Islam: Religion of Peace?: The Violation of Natural Rights and Western Cover-Up, Fr. Portella

Finally, a Catholic Priest with a clue.  To answer his question: no, of course not.  Islam is not peace anymore than Slavery is Freedom, or Nazism a project of ‘equality’. 

The Church saturated with its Gay Priests and the 40 year sex-scandal with Gays molesting altar boys (the LGBT bona fides) ; its Globaloney-warming-baloney-complex (its fake science bona fides); its election of a ridiculous perhaps non-Catholic as Pope calling himself Francis the II (its Earth Friendly bona fides, though Francis Assisi did try to convert Moslems unlike the present Pope Stupid); its deeply neurotic Vatican-Curia-led love and admiration for the Moslem fascism (emanating from Vatican II and general illiteracy), which has spent 1400 years trying to eradicate the Catholic Church and which is killing Christians every day; may seem beyond any hope of redemption or relevancy in the defence of Western Civilisation and Christianity.  Enter Priest Portella, from a very small minority of Priests who see the world for what it is.  It would not surprise me if he was removed, de-frocked, and humiliated, for his criticism of the Fascism called Muhammadism or Submission (Islam).  Pope Frank the Stupid will take a dim view of Portella’s erudition (assuming he can read and comprehend what is written).

Portella (bold is mine):

Islamists, through the doctrine of dawa (outreach or proselyting), which is an all-encompassing precursor to jihad, seek to convert non-Muslims and summon them to conquer the West, utilizing any number of mechanisms to achieve that goal. While the West is preoccupied with fighting hate speech, Islamophobia, and white supremacist groups, it seems to have willfully ignored the cultivation of Muslim hate speech and supremacist attitudes toward non-Muslims through dawa. Cultural jihadists have also gained headway through their own charities and well-bankrolled networks, which have enabled them to infiltrate university campuses and influence the media and government officials. Consequently, they are able to foster dialogue and coalition building, favorable to their political arrangement and consistent with the political-religious foundation of the sharia. This has become evident by having preferential treatment over other religious denominations despite the separation of church and state as outlined by the First Amendment, such as the prayer room that was set up in 2017 for Muslims at Liberty High School in Frisco, Texas, at taxpayers’ expense. Islamists, personifying themselves in the media as victims of religious hatred and with the help of philanthropists such as George Soros and organizations such as the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), have been partially successful….

The ignorance of the Arabs:

As the medieval Arab historian Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406) said, the Arabs were an ignorant race, with no literary or scientific knowledge, and when they wished to probe the mysteries of creation and the universe they turned for information to the Jews [and Christian literature] who had accepted Islam. These, says this learned author, were no less ignorant than the surrounding Arabs; but they brought over into Islam a mass of their own traditions, especially those dealing with the origin of the creation and with the future of the human race.

(the Koran) is a medieval codification of Bedouin customs that pre-date Islam which are still in force today, such as female genital mutilation, draconian-type penal sanctions for adultery, and theft and the commerce of slavery. Given the current political events, the subject of jihad shall be given primary attention in this section. Jihad is a divine call which all Muslims must respond to.

Mein Koran jumbles up and mis-quotes many passages from the Bible.  The Arab Bedouin, including Muhammad, were illiterate, poor and on the fringes of far greater and richer civilisations – which they coveted – such as the Sassanid and Byzantine Christian empires.  They viewed the Jewish and Christian communities and traders in their midst as far more successful than themselves and wished to emulate them.  The monotheistic traditions and cultural attributes along with related economic and social success, impressed the Arabs and they tried to copy Jews and Christians.  When they were rejected under the leadership of the brigand Muhammad, they simply killed and stole what they viewed as ‘Allah’s’ and Muhammad’s.

Jihad – kill the Infidel:

Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war.… When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action.… If they refuse to migrate, tell them that they will have the status of Bedouin Muslims and will be subjected to the Commands of Allah like other Muslims, but they will not get any share from the spoils of war or Fai’ except when they actually fight with the Muslims (against the disbelievers). If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them.—Sahih Muslim, Book 19, hadith 4294

The genesis of Islam, by contrast, was inextricably tied with the formation of a sovereign society that was inherently universal and imperialist. Temporal and religious powers, which were both one and the same, were combined in the person of Muhammad as Prophet, who claimed that Allah invested him with this authority. This is why he assumed altogether the role of head of state and head of the religion, which permitted him to cloak his political ambitions with a religious aura. Consequently, he channeled Islam’s energies into “its instrument of aggressive expansion, there [being] no internal organism of equal force to counterbalance it.” Muhammad offered “a programme of Arab state formation and conquest: the creation of an umma, the initiation of jihad.” He was a prophet with a political quest and not, as is so often presented, a prophet who just happened to become involved with politics.

Lots of compulsion in Mein Koran:

The People of the Book who did not accept Islam were forced to pay taxes if they wished to continue living under the newly created Islamic community. Before engaging into cohesive explanation, the entire passage of verse 256 must be read: There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejects false deities [Taghut] and believes in Allah has grasped a firm handhold which will never break Allah is Hearer, Knower. It also cannot be read independently from other verses in the second sura but in unison with them, such as verse 193: And right [fight] them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers.

The purpose for jihad as a holy war is to invite the nonbeliever, after proselytizing (i.e., the dawa has failed, or to prevent the violation of the poll tax owed by the People of the Book): Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture [People of the Book] who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who forbid not that which Allah has forbidden by His Messenger, and follow [adopt] not the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizya willingly out of hand and have been humbled.—Sura 9, 29

Muhammad’s will to power and the slaughter of Jews and Christians:

Sira Rasul Allah (the first written biography of Muhammad) by Ibn Ishaq, which says: Allah said, “It is not for any prophet to take prisoners until he has made slaughter on earth,” i.e., “slaughtered his enemies until he drives them from the land. You [Muhammad], desire the lure of this world, its goods and the ransom captives. But Allah desires the next world [a unified earthly one],” i.e., killing them to manifest the religion which He wishes to manifest and by which the next world may be attained.—Ibn Ishaq, 326–327

The doctrine of jihad as holy war was fully developed by the height of the Middle Ages, as Arabs and Turks justified conquering other lands and, in compliance with Allah’s will, simultaneously instituting an Islamic body politic. By the late fifteenth century, jihad emerged as a divine obligatory and bellicose institution for all Muslims. It was tantamount to a religious duty because of the universalism of the Islamic mission to either convert or submit everybody to Allah’s will. Jihad, therefore, presupposed the existence of a unified Islamic umma under a caliph. It was his fard ayn (moral obligation) to expand the territory of the state and to eventually bring “the whole earth under the sway of Islam and to extirpate unbelief.”

Said Ibn al-Musayyab (642–715), considered to be among the foremost authorities in Islamic jurisprudence, “deemed fighting in the way of Allah to be an everlasting obligation upon Muslims.” Here as elsewhere, the Quran makes reference “to the activity by a derivative of the verb meaning to fight (qātala) [which appears fifty-four times, whereas qatala = to kill, appears eighty-three times]

They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper, save those who seek refuge with a people with whom you have a covenant, or those who come to you with hearts reluctant to fight with you, or fight for their own people. Had Allah willed, He could have given them authority over you.—Sura 4, 89–90

Moslems cannot kill other Moslems

Ibn Kathir upholds this position. Referring to the early commentator Sayid Ibn Jubayr (who lived at the time of Prophet Muhammad and was a companion of Aisha): He who allows himself to shed the blood of a Muslim, is like he who allows shedding the blood of all people. He who forbids shedding the blood of one Muslim, is like he who forbids the blood of all people. Al-Tabari and al-Qurtubi both say that the intended meaning of verse 32 refers to the killing of a soul of particular spiritual importance, such as a prophet or a “just imam,” or it stems from the point of view of the murdered individual. It is quite apparent that the pseudo-verse 32 as presented by apologists is misleading because it is not just out of context, but it is deliberately abbreviated in order to deceive those not familiar with the Quran (to say nothing of the hadiths that encourage violence). The verse in its…

Sharia Barbarism, the anti-thesis of modernity (it is not a law, but a Bronze-age, pagan ideal):

….science and technology characterize our modern world, then Islamic civilization is defined as a civilization of law (sharia), which is none other than exacting mandates as they exist in the intellect of Allah, the Lawgiver. This is why modern Islamic state law encompasses much more than a list of concessions and prohibitions, to which governmental or religious authorities have the duty to punish or reward. If this then is law, it gives the idea that it is narrated. In other words, law is prepolitical and “cannot be read as either ‘divine’ or unmediated but must be understood ‘as an aspect of hegemonic contestation, a technique of articulating political claims in terms of legal rights and duties.’”

Part of the tragedy in the Islamic world is that it is embedded in sharia law, the guide to Muslim daily living, which is founded on the sayings of Muhammad (hadiths); doctors of the law (fuqahā’) use these sayings to exercise a quasi-absolute authority over the Muslim faithful. Authorization for rigid punishment in Islamic countries, such as capital punishment for Muslims who cease to observe Islam or convert to another religion, is based on the hadith from Sahih al-Bukhari, in which the Prophet of Islam stated, “Whoever changes his [Islamic] religion, then kill him.” The Ulema in Morocco knows that this norm goes against Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which includes the right “to change … religion or belief.” In order not to contradict this article, the Prophet’s statement is now understood to mean “whoever abandons the umma” should be put to death.

Unlike the violence recorded in the Old Testament, which is limited to historical events, the Quran is more ambiguous than might be expected of a book from a god who claims to love his creation and forgive the sinner. Many contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to construe their sacred book’s appeal to the taking of arms and financing terrorism according to their own ideas. Islamic apologists have catered to these preferences with tenuous positions that camouflage historical fact, generally lacking any sort of profound scrutiny. This problem is not necessarily one of bad people but of bad ideology. In other words, the point of concern is not whether people are Persian, Egyptian, or Palestinian, but rather their indoctrination of the sharia, which justifies the use of violence and other human rights violations. As the General Secretary of the Nahdlatul Ulama Supreme Council, the world’s largest Muslim organization, Imam Yahya Cholil Staquf, stated: “The problem lies within Islam itself.”

The Moslem Emigration and Jihad-of-the-Womb, in the West:

In 1974, Algerian President Houari Boumendienne, in an address to the United Nations, stated, One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory. According to the Pew Research Center, “if current demographic trends continue, the number of Muslims is expected to exceed the number of Christians [worldwide] by the end of this century”; the book’s third purpose is to highlight this fact.

In France, for example, while each family has 1.8 children, Muslims have 8.1 children per family. In southern France, there are now more mosques than churches; 30% of children are Islamic. It is foreseen that by 2027, one in every five Frenchmen will be Muslim. And, if that rate continues, within two generations France will be an Islamic Republic. Within the last thirty years, the Islamic population in Great Britain rose from eighty-two thousand to two and a half million: a thirty-fold increase; there are over one thousand mosques, many of them former churches. In the Netherlands, over 50% of all newborns are Muslim, and in only fifteen years half [its] population will be all Muslim.

Vijah Kumar argues that “[a]ll Islamic mosques have Islamic leaders who can call Muslims for fighting, and as such are satellite headquarters for spreading [l]iteral Islam’s political doctrine of world domination and totalitarianism, no matter how many ‘moderate Muslims’ they serve.”

Muhammad, Sex and Sodomy:

Jurists, including al-Tabari, explain, “The boys are likened to scattered pearls, to indicate their beauty and good looks.” The question to be asked is, if the act of committing sodomy or other sexual acts with boys on the part of adult men is wrong, why does the Quran present boys in such an erotic way? There are also hadiths that apparently are used to encourage such behavior: Buhaysah reported on the authority of his father: My father sought permission from the Prophet. (When permission was granted and he came near him) he entered him and his shirt, and began to kiss him and embrace him.—Sunan Abu Dawood, Book 9, hadith 1665 Usaid ibn Hudair reported: While he was talking to people and telling jokes to make them laugh, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, poked him in the side with a staff. Usaid said, “Let me retaliate!” The Prophet said, “Take retaliation.” Usaid said, “Indeed, you are wearing a shirt and I am not.” The Prophet lifted up his shirt, so he hugged him and kissed his side. Usaid said, “This is all I wanted, O Messenger of Allah.”— Musnad Ahamda, Sunan Abu Dawood, hadith 5224403 According to estimates, “as many as 50 percent of the men in the Pashtun tribal areas of southern Afghanistan take boy lovers

W. H. T. Gairdner once stated, while some of the deeds of the Prophet are considered sacrilegious in the West, they are presented in Islamic biographical works as pious. [I]ncidents in the life of an Arab conqueror, the tales of raiding, private assassinations and public executions, perpetual enlargements of the harem and so forth, might be historically explicable and therefore pardonable. [I]t is another matter that they should be taken as a setting forth of the moral ideal for all time.

Moslems slave-traded 40-50 million Blacks and 10-20 million Whites and still own 1+ million slaves today:

It is believed that in Mauritania, which has the largest population of black slaves today, more than a half-million blacks are coerced into inhumane labor, grotesque sexual practices, and breeding. According to a Human Rights Watch/Africa report, customary abuse of slaves in Mauritania include beatings, denial of food, and prolonged exposure to the sun, with hands and feet tied together.416 This was confirmed by the US State Department in 2009, when it reported: Still today [in Mauritania], masters lend their slaves’ labor to other individuals, female slaves are sexually exploited and children are made to work and rarely receive an education. Slavery particularly affects women and children, who are the most vulnerable among the vulnerable. Women of child-bearing age have a harder time emancipating because they are producers of slave labor and perceived as extremely valuable.

In North Sudan, slavery was restored in 1983, when the Islamic government began using slave raids as a weapon in its military campaign to put down the southern rebellion against the government’s imposition of Islamic law. “The government armed Arab Muslim militia groups and encouraged them to raid Southern villages, steal their property, and take their women and children as slaves – [t]ens of thousands of [Christians and non-Muslims] were captured and enslaved.”  Muslims today react by saying that Christians equally approved the practice of slavery. This issue is not uncontested in sacred scripture, the New Testament in particular, which not only acknowledged the institution of slavery but instructed slaves to be obedient to their masters “just as [they] would obey Christ” (Ephesians 6:5).

This book is essential reading, especially by Catholics, who are brainwashed by their Church leadership into the untenable and quite illiterate view that Muhammadism is a ‘brother’ religion and the 40.000 Moslem attacks since 9-11; along with hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded, is somehow ‘un-Islamic’.  Or, that the reduction of Medieval Europe’s population by 25-30% from Moslem invasion, Jihad, sex-trafficking, slave-trading and yearly depredations and war, was somehow disconnected from the ‘real, authentic, Islam’, itself spread by brigands, totalitarians and thugs such as Muhammad and Abu Bakr, in which Jews, Christians and Pagans were murdered, slaughtered, raped and forcibly converted.

Read Mein Koran, read it and weep, as page after page extols the Muslim Umma and exhorts it to completely eviscerate non-Moslems.  Muhammadism is a globally focused fascism.