Until the advent of materialism and 19th c. dogma, Western Civilisation was superior to anything Islam had developed. Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam. Proof of this resides in the 'modern' world and the unending political-economic and spiritual poverty of Muslim states and regions. Squatting on richer civilisations is not 'progress'. Islam is pagan, totalitarian, and irrational.
(Muslims in London, during Eid, gathering for a very public prayer)
Muslims are fast dominating the urban centres of the decaying, dying, weak, dystopian, anti-Christian ‘West’, formerly a haven for civilisation. In most EU and UK urban areas Muslims now constitute anywhere from 5-40% of the population. Every major EU urban centre is becoming decidedly un-European. White Europeans are becoming a rare sighting in many areas. Demographic shifts to Africans, Muslims, Indians and Chinese are accelerating with the continued enforcement of open borders. In the UK during 2022, some 50.000 mostly African, some Albanian (which is what the media focuses on) fighting age males will have been escorted onto the south coast of England by the Royal Navy and Lifeboat Association. Few if any, will be deported. They are a tithe of the 1 million or so immigrants, both legal and illegal, that enter the UK each year with about 300.000 leaving. All told most of the net immigration of 700.000 is non-White, non-European. This has been ongoing for 10 years or more. How much longer will the national cultural fabric hold before such a country is either engulfed in violence or is simply conquered.
Beyond the abstraction of Muslim metaphysics, or the intolerant Jihad of the Koran, beyond Muhammad’s injunction for offensive warfare against the Unbelievers, we can see the ‘migration’ or Hijra of Muslims everywhere within the post-Western world, especially in its decayed, frayed and increasingly lawless urban areas. In the UK few mosques existed in 1970, now more than 2.400 can be found. Muslims can be found all over the police, government, universities and local councils and schools. The cultural shift in 50 years is so dramatic and extensive, it likely cannot be reversed. Muslim imams in the UK and elsewhere openly proclaim that they will conquer their host country. Choudary a criminal Muslim ‘preacher’ and mob leader prophesises that Buckingham Palace will become a mosque. Who is to say he is wrong. For someone visiting an urban area of the EU, or London, what do they see? Beyond the desecrated and even fire-bombed churches such as Notre Dame, Saint Sulpice or the endless array of cultural degradation both visible and invisible, what is the impression given? Compared to 50 years the trend lines are clear and they are accelerating, not lessening. As an American who just visited London recently wrote, London like so many other UK and EU cities is simply not an English or ‘native’ city anymore. And this is precisely the plan. None of this is by accident.
===Source Link
As an American, when I go to England, I want to see and hear someone who looks and sounds like Laurence Olivier or Julie Andrews, not someone who sounds English—but isn’t—and looks like Sadiq Khan.
In keeping with the city’s Muslim mayor, a common sight is burqas—those “medieval rags,” as the late Oriana Fallaci called them—that cover Muslim women head to toe because the sight of a woman’s arm or leg might drive a man mad with passion [How Oriana Fallaci's Writings on Islamism Are Remembered—and Reviled, by Annabelle Timsit, The Atlantic, December 15, 2017]. Muslim women in hijabs parade through Harrods, spending their wealthy Arab husbands’ money with abandon. Some of Harrods’ decor, most notably the Egyptian escalator and other imitation trappings of ancient Egypt, are the work of its former foreign owner, Mohamed Al-Fayed, the father of Dodi Fayed, the man with whom Princess Diana began an affair to stick her thumb of the eye of the British royals after Prince Charles divorced her.
Owned by the government of Qatar, Harrods is no longer an English store—exactly as London is no longer an English city.
Also foreign were most of the waiters, waitresses, and other restaurant employees I encountered, including almost the entire staff of my hotel. Some were white, but again, they weren’t English. They were French, Polish, or Eastern European. The white woman who managed the hotel restaurant was a Greek who emigrated to England so her young son could pursue an information technology career. Nice as she was, she will hardly defend her adopted city’s English heritage. Neither will any of the foreign white waitresses, delightful and accommodating as they were. Nor do the dusky-hued waiters and other staff, including the polite, accommodating fellow who sent me on my way to the airport. Anyone behind a counter in a store, including Harrods, seemed to be a non-white foreigner. A woman in a hijab worked behind the custom chocolate counter.
Many of the English whites I saw or met were either school kids, such as those who were at the British Museum, tourists from other parts of England, or, as one would expect, working class men and women. The men who managed a small produce stand outside Victoria Station were white, as were most of the cab drivers I met in London. The cabbie who drove me back to the airport was a working-class white who drove newspaper delivery trucks before his days as a hack.
And here’s something I didn’t see in London, sadly enough, that I didn’t see in Rome 15 years ago: women pushing strollers, and certainly no mothers pushing strollers with three or four little ones in tow. Teenagers were few and far between. Almost all the whites were 20-something or older. Just about the only kids I saw were on that field trip at the British Museum.
Like the Italians, the English are contracepting and aborting themselves out of existence as Muslim women routinely spawn five or six wee Mohammeds. Most births in England are to Polish and Pakistani women [Births by parents’ country of birth, England and Wales: 2019, UK Census]. The highest fertility rates are among Arabs and Africans.
Speaking of the British Museum, by the way, while it peddles the same Woke “history” they all do, such as A Little Gay History, and has apologized for the past of its “slave trader” founder, Hans Sloane, it hasn’t gone completely round the bend [British Museum bosses remove bust of its founder Sir Hans Sloane over his links to slavery, by Lizzie Dean, The Daily Mail, August 24, 2020]. Some exhibits and the guidebook still label antiquities with “B.C.,” instead of the obnoxious, infuriating, and purposely Christophobic“B.C.E.” When the museum’s staff will catch on and correct the oversight we cannot know.
As for English, or London-born or reared, blacks, they did not appear as sullen or menacing as American blacks. Perhaps that’s because they speak with English accents, or more likely, because they simply aren’t sullen and menacing. They apparently don’t viscerally hate whites, at least not yet, because the schools and media haven’t treated them to hate-whitey propaganda 24-7-365.
My English hostess and traveling companion told me that is changing precisely because BLM has reared its ugly head [Thousands join Black Lives Matter protest in London, as bolted police horse causes panic, by Rob Picheta, Nic Robertson, Mick Krever and Nada Bashir, CNN, June 8, 2020]. BLM vandals and rioters have, for example, torn down a statue of English merchant, philanthropist, and slave trader Edward Colston of Bristol, who endowed schools, hospitals, and almshouses [Edward Colston statue: Protesters tear down slave trader monument, BBC, June 8, 2020].
Another sign that white Englishmen no longer control the once-great city: what I witnessed while waiting in line to visit Westminster Abbey—a tour I declined because of the 25-pound entry fee.
Shouting “Allahu Akbar,” a gang of angry Muslims—Muslims are always angry about something—marched down the median of St. Margaret’s Street as it turned into Abingdon. What they were ranting about we were not given to know, but my intrepid hostess for the trip gave them a piece of her mind: “Go home!” she shouted. “Go home.”
After I exited the line into the abbey, a young American tourist asked if we were leaving. Yes, we said.
Replied the tourist: “Just like those Muslims need to, right?”
The Muslims assembled elsewhere to continue their unwelcome raree. No one complained, and even if someone had organized an anti-Muslim counterprotest, they would likely have been met with arrest. After all, if Muslims are permitted to behead people in broad daylight, what’s the problem with a dozen or so furious, menacing protesters who scare the tourists outside Westminster Abbey? Or blocking sidewalks for the call to prayer?
These violent, unassimilable people openly plan to conquer England—they know they can’t assimilate and remain faithful Muslims—and that plan, as South London-born terror preacher Anjem Choudary has promised, is moving ahead.
Again, as the Leftist BBC reported, more than 20,000 colonists disguised as “migrants” have invaded England since January 1. Choudary tells followers to use public benefits to fund jihad, plans to turn Buckingham Palace into a mosque, and warns that Shariah law, via demographic war, is coming to the sceptr’d isle.
For all we know, Choudary tells his disciples to defecate and urinate in the street, too.
Of course, this can and will change if the immigration is stopped. But that doesn’t seem likely to happen. London and other major cities such as Birmingham, where political power lies, are controlled by Leftists and Muslims because, to cite Cleese, they are not English cities any more.
“Asian” grooming gangs got away with mass rape, a form of sexual jihad, for three decades for a reason: Imported Muslims are so numerous in England that police and public officials feared being called “racist” if they identified the “ethnicity” and targeted the culprits to stop it [More than 1,000 children were raped and sexually exploited over 30 years in Telford where police and council officials 'ignored' abuse over fears investigating Asian men would ‘inflame racial tensions’, by Jessica Warren, Daily Mail, July 12, 2022].
The Labour Party opened the borders not just to “rub the right’s nose in diversity,” but to Elect A New People—Arab, African, and Asian Muslims—who would vote for the Left. But even “conservative” prime governments, the last few years, the border remained open.
As Nigel Farage, the hero of Brexit, recently said in a much-noted article:
I led a previous political insurgency as the leader of Ukip. Britons may well find that the next insurgent leader in the UK, whoever he or she may be, is nowhere near as moderate as I was.
This immigration disaster will trigger a new political insurgency Telegraph (UK), August 26, 2022
===
And if anyone agrees with this author, or observes the same, they are of course, racist, white-supremacist, intolerant, anti-science and phobic.
Peter Brown synthesises the rise of Christianity, especially during the years from 300 A.D. to 450 A.D., a crucial time for the expansion and solidification of a once outlawed, persecuted, and perjured faith. Brown describes the expectations of upper-class Romans in the 4th and 5th centuries, as the empire imposed not only fiscal rigour and enhanced taxation; but endeavoured to ward off the cruelty of pagan society, attempting to ameliorate the awful conditions of most of its subjects, the corruption of its military and legal system; and the despotic elements which resulted in a society of enslavement and mass poverty. Brown rightly focuses on the cultural and religious elements which changed the empire from pantheon paganism to Christianity and civilisation.
The Roman empire had a culture of ‘paideia’, which infused everything from schooling to leadership. ‘Paideia’ was the Romano-Greek concept of social behaviour and societal expectation, including classical learning, what to study, how to speak, how to carry oneself in public, career choices based on social standing, what was deemed artful and in good taste, and what was granted as acceptable or unacceptable behaviour. As Brown so elegantly writes, Christianity between the artless form of gospel wisdom and the ‘Paideia’, merged the existing Romano-Greek culture into that of the ‘sublime philosophy’ of the Patristic Church. Christianity originally spread in the civilised urban centres, and did especially well amongst not only the poor, but the elite, the merchants, and the governing classes. By 300 A.D. the followers of Christ would have been no less than 10-15% of the total empire’s population. But with elite monies and support, that would greatly expand, so that by the 5th century, Christianity could claim half the population as laity and followers of the Cross.
Brown relates this tacit and at times covert realignment within Roman society, from paganism to the Church. The emotional sermons of John Chrysostom on caring for the poor and ridding the wealthy of excess consumption and corruption, were emblematic of a philosophy of support, welfare, care and nurture of all people, regardless of standing, skin colour or sin. The Bishops throughout the empire, many from wealthy families, redirected secular wealth to abbeys, churches, hospitals, hospices, and poor relief. When Constantine officially declared Christianity to be the religion of the Roman state in 315 A.D., the benefits of being inside the new merger of Christ-worship and ‘paideia’, attracted the powerful, the ambitious, and the governing elites. Constantine directed large sums of state largesse into the Churches and their attendant organisations as outreach centres to the dispossessed, the poor, and the marginalised. Much power was accreted in this process by Bishops and wealthy patrons who began to play important and politically meaningful roles in the new alignment.
In 395 A.D. a pagan-Western usurper who worshipped a pantheon of gods, was soundly destroyed in battle by Theodosius I near Alexandria, a battle of similar importance to both the empire and to Christianity as Constantine’s victory at the Milvian bridge near Rome in 312 A.D. This confirmed to many the inexorable rise of the Christian faith and the inevitable demise of the ancient pagan gods and their temples. New energy poured into Christian education and writing. Philosophical discourse including naturalism, physics and even mathematics were merged into Christian theological debates and metaphysics. Miracles, both public and private, enacted by believing Christians and holy men, continued to attract converts and discussion. A discernible moral and pragmatic energy was offered by Christians and their Church which in the turmoil of the 4th and 5th centuries, provided succour and aid to many. All men were equal before God, regardless of wealth and status, and all were bowed, humbled and judged. Such a radical belief had never before been offered.
Post Constantine, Christian authors were very busy suffusing Christian doctrines with pagan-Greek ideals from Plato, Aristotle, and others. Histories of the Church were written, following the path set by Eusebius. Monks and monasteries proliferated, not always in harmony with the still strong paganism found throughout the empire. During the 4th and 5th centuries Christianity and paganism lived sided by side, with many Christians still worshipping pagan idols. As Brown relates with many examples of high-profile Christians, Bishops and civic leaders, polytheism was still abundant and many Church leaders were once polytheists despite the rather official and triumphal nature of Christianity by the 5th century.
The modern expectation is that Christianity ‘just happened’ as an inevitable ‘dialectical phase’, or even an imposition by force or power. Nothing is further from the truth. Christianity before 315 A.D. was growing, but was politically and socially marginalised, at times savagely attacked and persecuted and at other times, viewed with disdain and incomprehension by pagan polytheists. Its expansion to include 80% of the empire’s population by the end of the 5th century is due to the conversion by the political and wealthy elite of the empire in key urban areas, the conversion of Constantine and restatement of primacy by Theodosius I, the flow of investment and wealth often through Bishops and the Churches to the poor; the creation of colossal buildings and parade grounds to showcase the religion; and in the general appeal to the poor, the sick, the dispossessed and powerless, through social healing, relief and spiritual-psychic revelations and improvements, including simplicity of belief system and the reduction of pagan idols and theogonies. The expansion of Christianity from a small group of maybe 30 people in 33 A.D. to some 80 million by the end of the 4th century is one of the most remarkable miracles of all.
Mein Koran is a Jihadic document. There is no defensive ‘Jihad’. Jihad by definition is expansive, offensive, which is why the Muslim flag is ‘green’, meaning growing or expanding as with life during spring and the issuance of green foliage. The black and white flag of Jihad represents war and death to the Infidels, used by the legions of Arab Muslims in the 7th century and imitated in this century by ISIS and Boko Harem (Books are forbidden). Many Muslims preach offensive Jihad citing the Koran and the Muslim conquests between the 7th and 16th centuries. The entire point of Jihad is to conquer the globe for the Muhammandan cult.
Palestinian Islamic Scholar Dr. Mohammed Afeef Shadid: Our Goal is to Spread Islam throughout the Globe; We Will Liberate Palestine by the Sword, Kill All the Jews in It,” MEMRI, August 17, 2022.
Shadid rages:
Our goal is to spread the religion of Allah throughout the land. The verses from the Qur’anic chapters “The Repentance” [chapter nine] and “The Spoils of War” [chapter eight] completely abrogated the notion of defensive jihad. We constitute an offensive army. “Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who do not comply with what Allah and his messenger have forbidden.” [9:29] “Fight them until there is no more strife and religious (obedience) will be entirely for Allah.” [8:39] “Kill the polytheists wherever you may find them.” [9:5]
We did not set out from Medina to fight the Persian and Byzantine (empires) because they occupied and plundered our land, [but] to usher them into the abode of Islam and nothing else, and to spread the religion of Allah.
In the days of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, the Islamic caliphate, the abode of Islam spanned six million square kilometers. Under the Umayyad state, it spanned eleven million square kilometers. In the days of the Abbasid state, it spanned 33 million square kilometers. Then, under the Ottoman caliphate, it spanned 10 million square kilometers. The second caliphate, which will rise soon, in our own days, inshallah, will reach 510 million square kilometers, which covers the entire globe. Palestine and the holy land will only be liberated by those who brandish their swords and their weapons in order to bring it back into the abode of Islam and, obviously, to kill all the Jews in it.
At least this particular preacher of Jihad is honest.
The illness, mental, psychological, societal, and cultural of Muhammad’s cult named Submission or Islam. A cult which cannot laugh at itself, does not allow art or iconography, and strikes out like a ravenous, blind, partially lame animal at any who dare to criticise, mock, or even mildly inquire about the cult and its doctrines. Salmon Rushdie some 34 years ago penned a hard-to-read-critique of the pagan cult (celestial, moon, or fertility take your pick as to what the Al Lah or Lord of Mecca was and is), named the Satanic Verses, which is an elucidation of Muhammad’s ‘error’ in allowing pagan idols such as the Sun, Venus or fertility icons to be worshipped alongside the Al Lah or Lord of Mecca. This political trade-off was agreed to by Muhammad in order to secure some peace for his cult. In Muslim lore however, the verses were Satanic in their origin with the devil tricking Muhammad into such a concession. Hence, they were removed from the Koran, Hadiths and Muslim theology.
A fatwa or death sentence issued by Iran and other Muslims, has been open on Rushdie ever since he dared to mildly criticise the Muhammad cult. In Buffalo recently he was attacked by a paid Muslim assassin and knifed on stage at a literary event. The lack of a reaction from Western ‘intellectuals’ (a derogatory term) and the media (fake), is sufficient to show that Muslim violence does work. Catholics won’t murder you for critiquing the Old or New Testaments or calling into question the Nicene creed or offering that perhaps Pelagianism was not such a bad compromise on the nature of Christ, grace and free-will (viewed as heretical by the Catholic Church). You won’t be knifed, beheaded, or shot up for investigating Catholic doctrine or history. But not so with the Muhammadans. Even a whisper of suspicion against the Koran, Muhammad’s life as a war-leader and murderer, or some concern about child-bride marriages, the massacring of Christians in various Muslim countries every year, or the various Jihad attacks since 9-11, is likely to result in threats against your person, and in some ‘Western’ countries, imprisonment for hate speech.
Writer Douglas Murray in The Telegraph states the obvious.
The attack in New York on Salman Rushdie has brought back sharply into focus the fact that the Booker-winning novelist has been a target for Islamists for over three decades, ever since the publication of his novel The Satanic Verses in 1988. After that novel’s publication the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran issued a fatwa against Rushdie. Encouraged by British Muslims, the Iranian leader accused Rushdie of blasphemy and put a bounty on his head. For many years Rushdie lived in hiding, protected by the British state.
Rushdie described those bewildering, terrifying, heroic years living in hiding in his 2012 memoir Joseph Anton. It is quite a work, detailing every demoralising corner of the affair. It includes accounts of the politicians of both left and right who failed to support the novelist, as well as the writers, artists and other public figures who pretended that the Ayatollah had committed an offence, but so had the author of the novel. And of course the crowds of Muslims in Bradford and other cities who burned copies of the book and were allowed to call for Rushdie´s murder on British streets and television.
Muslims screaming on the streets of England for Rushdie to be murdered. Imagine the fake news and ‘expert’ reaction if Catholics or Christians took to the streets demanding that the mosques be torn down after a Muslim Jihad attack, or in solidarity with the thousands of Christians slaughtered and enslaved every year by Muslims in Muslim states. But when Muslims are the ones demonstrating an intolerant, violent and supremacist dogma, the usual array of experts, intellectuals and the science, say nothing.
The late 16th century Catholic missionary Matteo Rici is one of the more remarkable characters of the late Middle Ages,and early modern period. Rici is acknowledged as one of the greatest missionaries in world history. Against overwhelming obstacles including linguistic, cultural, physical, financial, and racial, Ricci proselytised the faith in China, accommodating Chinese sensibilities with the Biblical tradition, based on his belief that mutual respect and a profound appreciation of Chinese philosophy and history, would better serve the needs of evangelisation than force, contempt, condescension, or imposition.
The power of this book is that it presents in a coherent and readable fashion the exploits of this remarkable but little-known missionary. Ricci was Italian and much of the documentation about his life and activities in the ‘Middle Kingdom’ are in Italian, Portuguese or Chinese (in which he was fluent both as a speaker and writer). It sets the exploits of Ricci against the backdrop of the Counter-Reformation, Portuguese Asia, and Late Ming dynasty in China. There are translations of Ricci’s work in this slim volume and excerpts about Ricci by his Chinese contemporaries.
There are four parts to this book. Part 1 describes the trading empire of the Portuguese in Asia and the construction of military and trading posts in the 16th century. Part 2 assesses this maritime expansion and the Catholic missions and their different models from coercion to cooperation and persuasion. Francis Xavier the precursor to Ricci is discussed. Part 3 gives a description of Ming China as encountered by the Jesuits (Ricci was one of many missionaries to China). This section emphasises the most important aspects of Ming China relevant to Ricci’s mission, namely, Confucian learning, Buddhism, scholarly culture, the politics of the Ming court and its policy toward trade and religion. Part 4 is a concise appraisal of Ricci himself and his activities of evangelisation, including his colleague, Michele Ruggieri. There is a comparison of Ricci’s persuasive model against that of the Spanish in Central America, who used the coercive and punishment model. The section outlines the magisterial career of Ricci within the Ming court, which included the introduction of Western geography and cartography, scientific encounters with Chinese scholars, religious encounters with Buddhists and Taoists, and his own perception of the Confucian elite, their culture along with contemporary Chinese appraisals of Ricci himself. Ricci is one of the few and maybe the only Westerner, to be given a Chinese state burial (1611).
Some notable dates of this remarkable man:
1571 Ricci joins the Jesuits.
1578 Ricci and Ruggieri embark for India
1580 Portugal and Spain unite
1582 Ricci arrives in Macao, Ruggieri leaves for Zhaoqing China
1583 Ricci follows Ruggieri and joins him in Zhaoqing
1589 Ricci and Ruggieri move from Zhaoqing to Shaozhu
1590 The wealthy and influential Chinese Qu Taisu becomes Ricci’s disciple
1593 Ricci exchanges Buddhist garb for Confucian clothing
1595 Ricci moves to Nanjing and Nanchang, settling in 1599 in Nanjing
1601 Ricci moves to Beijing
1605 Ricci baptises the influential Xu Guangqi in Beijing
1610 Ricci baptises Li Zhizao and dies
1611 State funeral for Ricci
From a young age Ricci demonstrated an extraordinary aptitude for geography, science, and mathematics. It was these skills which largely won over sceptical Chinese, Confucian and Buddhist scholars and court advisors. From 1583 onward, Ricci (and Ruggieri) learnt Chinese, Chinese history and were avid students of Ming culture. Ricci dressed in Buddhist attire given that for the Chinese, Catholic images, doctrines, devotions to Christ and Mary, rosary beads and prayers, heaven and hell, had homologies in Buddhism.
Many of the early converts were Buddhists who probably saw much similarity in the two creeds. This cultural appeal and sensitivity were a conscious choice made by Ricci and it did engender criticism from many quarters for being too pagan or not firm and strong enough in its Catholic purity. Given that Buddhism was the most popular religion in China, it made sense to Ricci and Ruggieri to work with Buddhists and their powerful supporters and not confront them. Ricci’s most famous and important work, written in Chinese and called ‘A Veritable Record of the Lord of Heaven’, published in about 1602, contains many Buddhist terms, analogies, and statements.
One of Ricci’s converts (Qu) convinced Riccia that the Confucian intellectuals had a low opinion of Buddhist philosopher and its teachers. Ricci changed his look from a poor Buddhist monk to a Confucian scholar. Dressed in black silk with a full length of hair and long beard, he imitated the Chinese elite and criticised Buddhism for its fatalism, vegetarianism and vague doctrines and beliefs. He impressed the Mandarins with his deep learning including Latin, Greek, the history of Greece and Rome and the history of Christian evangelisation. He translated Euclid and other mathematical and scientific works into Chinese and provided maps of the world. Ricci was able to link the core tenets of Confucianism with Christianity, demonstrating that much of Catholic doctrine was already understood and practiced by the Chinese including toleration, forgiveness, respect for ancestors, virtues, and wisdom. Even heaven, hell and Christ were made compatible with Confucian idealism.
Thanks to Ricci, Catholicism was thus portrayed and sold to the Chinese as native and natural, not foreign, and irrelevant. In this regard Ricci converted many thousands of Chinese and in Beijing and elsewhere, established a dozen or so churches and abbeys and give Catholicism a high profile with a great deal of respect given to the Church by the Chinese for its sophistication, learning, culture, and scientific achievements. Ricci’s legacy survived persecutions, wars and intolerance by various Chinese empires and emperors, and Ricci’s name is still famous in China to this day.
Allah or Al Lah (The One, The Deity, The Lord); does not mean ‘God’ in the Christian-Judeo sense. Many Westerners wrongly believe that Al Lah is Arabic for ‘God’. Al Lah comes from the Babylonian word for moon-worship or Sin and the real meaning of ‘Al Lah’, a concept which long predated Muhammad’s cult of violence and terror is not ‘God’. Al-Lah really means ‘The Lord Deity’, or ‘Chief Deity’, or ‘First amongst all Deities’, not God as a Christian or Jew would understand that word. There are usually 3 interpretations of what the Al Lah or Hu’Baal means: 1-Storm or Thunder worship, 2-Fertility worship, or 3-Moon and celestial worship. At different epochs in Near Eastern history, and in differing regions, one finds evidence of all three. The commonality between all the strands of Baal worship is human and child sacrifice, animal sacrifice, polygamy and sexual immorality, oppression and war, and a distinct lack of civilised conduct, codes and moral conduct.
The word ‘Sin’ in Western languages is derived from the brutality, licentiousness, pagan worship, and human-sacrificing horrors of the Baal cults of which Muhammadism or Islam is one variant. These fertility-celestial and moon worshipping cults did not esteem the human, the child, monogamy, morality, nor did they understand boundaries and individual rights. There were barbaric paganisms who had no problems with sexual hedonism, profligate living, child-sacrifices, and constant bloody warfare. Sodom and Gomorra were examples of such ‘sin’.
Not consigning the ‘Lord’ or ‘Chief Deity’ of Mecca into historical context just enables Moslems to redefine ‘Al Lah’ to be whatever they propose including ‘God’, and even the ‘same God as that worshipped by Christians’. This lends credence to the propaganda that Islam is a ‘religion’ with only a different emphasis on doctrinal theology separating it from Judaism and Christianity. If viewed through the lens of history and archaeology this claim or belief is absurd.
History and archaeology have confirmed the following:
Near Eastern cults including those in Mecca, worshipped celestial objects, the most important being the Moon or Sun. Much of this comes from the Sumerian-Babylonian empires(s), which dominated the Near East including Arabia, for millennia.
In the Old Testament Canaanites, Hittites, Philistines and most tribes were Moon worshippers, with Baal the Moon God being the venerated deity, usually expressed in the image of a Golden Calf (the story of Moses at Sinai and the tribes of Israel rejecting God for Baal and building the image of a golden calf, whilst engaged in hedonistic sex, drinking and dancing is an example).
The Kabaa shrine itself was a crude structure dedicated to celestial worship. The main idol was Hubaal resplendent archaeology tells us, in red-carnate stone, long pre-dating Muhammad. This Hubaal was called ‘Al Lah’ and Muhammad pronounced him the ‘greatest of all Gods’ or Allahu Akhbar the Moslem war-cry. Evidence gathered from both North and South Arabia demonstrate that Moon-God worship was clearly a central feature in Arabian life even in Muhammad’s day and was still the dominant cult. According to numerous inscriptions, while the name of the Moon-god was Sin, his title was Al Lah, i.e. ‘the deity’, or ‘the Lord’, meaning that he was the chief or high god among the gods.
The evidence that Muhammadism’s antecedents are celestial and moon-cult in nature is overwhelming. Baal cults were the anti-thesis of Judeo-Christian belief. In fact, Hebraic thought rose in direct opposition to the pagan savagery of the Baal cults. Most Atheists and Marxists descry the ‘violence’ of the Old Testament without putting the Bronze Age into perspective. If the Hebrews did not fight the pagan Baal worshipper’s monotheism never would have arisen, the truth of the Bible and of Christ never would have been witnessed and the savagery which help back civilisation in many areas of development would have gleefully rolled on.
It is clear that ‘Al Lah’ has nothing in common with the Christian idea of God, with history, archaeology, and Arabic sources providing overwhelming evidence that Al Lah veneration is moon and celestial worship, directly linked to Babylonian-Sumerian cults. Indeed, the very word ‘Sin’ comes from the depiction of the immorality and atavistic nature of cults such as Baal or its middle-age reincarnation called Muhammadism.
Sura 9 or ‘Repentance’ is the ‘last revelation’ to Muhammad (pace Bukhari), after a failed attack at a Christian Byzantine fort at Tabuk in northern Arabia, in 631 AD, one year before he was murdered by his men who had grown weary of revelations, his gluttony, his special decrees benefitting himself and his hypocrisy in securing for his own needs and wants, that which was denied others, through the invocation of divine approval. Sura 9 is a violent denunciation, anchored in anger and frustration in not overcoming the hated Christians at Tabuk, to Jews, Christians, pagans and insufficiently pious and Jihadic Muslims, that they must ‘repent’ the error of their ways and accept the totality of the Muhammad-Al Lah project and cult. No room for shirking (disbelief), questioning, inquiry, or doubt. Follow, obey, convert or dominate the Unbelievers and receive paradise in this life and the next as your reward. This Sura intimates that though there may be setbacks and even defeat for the followers of Muhammad, a final global victory, is assured and this chapter supersedes all other chapters in the Koran.
Spencer: Given the doctrine of abrogation (see 2:106), this gives it precedence over other doctrinal pronouncements in the Qur’an and codifies its bellicosity as normative for believers for all time.
The Muslim Jihad is thus permanent and universal.
This Sura is translated into English here (Translated by Yusuf Ali, a fanatical Muslim apologist, so there is no ‘mistranslations’ which so bemuse Muslimophiles when discussing problematic texts). The excerpts below are from Robert Spencer’s book with explanations on key verses provided by Spencer in italics. The verses listed are not obviously comprehensive but selected for importance. This link can be used to read the translation of all the verses in this chapter which are not copied out in their entirety.
Verse 1: Break Treaties with the Infidels
Freedom from obligation from Allah and his messenger toward those of the idolaters with whom you made a treaty. According to the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, the treaty between the Muslims and the pagans of Mecca “is canceled by this statement.” Muslims may break treaties with non-Muslims unilaterally; see 8:58.
Verse 2: Infidels will burn
Travel freely in the land for four months, and know that you cannot escape Allah, and that Allah will humiliate the unbelievers. Allah will humiliate the unbelievers “in this world by killing and in the Next by the Fire,” says the Tafsir al-Jalalayn. For how the unbelievers are to be punished in this world, see 9:14.
Verse 3: Infidels will face doom
Give news of a painful doom to those who disbelieve. This refers only to those pagans who have violated the terms of their treaties with the Muslims; the other treaties will be honoured to the end of their term. (However) no treaty with unbelievers is envisaged that does not have a termination date; i.e., no treaty of indefinite peaceful coexistence can be acceptable.
Verse 5: Kill the pagans
Then, when the sacred months have passed, kill the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and besiege them, and prepare for them every ambush. But if they repent and establish prayer and give alms, then leave their way free. Indeed, Allah is forgiving, merciful. This is the notorious Verse of the Sword. In a 2003 sermon, Osama bin Laden rejoiced over this verse: “Praise be to Allah who revealed the verse of the Sword to his servant and messenger, in order to establish truth and abolish falsehood.” That is ultimately the goal of jihad warfare: the establishment of Islamic law, which brings about a just society…..Ibn Kathir asserts, on the contrary, that the unbelievers must be killed “on the earth in general, except for the Sacred Area”—that is, the sacred mosque, which is traditionally identified as being in Mecca. This implies an endless conflict…(and)
Thus, even Muslims who do not fulfil Islamic obligations fall into the category of those who must be fought. This is a principle that latter-day Salafist movements apply broadly and use frequently in branding governments that do not rule according to strict Islamic law
Verse 14: Al Lah will help Muslims fight the Infidels
Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, and he will lay them low and give you victory over them, and he will heal the hearts of people who are believers. According to Ibn Juzayy, “Allah will punish them by your hands” means “killing and capture. That is a promise of victory for the Muslims.” The Tafsir al-Jalalayn concurs: “Allah will punish them by killing them at your hands, and disgrace them by capture and defeat.”
Verse 17: Polytheists will end up in the fire
It is not for the idolaters to take care of Allah’s sanctuaries, bearing witness against themselves of disbelief. As for such people, their works are useless and in the fire they will remain. Then Allah declares that the idolaters or polytheists (mushrikeena, from mushrik, polytheist) are not worthy to take care of the sacred mosque. They control it, but as comments Ibn Juzayy, “They do not have either the right or the duty to do so. They inhabit them through forceful occupation and injustice.” They have no right to the mosque because, according to Islamic tradition, Abraham himself built it as a shrine to Allah.
Verse 20: Jihad means fighting
Those who believe, and have left their homes and waged jihad with their wealth and their lives in Allah’s way are of much greater worth in Allah’s sight. These are the ones who are triumphant.
Verse 23: Don’t take Infidels as friends
O you who believe, do not choose your fathers or your brothers for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoever among you takes them for friends, such people are wrongdoers. Says Ibn Kathir: “Allah commands shunning the disbelievers, even if they are one’s parents or children, and prohibits taking them as supporters if they choose disbelief instead of faith.” See also 9:113, 29:8, 31:15, and 60:4.
Verse 29: Fight, subjugate and kill Christians
Fight against those do not believe in Allah or the last day, and do not forbid what Allah and his messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth, even if they are among the people of the book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued. Here is the one place where Muslims are explicitly directed to make war against and subjugate Jews and Christians, the “People of the Book,” and A hadith depicts Muhammad saying: “I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah, and he who professed it was guaranteed the protection of his property and life on my behalf.”
Verse 30: Christians are perverse
…the Christians say, The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the statements of those who disbelieved before. May Allah curse them. How perverse they are.
Verse 34: Rabbis and Priests are greedy, corrupt
O you who believe, indeed, many of the rabbis and monks devour the wealth of mankind wantonly and bar people from the way of Allah. They who hoard up gold and silver and do not spend it in the way of Allah, give news to them of a painful doom. Says Ibn Kathir: “This Ayah warns against corrupt scholars and misguided worshippers. Sufyan bin Uyaynah said, ‘Those among our scholars who become corrupt are similar to the Jews, while those among our worshippers who become misguided are like Christians….
Verse 35: The greedy end up in Gehenna
On the day when it will be heated in the fire of Gehenna, and their foreheads and their flanks and their backs will be branded with it, Here is what you hoarded for yourselves. Now taste of what you used to hoard. On Gehenna, see 2:206, as also at 9:49, 9:63, 9:68, 9:73, 9:81, 9:95, and 9:109.
Verse 36: Arabian Astrology and calendar creation was primitive
The pre-Islamic Arabic calendar, like the Islamic calendar, was lunar, consisting of 354 days rather than the 365 days of the solar calendar. To make up this difference, Arabians added leap months—one every three solar years. This verse, which was supposed to have been revealed in the year 629, forbids adding leap months. In connection with this, the contemporary Islamic scholar Johannes Jansen points out that in the eighth/ninth century biography of Muhammad by Ibn Ishaq via Ibn Hisham, “For every event which took place in the life of Muhammad, Ibn Ishaq meticulously recorded in his Sira in which month it took place,” and that this is “one of the main reasons why Western historians classified his book as historiography in the normal sense of that word.”
Verse 39: Jihad is an obligation
If you do not go forth, he will afflict you with a painful doom, and will choose a people other than you instead of you. You cannot harm him at all. Allah is able to do all things. Those who “incline away from jihad,” says the Tafsir al-Jalalayn—will face divine punishment and be replaced by another people.
Verse 41: Jihad is an obligation unless ill or weak (old)
Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and wage jihad with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah. That is best for you, if you only knew. Ibn Kathir, Ibn Juzayy, and the Tafsir al-Jalalayn all agree that that command was abrogated by 9:91, which exempts the weak or ill from the obligation to fight. This once again demonstrates that the Qur’anic concept of fighting involves warfare against non-Muslims, not a struggle within the soul of the individual believer. This fight is of the highest priority, to the extent that a hadith depicts Muhammad as being asked, “Guide me to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward),” and answering: “I do not find such a deed.”
Verse 44: Don’t question the obligation of Jihad
Those who believe in Allah and the last day do not ask permission of you that they not wage jihad with their wealth and their lives. Allah is aware of those who keep their duty. True Muslims did not hesitate to wage jihad, even to the point of risking their property and their very lives. The ones who refused to do this weren’t believers.
Verse 52: Conquer the Infidel or die in the attempt
Say, Are you waiting for anything to happen to us except one of two good things, while we await for you that Allah will afflict you with a doom from him or at our hands. Wait, then. Indeed, we are waiting with you. The two best things are martyrdom or victory. The Muslims will either defeat the enemy or be killed by them, in which case they will enter paradise, a win/win situation (see 3:124).
Verse 60: Charity for Muslims alone to make the cult stronger
The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and to free the captives and the debtors, and for the sake of Allah, and the wayfarer, a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is the knower, the wise one. Allah specifies those to whom the obligatory alms, zakat, can be distributed; it can be spent “for the sake of Allah.” That means, explains the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, it can be spent to “enable those who do not have booty to undertake jihad, even if they are rich.” Ibn Kathir states that zakat for the sake of Allah “is exclusive for the benefit of the fighters in Jihad, who do not receive compensation from the Muslim Treasury.” As-Suyuti adds: “Some say that it is spent on all that is connected to jihad: treaties with the enemy, building fortresses, digging ditches, providing weapons and provision, and paying spies, even if they are Christians.”
Verse 65: Mocking Muhammad is a blasphemy (punished by death)
And if you ask them, they will say, We were only talking and joking. Say, Was it Allah and his signs and his messenger that you mocked? “Mocking the signs of Allah,” says as-Suyuti, “is tantamount to kufr,” that is, unbelief. This is one reason why cartoons of Muhammad are such a hot-button issue among many Muslims today.
Verse 68: Unbelievers go to Hell
Allah promises the hypocrites, both men and women, and the unbelievers, the fire of Gehenna for their dwelling. It will be sufficient for them. Allah curses them, and theirs is lasting torment.
Verse 73: Muslims must wage war
O prophet, wage jihad against the unbelievers and the hypocrites. Be harsh with them. Their ultimate dwelling place is Gehenna, an evil destination. “Wage jihad” is jahidi, strive hard (see 2:218). Attributed to Ibn Abbas is this explanation: “Allah commanded the Prophet to fight the disbelievers with the sword, to strive against the hypocrites with the tongue and annulled lenient treatment of them.”
Verse 86: Wage Jihad
And when a sura is revealed, Believe in Allah and wage jihad along with his messenger, the men of wealth among them still ask permission from you and say, Permit us to be with those who sit.
Verse 88: Your personal Jihad brings rewards
But the messenger and those who believe with him wage jihad with their wealth and their lives. Such people are the ones for whom the good things are. Such people are the ones who are the successful.
Verse 90: If you lie to avoid participating in Jihad, you are not a Muslim
And those among the nomadic Arabs who had an excuse came in order that permission might be granted to them. And those who lied to Allah and his messenger sat at home. A painful doom will fall upon those among them who disbelieve. Ibn Juzayy says that the refusal of the Bedouin Arabs to wage jihad invalidated their claim to be Muslim: “They were the people who did not go on jihad nor ask excuses to stay behind them, so they lied when they claimed to believe.”
Verse 100: Emigrate to spread the cult
And the first to lead the way, of the emigrants (muhajiroun) and the helpers (ansar), and those who followed them in goodness, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with him, and he has made ready for them gardens under which rivers flow, in which they will remain forever. That is the supreme triumph. In Islamic tradition, the muhajiroun, “emigrants,” are those who left their land to go to another and bring Islam to it. The first muhajiroun were Muhammad and the original Muslims of Mecca when they moved to Medina. The later converts in Medina were known as the ansar, “helpers.” The emigrants have the priority among Muslims, which is an indication of the importance placed upon emigration for the sake of Allah. See 4:100.
Verse 111: Al Lah owns your wealth, so Jihad, including suicide bombing is your duty
Indeed, Allah has bought from the believers their lives and their wealth, because the garden will be theirs, they will fight in the way of Allah and will kill and be killed. It is a promise that is binding on him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. Who fulfills his covenant better than Allah? Rejoice then in your bargain that you have made, for that is the supreme triumph. This verse has become in the modern age the rationale for suicide bombing. Ibn Kathir explains: “Allah states that He has compensated His believing servants for their lives and wealth—if they give them up in His cause—with Paradise.” Ibn Juzayy adds significantly that this verse’s “judgment is general to every believer doing jihad in the way of Allah until the Day of Rising.”
Verse 122: Not everyone in the community must fight unless attacked
And the believers should not all go out to fight. Of every troop of them, only a party should go forth, so that they may gain sound knowledge in religion, and that they may warn their people when they return to them, so that they may beware. All the Muslims need not go forth to wage jihad warfare. This is a foundation for the Islamic legal principle that jihad is fard kifaya—that is, a community obligation from which some are freed if others take it up. Jihad becomes fard ayn, or obligatory on every believer, when a Muslim land is attacked.
Verse 123: Contradicting verse 122 all Muslims should fight all Infidels near them
O you who believe, fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty. Says Ibn Kathir: “Allah commands the believers to fight the disbelievers, the closest in area to the Islamic state, then the farthest.”
As evidenced by the sample above, Sura 9 has nothing nice to say about non-Muslims. Jews, Christians, pagans, impious Muslims are targeted for Jihad, conversion or death. The obligation for all Muslims to wage Jihad in some manner is restated and emphasised many times. Everyone in the Muslim community has a divine duty to help the cult achieve its main objective which is world-wide domination. This must be an active, not a passive duty. The Sura demands that every Muslim use their person, their goods, their wealth, and any means available including lies, deceit, breaking of treaties, or emigration to non-Muslim lands, to advance the cause of Muhammad’s cult. Sura 9 is the final ‘revelation’ by the Al Lah to Muhammad and is the clearest statement imaginable, on Muslim intolerance toward all Unbelievers and the never-ending, open-ended demand for war, Jihad, and global domination. No wonder Muslimophiles studiously ignore this chapter.