Saturday, January 1, 2022

Bookmark and Share

Political Islam is Islam. There are no 'moderate pieces' within Islamic theology.

Wrong policy choices from the really smart people.

by Ferdinand III


 

Muhammadanism or ‘Islam’ meaning Submission to ‘Al-Lah’ or ‘The Lord’ of Mecca, was premised on worshipping Baal the moon deity who was the chief deity or Al-Lah of Mecca for millennia, and whose shrine was maintained by Muhammad’s family (hence the close relationship between the moon deity and his profiteer).  Al Lah the Moon ‘father’ had a consort the Sun and 2 daughters (Venus and Mars), each of whom had cult followers and demanded separate rituals and sacrifices. 

 

The Meccan cults echoed similar practices and beliefs which were commonplace in the Near East, most of which were spread by Sumerian-Babylonian imperialism and demands, stretching back to at least 2500-1800 BC, the late Bronze age, or the time preceding the rise of Moses and the Hebrew exodus.  The Canaanites, Jebusites, Amorites, Hittites and other tribal states of the Levant, all worshipped Baal or the moon deity. 

 

The Baal cult is rightly portrayed as demonic in the Old Testament, evil, suffused with human sacrifice, sexual perversity (Sodom and Gomorrah), slavery and immorality.  The wars in the Old Testament are in essence the eradication of this barbarism by a new religion, centred on human freedom, free will, an immanent high God, with a set of laws to end the pagan barbarism of Baal worship. 

 

Islam emanates from, and directly uses, even today, the artefacts from the Baal cult, a Bronze Age relic, a totalitarian system where the entire existence of the person is managed and monitored.  All of the rituals in Muhammadanism can be found in the Bronze age Baal cults (throwing rocks at little devils, kissing stones, the circumambulation around the Kabaa, sex slavery, polygamy, astral worship etc).  As the Old Testament outlines in its apposite history of the Bronze Age, within the Baal cults there is thus no separation between 'moderate' elements and the rest of the cult theology.  To presage Mussolini, everything lies within the cult.  This was Muhammad’s main theme when he conquered Mecca and demolished 364 idols keeping only the Baal idol and its red stone statue.  Even Baal’s consort and daughters were to be eschewed (the Satanic verses by Rushdie) and only the male moon deity venerated, suffused with the existing millennia old practices of pagan Baal barbarism, now elevated to divine status, tinctured with an admixture of garbled Judaism and a purloined twisted Christian ethos to support Muhammad’s totalitarian ideals.

 

The obvious historical roots and development of this Baal-Muhammad cult indicates there is not an 'Islamism' which can be divorced from a supposed 'moderate' Islam.  The book Recital (Koran) and Muhammad’s life and the 1400 Muslim Jihad make this clear.  The cult of Muhammad manages every single aspect of life.  This totality cannot be rejected in any form, nor can a component or part, be ignored or even criticised.  To do so is a blasphemy punished by death.  Leaving the cult is likewise a mortal sin punished by murder.  It is these ‘total’ theological demands and the ideological intolerance of the cult which matters, much as it did with Nazism and Communism, and not the protestation of a ‘secular Muslim’ who may display an individual belief system that could be labelled tolerant or reasonable and rational.  

 

Within Muhammad’s Baal cult the church is the state; the Imam or spiritual leader is the interpreter who must be followed; the cult is the social organization; and the construct of life is dedicated to furthering the aims and ambitions of the cult; in which all men are to be 'returned to Allah' to quote the Koran, because all humans are and must be, Muslim.  Islam can no more be broken into 'parts' of 'moderation' or 'dissent', any more than one can take the Sun and partition it into hot and cold pieces.  Islam is a complete and unified theology, welded together and impossible to parse into sections.

 

Supposed ‘thinkers’ within Islamic ‘jurisprudence’ also concur that the totality of the cult is uber alles.  The end objective is global conquest.  Muhammad demanded the conquest first of ‘Rum’ or Rome, meaning Constantinople, the Eastern Roman and Orthodox Christian empire.  But it also means Rome in Italy and be extension, Muhammad’s invocation demands the destruction of Western civilisation, and indeed all non-Muslim societies across the globe, replacing them with Muhammad’s totalitarianism, centred around the worship of Al-Lah and of course the reverence of Muhammad himself, imitating as with Christology, the deification of the moon deity’s spokesman. 

 

Within the totalitarian state of Muhammad, we also have the hierarchy of paternal governance, not often commented on by ‘experts’ and Muhammadophiles.  Pious Arabs from Muhammad’s tribe are at the top of the Muslim-patriarchal pyramid.  The ‘bloodline’ of the military founder runs supreme.  Next would be Arab Muslims, then mixed blood (Arab based) ‘slaves of Al Lah’.  Muslims of any blood or race would be ranked ahead of Christians, with non-Muslim Blacks, Jews and slaves at the bottom.  Dhimmitude or the existence of non-Muslims in a Muslim state is a real and vicious history of oppression, slavery, hate and intolerance, absent in most ‘histories’ of the Muslim world.  Women as well, do not feature within the socio-political organisation of power within Muhammadanism.  There are no female voices in Muslim history.  Women don’t exist outside of the purview and authority of a man.  Women are simply tools of procreation, destined to produce ghazi or warriors for Muhammad.

 

The most important ‘juridical thinkers’ of the Muhammad cult in the modern age are Qutb, Maududi, and Al Ghazali.  None of the 3 are Wahhabi's, the radical 18th century Saudi sect that still demands the complete fundamentalist interpretation of Islam, and which the Western ‘mainstream’ (ignorant) media and education blame for ‘radical Islamism’.  All 3 of these philosophers are interpreters of the Koran.  The writings and speeches of these men have had more influence in Islam than anyone else save that of the profiteer and war leader Mohammad. They have interpreted and laid out an uncompromising interpretation of Islam, based on the Koran, which has informed all of Islam today. Mohammed would certainly approve of their boundless enthusiasm for war, expansion, and the enslaving of others.  Jihad and the extermination of others was central to all of their works.  Along with Wahhabism, the writings of these apocalyptic horsemen provide a main-spring and a justification for Islamic terror, violence, apartheid and hate. Yet almost no-one in the mainstream media or in the educational systems in the West, will discuss these men. No one in the politically correct multi-cult universe wants to destroy the notion that Islam is a peaceful religion.

 

As millions of Muslims continue to pour into the West as ‘refugees’ or through an immigration system that desires the eradication of Western civilisation, the 'cognitive dissonance' will only continue to grow in academia, the media and within the political elite. These people can't or won't see Islam for what it is, namely a political movement designed to subsume the world under the control of Muslims.