhimmis was more contempt than hatred, and over time the dhimmis disappeared.  They either left or converted.  It was too hard to be a second-class citizen, and the extra taxes were a burden.  As time went on, both Christians and Jews became more Arabic in their outlook; they started to treat women as the Arabs did and their customs became more and more Islamic.  Finally, it was easier to accept Islam as their religion and stop all the pressure and contempt.”

So here we are, now, in the present day.  Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of the Conservative Likud Party in Israel, has won re-election.  His goal was for Likud to gain more seats in the Israeli Knesset so that he’ll have more support in financing the country’s defenses, particularly against Israel.

Meanwhile, the U.S. State Department, under the auspices of Obama, funded Netanyahu’s main opposition.  If this action by Obama isn’t, in fact, unconstitutional (Constitutional scholars:  was it illegal for the president to do this), it isn’t unprecedented:  John F. Kennedy supported the democratic candidate in South Vietnam’s election, only to see his candidate assassinated.  George Washington, our Founding Father and first president frowned upon it.  Progressive Liberals complained vociferously about our engagement in Iraq, accusing President George W. of “nation-building.”

What are we to make of Obama, and particularly his foreign policy?  Mainstream reporters denounced the election of the “Conservative” Netanyahu while potential 2016 Democrat presidential candidate John Kerry goes about negotiating with Iran to allow them to make all the nuclear weapons they want with which to destroy Israel.

Is the United States of America already a dhimmitude nation, paying obeisance to Iran, refusing to support a democratic revolution in Iran, while fiddling with Israel’s elections?  Does Obama, and Bush before him, expect Israel to submit to dhimmitude by creating a dual nation state?  Who does he think he’s kidding?

Certainly not Netanyahu.  He’s no dhimmi.  He’s not afraid to criticize an Islamic nation, especially one as tyrannical as Iran.  Forty-seven Senators, some of them Democrats, were not afraid to criticize Iran and tell Iran’s president that any deal negotiated by the current administration would be invalidated before the White House door slammed Obama in the backside.

Obama had the cheek to take the Senators to task, as though they were errant schoolboys (and girls), claiming that they were out of line in sending a letter that upset his foreign policy.  However, they did have Constitutional authority to write to Iran and inform that nation of the consequences of any favorable negotiation.  Foreign policy, while it is the president’s bailiwick, can only be conducted via the advice and consent of the Senate.

Obama helped arm the Syrians.  His attorney general ran illegal arms to drug dealers in Mexico.  He’s frequently insulted Israel’s prime minister and interfered with that country’s elections.  He’s granted countless executive amnesties that are unconstitutional.  He’s exacerbated civil unrest in Ferguson, Mo.  He vetoed the Keystone Pipeline.  He authorized the execution of Common Core.  He stood by while Americans were executed in Islamoland.  He did nothing about the attack on the consulate annex in Benghazi or the murder of our ambassador to Libya.

Of course, there’s the economy- and savings-gutting Obamacare, which costs too much money and does very little to improve the health of Americans, and nothing to help them pay the costs.  He recently signed onto Internet regulations that will give the bureaucratic FCC far too much political control over Internet communications.  He’s decimated our navy, fired numerous generals, and reduced our own nuclear arms to below parity with Russia and China.  He was caught off-mic sending a message to Vladimir Putin.  He’s surrounded himself with Muslim staffers, including Iranian-born American Valerie Jarrett, the daughter of Socialist-Communists and David Axelrod.

This latest scolding of U.S. Senators doing their legal duty in protecting Americans should be the last straw in Obama’s hypocrisy.  Just when, exactly, are Americans going to wake up and understand how little time they have left to enjoy freedom?  Maybe it’s because most Americans today grew up within the concrete walls of bureaucracy, obeying laws they had no voice in establishing and can do nothing about politically.

For instance, the government can’t take away your right to own a gun.  But it can create, through bureaucracy, a maze of regulations that make it impossible to use that gun, even when your life is threatened.  You can ride a bicycle.  But you have to strap on a helmet, which might save your life if you’re a reckless cyclist (and some kids are).  But it also robs you of the joy of feeling the wind in your hair as you cycle along.  As we become more and more urbanized, there are fewer and fewer safe roads on which cyclists can cycle, which gives the bureaucracy the excuse to put more regulations on automobile drivers.

The time has come to prepare for a regulated, terrifying future without art, music, dancing, drinking, driving, going to the movies, the bank, or the mall.  If the Politically-Correct Police don’t get you, either the criminals or the Muslim Morals Patrol will.

Congratulations to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on his victory.  The Dhimmi Dummies in the Liberal Progressive Media are probably right; the price will be heavy and likely bloody.  To submit to the Islamists is unthinkable, at least to those who love freedom.

But the Islamists simply won’t have it any other way.

Advertisements
Published in: on March 18, 2015 at 9:24 am  Leave a Comment  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://belleofliberty.wordpress.com/2015/03/18/bibi-defeats-the-dhimmis/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: