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.
“I have been commanded to wage war against mankind until they testify there is no god by Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah….If they do so, their blood and property are protected.”
“I have been made victorious with terror.”
The Muslim Jihad against civilisation and the world at large begins with Muhammad the founder of the Meccan cult. In 610 Anno Domini this deranged and bloody personality began informing his illiterate Bedouin tribesmen that the arch-angel Gabriel had selected him to be this Allah’s messenger. Historically the Al-lah or Lord of Mecca was Baal the moon deity and Muhammad’s family were its caretakers. Over time this Al Lah becomes conflated with an immanent ‘God’ and seeks to replace the Christian ideal of the Holy Trinity. Muhammad’s message was simple, the cult was called ‘Submission’ or Islam. Submit to his Al Lah whatever it might be, and most importantly to its only messenger Muhammad himself.
Forced out of Mecca, fleeing to Medina, Muhammad becomes the dictator of the city-state, forms an army and begins raiding everywhere. His followers increased as brigandage, and larceny brought back plunder and women. To join the cult, all one had to do was recite the Shahada, the first pillar of Islam, literally a sentence fragment, ‘There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger’, which confirms loyalty to the Allah thing and Muhammad. You didn’t need to believe, do much in the way of rituals or oblations, except pray a few times and often in the early years of Muhammad’s cult that was not required.
As Edward Gibbon catalogued, from 622 to 632 AD, Muhammad led or supported an average of 9 raiding expeditions every year. By 632 AD the entire peninsula of Arabia was in the control of his cult. By comparison he had a few dozen mostly familial followers after 12 years of ‘preaching’ in Mecca. War apparently, pays big dividends. Gibbon, ‘(Muhammad) employed even the vices of mankind as the instruments of their salvation, and the use of fraud and perfidy, of cruelty and injustice, were often subservient to the propagation of the faith.’
By 630 AD Muhammad could assemble 10.000 men and march on Mecca. Abu Sufyan, the leader of the Meccans, and once an inveterate opponent of Muhammad, submitted to the Al Lah cult and said the Shahada. He would later become a fanatical Jihadist and murderer of Christians and pagans. The allure of booty, loot, women and power was built into the Jihad from its very beginnings.
The real appeal of Muhammad’s simple message was the compatibility with the uncivilised pagan-tribal nature of Arabian society. In 7th century Arabia one’s loyalty lay with the tribe, mandating a deep-seated enmity of other tribes and groups. Raids between tribes were endless and most tribes such as Muhammad’s were organised within familial lines. Muhammad’s tribe the Quraysh, who ran Mecca, were composed from the same extended familial lines. This pagan-tribal appeal of Submission, in which raiding, brigandage, rape and sexual enslavement were divinely sanctioned explains much of its appeal. The Muslim philosopher Ibn Khaldun (d.1406) described Arab Muslims as the ‘most savage human beings that exist. Compared with sedentary people they are on a level with wild, untamable animals and dumb beasts of prey. Such people are the Arabs’. Hardly a strong endorsement of civilised, religious bearing.
Other uncivilised and pagan tribes were also attracted to Muhammad’s cult. The illiterate, savage Berbers in North Africa became fanatical Muslims invading Spain in the 8th century and again in the 11th and laying waste to much of civilisation in Spain and southern France. The Turks and Mongols likewise embraced the tribal dictates of Muhammad’s primitive cult, with both being uncivilised nomadic, animistic tribes, without any pretence of higher culture. The tribal elements and fiduciary benefits of joining the Jihad were too much to resist. Needless to say, both Turks and Mongols laid waste great swathes of Christian civilisation and territory.
The concept of tribe became the Umma or brotherhood of all Muslims. Muhammad declared in 630 AD after conquering Mecca that ‘a believer shall not slay a believer for the sake of an unbeliever, not shall he aid an unbeliever against a believer’ (example is Koran 4-89, 4-144). The world of the Umma was a stark dichotomy -the supra-tribe of Muhammad against everyone else. Muslims were to become friends with each other to the exclusion of the unbeliever (Ibn Ishaq, 1997, p. 232). The creation of a supra-tribe, supremacist, ‘pure’ and ‘divinely’ sanctioned and supported, gave great energy and confidence to the Muslim Jihad, regenerating itself in violence and blood, as the primitive and savage tribes of the Berbers, Turks and Mongols joined the cult of Muhammad.
Numerous Koranic verses portray the Jihad as the noblest duty of a Muslim. Muhammad stated that ‘Lining up for battle in the path of Allah is worthier than 60 years of worship’. There is a reason why the cult of Islam or Submission does not have monks, monasteries, nuns or convents. The expectation was war, Jihad, and fighting, not praying, prostration and meditation. Muhammad’s Jihad offered not only the Spoils of War (Sura 8 in the Koran), but also an after life of riches and spoils, replete with virgins, young boys, wine and unlimited comforts. It was a win-win for the Jihadi. Die in battle and go to the Muslim-male heaven (nothing similar exists for the Muslim female) to be tantalised by buxom virgins, young boys, food and wine. Or survive and win the battle and satiate your temporal lusts with sex slaves, money, land and loot.
What if a Muslim refused to fight? The Al Lah had a darker and more sinister view of such a person. In Sura 8-15, the Al Lah says that those who don’t fight for the cult will be ‘be tortured like no other sinful human’. If you could not physically fight, you were expected to ‘strive’ or give a greater Jihad, to support the ‘lesser’ or physical-warring Jihad. Money, your property, food, weapons, camels or horses, were expected from those who could not physically saddle up and ride in the Jihad. To further tempt males into joining the cults’ endless, and yearly raiding and warring, the Al Lah promised to commute and expunge all sins and wrong-doings. This was true if you fought and survived, or even more so, if you went on Jihad and perished. For the martyred Jihadi he is, according to Muhammad, precious to the Al Lah, ‘He is forgiven from the first drop of blood (he sheds). He sees his throne in paradise….Fixed atop his head will be a crown of honour, a ruby that is greater than the world and all it contains. And he will copulate with 72 Houris.’ The Houris are supernatural, celestial big breasted nymphs, with ‘wide eyes’, created by the Al Lah as presents and rewards for his deceased Jihadis. That ‘heaven’ for the cult of Muhammad is depicted as a brothel with unlimited food and wine service, and this is unsurprising given the uncivilised and atavistic culture it represents.
Importantly, the Jihadis intentions or Muslimification was unimportant. The only point at issue, was to engage in and support the Jihad. If you didn’t really believe in the Al Lah moon deity or ‘god’, or in Muhammad and kept it to yourself that was fine. Sura 2 depicts Jihad as a business, as a ‘fine loan to Al Lah’ and ‘rejoice in the bargain you have struck for that is the supreme triumph’ (Koran 9-111). For the average tribal male this ‘bargain’ was simply a win-win. If he and the Jihad succeed, he has every chance at becoming wealthy and satisfying carnal lusts with sex slaves. If he dies, he goes to the Muslim brothel in heaven, well-provisioned with targets of lust, food and wine. His piety was unimportant, participating in war was what the Al Lah demanded and rewarded.
Jihad is baked into the Koran and Muhammad’s cult from its inception. Submission or Islam was formed by war and raiding. Its irruption in 632 AD into the Greek-Roman-Christian empire in the ‘East’, created the ‘West’ by destroying 2/3 of Christendom. Christianity in the guise of the Byzantine empire, controlled the Middle East and North Africa, with the Christian Visigoths established in Spain. Within 1 century the Muslims had completely effaced this Christian unity, subjugating most of the Middle East, North African and Spain. The ‘West’ so-called is simply the rump of what had been an extensive Christian empire from Britain to Armenia. Christian groups, churches, buildings, monasteries, libraries, agriculture, industry, hospitals, ports and trade routes were destroyed, taken over, converted or re-directed by Muslims for their own benefit, in their endless Jihad. How many people today know that the term ‘West’ comes from the Middle Ages and means the remaining 1/3 rump of what was once an advanced and vibrant Mediterranean based Christian empire?
More than 16,000 Christians were killed in Nigeria in four years between 2019 and 2023 as more followers of Christ were victims of violence than adherents of other religions, according to data collected by the Observatory for Religious Freedom in Africa.
ORFA released a four-year data project Thursday documenting 55,910 fatalities from 9,970 attacks, including both civilians and combatants, across Nigeria. Of those killed, 30,880 were civilians. Christian victims totaled 16,769, significantly outnumbering the 6,235 Muslim fatalities — the ratio of Christian to Muslim deaths being 6.5:1. Radicalized Muslim Fulani herdsmen were responsible for 55% of the Christian deaths.
"For over a decade atrocities against civilians in Nigeria have been downplayed or minimized. This has proved a major obstacle for those seeking to understand the violence," the researchers wrote in the 136-page report shared with The Christian Post.
"Misleading euphemisms, such as 'armed herdsmen' and 'cattle grazers' are used to describe continual waves of invasion, torture and killing in rural communities. Descriptions of attacks as 'ethnic clashes,' 'farmers-herders clashes' or retaliatory attacks are seriously misleading."
Another frequent term used to describe militias that carry out mass kidnappings and enforce "serfdom" on communities is "bandits," the report warns, adding that "a policy of concealing the religious identity of victims" is distorting the reality of the situation.
"Fulani Ethnic Militia are targeting Christian populations, while Muslims also suffer severely at their hands," notes Rev. Gideon Para-Mallam, an observatory partner and analyst, said in a statement.
"Millions of people are left undefended," Frans Vierhout, senior analyst at the Observatory of Religious Freedom in Africa, added. "For years, we've heard of calls for help being ignored, as terrorists attack vulnerable communities. Now the data tells its own story."
Across Nigeria, over 21,621 people were abducted in 2,705 attacks, with some incidents overlapping. The observatory recorded 11,610 distinct attacks where individuals were killed or abducted. Of these, 8,905 involved only killings, 1,065 included both killings and abductions and 1,640 involved only abductions.
Of the 21,532 civilians abducted, 11,185 were Christians, and 7,899 were Muslims, according to ORFA.
Researchers stated the religious identity of victims significantly influenced their treatment by captors, with Christian captives often facing harsher conditions and higher risks of execution compared to their Muslim counterparts.
On average, eight attacks involving killings or abductions occurred daily over a four-year period in Nigeria. Fear of violence has gotten so bad there were reports of children sleeping in trees to avoid nighttime attacks.
The data showed a large geographic spread of violence, with 65 different Local Government Areas affected. The majority of civilian fatalities occurred during attacks on communities, particularly during the farming season's peak months between April and June. The North West, North Central and North East regions were identified as epicenters of such attacks.
People were most vulnerable in their homes, with the majority of civilians — 25,312 killed and 16,761 abducted — suffering attacks in their communities, according to the report. This contrasts with other locations where 5,568 civilians were killed and 4,771 abducted.
The report pointed to the Fulani Ethnic Militia and other less-known groups as primary aggressors.
Armed Fulani herdsmen, part of FEM, and various terrorist groups were responsible for most killings and abductions, overshadowing the more internationally recognized threats from Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province. For instance, armed Fulani herdsmen were responsible for the deaths of 11,948 civilians, while other terror groups were responsible for 12,039 deaths. Armed Fulani were responsible for over 6,000 civilian abductions, while other groups were responsible for 13,000.
Armed Fulani were responsible for 9,153 Christian deaths during that timespan; Other terrorist groups accounted for 29% or 4,895 deaths. Combined, Boko Haram and ISWAP were responsible for 8% of the Christian deaths, which amounts to 1,268 fatalities.
Today in history, on June 15, 1094, one of the most remarkable feats in the long war between Islam and Christianity took place: the great kingdom of Valencia, which had been under Muslim control for more than 350 years, capitulated to the warlord Roderick Díaz of Vivar — better known to posterity as “the Cid” (from the Arabic honorific al-sayyid, “the lord”).
In the late eleventh century, the Almoravids, a North African group committed to jihadist teaching, began to pour into Spain from Africa to aid their Spanish counterparts, the Moors, against the Reconquista—the centuries-long Christian attempt to liberate Spain from Islam. The Cid’s premiere modern biographer, Professor Ramón Menéndez Pidal (d. 1968), summarizes the mood and stakes as follows:
With the Almoravid invasion, the struggle between the two civilizations had reached its height… [W]ith the invasion of the desert races and the recrudescence of Islamic fanaticism, a new chasm opened out between the two. And, on the Christian side, it was the Cid who, as the leader of the resistance against the victorious invaders, showed himself the most determined to carry on the war without giving or seeking quarter. … [I]t was upon the Cid that the task devolved of resisting, unaided, the whole might of Islam.
Toward the end of the year 1093, a secret plot between the Almoravids and the Moors of Valencia, which had only recently become tributary to the Cid, resulted in the overthrow of its king, Yahya al-Qadir, who had “increased their [Valencians] hatred by being a friend to the Christians” — that is, by being a vassal to the Cid. During the uprising, fanatical Muslims discovered al-Qadir trying to abscond out of Valencia dressed in and concealed by a woman’s burqa. To cries of “Allahu akbar,” the mob slaughtered him as an apostate and hurled his body into a camel dung pit.
On learning of the Valencians’ treachery and murder of his vassal, the Cid’s “anger was kindled, and his soul was inflamed,” writes the Muslim chronicler al-Maqqari. Like a fierce storm, he came and with extreme violence thrashed the Valencian countryside, taking all the castles and suburbs up to the city’s very walls. He “fought so fiercely,” writes Ibn al-Qama, who was present in Valencia, “that the Moors were terrified at the havoc he played among them.”
Months passed, and mass starvation soon plagued the besieged Moorish kingdom, but the Muslims continued to hold out on the conviction that their Almoravid allies would eventually come to their rescue. At long last, an immense host of Almoravids was espied marching to Valencia’s relief.
Acting fast, the Cid, who was camped outside the walls of Valencia, destroyed all of the bridges leading to the city and flooded the countryside with water from the canals, so that only one strip of land, which he now controlled, was dry. Done none too soon, a massive dust storm heralded the arrival of the Islamic hordes of North Africa.
[Now] when the news came that the Africans had arrived at Alcira, the Valencians, frantic with joy, rushed to the walls to scan the horizon for signs of their saviors and watch by night the twinkle of the numberless fires of the Almoravid bivouacs… And all the time the citizens prayed unceasingly for Allah’s aid against the Cid and agreed in council to plunder the Christian camp and the stores and hostels of the suburb when the battle reached the wall.
When morning came, the Cid and the Valencians awoke to a strange sight: empty fields. The jihadist saviors of Valencia had retreated in the dark over the flooded plains, abandoning the city to its fate. A contemporary chronicle allots two sentences to this ignominious event: a large “army of Moabites [Almoravids], swiftly on its way to relieve the siege, approached Valencia. But they did not dare to commit themselves to battle with Roderick. Greatly fearful of him they dispersed by night and retired to their bases in confusion.”
Black despair now fell on the Moors of Valencia: “they were like drunkards who understand not one another,” wrote Ibn al-Qama; “they became as one that falls into the sea.” Their mood was not helped by the Cid’s army. Completely unopposed, it now surrounded the city’s walls and loudly reviled the oath-breaking Muslims with vows of unrestrained vengeance. Topping it all off, the famine had reached the point that “the poor were driven to eating the flesh of human corpses.” With no hope, Valencia finally surrendered to the Cid — “may the curse of Allah fall on his head!” to quote al-Maqqari — on today’s date, June 15, 1094, after a nearly nineteen-month-long besiegement, and Roderick Díaz of Vivar became its undisputed lord — literally, its sayyad, Cid.
Although it did not ostensibly concern them, even Europeans outside Spain rejoiced at this outstanding feat — for “the conquests by the Cid” were seen as “a barrier protecting, not only Spain, but the whole of Western Europe from the Moslem peril.”
The Cid’s conquest of Valencia is important for another reason: a contemporary document drawn out following that event underscores that the Cid—who most modern historians portray as a callous, irreligious mercenary—was in fact a committed Christian and “propagator of the Christian religion.” He further lamented how Spain had “endured sudden destruction … through the cruel sword of the sons of Hagar”—a reference to Islam’s invasion and conquest of Spain in the eighth century—and saw his struggle against the Muslims as an existential war against “the traps of our enemies both visible and invisible,” to quote from said document, signed by Roderick in 1098.
Although there is much more to say about the Cid’s exploits against the jihad, it is perhaps his conquest of Valencia that, when closely examined, truly underscores his remarkable nature. As Roderick’s modern biographer, Pidal, explains:
It savors of madness that a single man, unsupported by any national organization and lacking resources even for a single day, should appear before [the walls of] Valencia determined upon restoring a rule that had been overthrown this second time by an enemy [the Almoravids] who had proved irresistible to the strongest power in Spain [Emperor Alfonso VI]: that he should dream of doing what the Christian Emperor had failed to do, and in the teeth of the Moslem Emir’s opposition [and succeed is] … the most extraordinary achievement ever performed in Spain by anyone but a king.
This article was abstracted from Raymond Ibrahim’s Defenders of the West: The Christian Heroes Who Stood Against Islam (Chapter 2 of which is dedicated to the Cid).