Tag Archives: Al-Qaeda

Who is my enemy?


Well, Allah for a start.

He has made it very clear that he “loveth not the unbeliever”. In fact he has created a purpose built torture chamber called Jahannam where all unbelievers, and a fair few believers, are to be treated very unpleasantly for a very long time, for eternity in fact. It has seven levels and seven gates. The gatekeeper is called Malik. He will show you to your quarters – Christians at the top, hypocrites at the bottom.

The basic routine is fire and lots of it, molten metal, beating with hooked rods of iron, branding of foreheads, flanks and backs, garments of pitch and hanging by the breasts. I’m lucky with that one since I don’t have any but women, who are the majority of the residents, deserve it because of their ingratitude to their husbands.

There are special dietary arrangements in place. Meals consist of “bitter thorns which neither nourish nor release from hunger” and the fruit of the mysterious Zaqqum tree, “a tree that springs out of the bottoms of Hellfire; the shoots of its fruit-stalks are like the heads of devils and which boil in the belly”.

This is to be washed down with “boiling water which tears the bowels” and pus. There is also “water like molten brass” on offer. This, of course, means it has been superheated which seems like a lot of extra trouble to go to just to be nasty.

Let’s just stop a moment and reflect on the enormity of what Muslims actually believe, what they are obliged to believe since this is Allah speaking. Remember how appalled everyone was, even Muslims, when ISIS burned that Jordanian pilot for two minutes? Two minutes….he had it easy! Allah promises to do the same to you and your kids and everyone you ever cared about forever. This is not metaphorical. Allah doesn’t do metaphor.

Can this be the same being who designed the Higgs Boson and put the music into Bach’s brain? I think not, more like the kid who sat behind me in chemistry lessons who liked to put insects in the bottles of sulphuric acid.

And why? Just because I don’t believe in him, apparently. Jeez….talk about insecure!

And yet there are those who try to pass him off as a just and merciful god with benign intentions even toward me, a kaffir. All I can say is “Don’t pour molten brass down my leg and tell me it’s raining”.

Surprisingly, or maybe not, some non-Muslims buy it. They are the practitioners of interfaith dialogue. What can they possibly be thinking when they discuss life, religion and everything with the representatives of the ogre described above?

Is it not remarkable that academics, churchmen, politicians and heirs to the throne are happy to discuss Islam with people who look forward to observing these horrors from their couches in paradise (1)….with guess who on the receiving end?

Personally, if I was having tea with people who thought it just fine that their god intends to fricasee me forever with regular changes of skin just to add a little zest to the proceedings, I’m sure it would quite put me off my cucumber sandwiches.

What about Mohammed?

Well, since Allah is merely the creation of Mohammed, what goes for Allah goes for Mohammed. If I believed otherwise I would have to be a Muslim wouldn’t I?

Even if you think that Allah is more than just Mohammed’s sock puppet, Mohammed clearly had no problem with publicising his boss’s sadistic fantasies so he is equally culpable. In return Mohammed got a little help keeping order in the harem (2), among other perks.

Not only that, but Mohammed said some very spiteful things about unbelievers and gave his followers very clear instructions about how to deal with them…striking necks, cutting off of fingertips, crucifying trouble makers, extorting the jizya etc. I have been searching through the instruction manual and can find no expiry date for them. Nor have the great Muslim scholars down the ages been able to. That means that Mohammed was not only the enemy of any unbeliever in Arabia in 630 AD and of any unbeliever between India and Spain for the following 100 years, but of any unbeliever anywhere, until the Day of Judgment.

And Muslims?

This is where it gets tricky. ISIS and Al-Qaeda are obviously my enemy, but then so are the (currently) less violent but equally supremacist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and their myriad front organisations. Just because a pickpocket does not carry a lead pipe it does not mean that he has my welfare at heart.

Which wing of Islamic supremacism is my greater enemy? I contend that the stealth jihadists of the Muslim Brotherhood type are by far the more dangerous. They operate by demographics and sedition, infiltrating our institutions and introducing sharia bit by bit. If you think that laughable, consider the halal food which you eat unknowing and the blasphemy law which is imposed on non-Muslims by the threat of violence…even against a previously unendangered species, cartoonists.

It could even be argued that the ISIS variety of Islamic supremacism is acting in our best interests. While the Muslim Brotherhood approach is to boil the frog slowly so it does not notice until it is too late, the “chop their heads off” dramatics of ISIS may serve to wake us up to the reality of our situation in time for us to take the necessary steps.

It appears that not all Muslims want to bring the world under Islam by violent or underhand methods but how do you tell who is a “moderate” and who is an “extremist”, and whether they are even the correct words to use? Take the case of this recent demonstration in Ireland against ISIS:

“ISIS does not represent Islam”. That’s nice isn’t it, just what we want to hear. But who does represent Islam, the eight people in the picture or the thousands who did not turn up to disavow ISIS? Or perhaps the Muslims who reportedly threatened the organisers.

Looking a bit closer we see firstly that the demonstrators could not resist the old “It’s the fault of Western foreign policy” line. Never any question of it having something to do with Islam, the Koran, Mohammed’s example, the parents, the community or the mosque.

Secondly, notice the usual doctored excerpt from 5:32 on their banner “If anyone kills one person…etc”. No one uses that except with the intention of deceiving (3).

Thirdly, it appears that the loveably moderate imam in the picture is not quite so moderate after all. While condemning one Islamic terrorist outfit, ISIS, he supports another, the genocidal Hamas which has taken the hatred of Jews to be found in Islamic scriptures to a demented level of intensity.

Moderates and extremists – they go together don’t they….like cowboys and Indians, cops and robbers, tarts and vicars. They might be a pairing devoutly to be wished but is the distinction grounded in reality or just the wishful thinking of Westerners? Take Mohammed for instance, was he a moderate or an extremist?

Here is the standard view of things with various groupings spread along a spectrum. Moderates are closest to Mohammed and extremists are naturally at the extremes, furthest from Mohammed:



I suggest that the spectrum is the wrong way round. It should be transposed with the people we call extremists actually closest to the centre of Islam, the example of Mohammed. That is why they should be called centrists rather than extremists:



Closest to Mohammed are of course ISIS. There is nothing they do which was not done by Mohammed and his companions. Next along are the Muslim Brotherhood type groups, sometimes called “moderate Islamists”, still doing their bit to bring the world under Islam by stealth.

At the furthest extreme from Mohammed, therefore the real extremists, are those we call nominal Muslims. Mohammed had a word for those who don’t answer the call, hypocrites, and you know where hypocrites go – right at the bottom of hell where it is 70 times hotter than at the top. Better shape up guys, your future doesn’t look great as things stand. Are you real Muslims or actually ex-Muslims who quite sensibly take the threat from genuine Muslims more seriously than that from Allah?

But where have the moderate Muslims gone? Muslims regularly tell us there are no such people, just Muslims so they have been replaced by “Just Muslims”. Are they my enemy? There is just no telling for sure, but there is a guiding principle. The more devout a Muslim is, the closer to Mohammed, the more potentially dangerous he is. How often have we heard after some atrocity that the perpetrator became increasingly devout in the preceding months?

Anyone else?

Well, there are the people who destroyed the community cohesion I grew up in by inviting ever more disparate groups to the multicultural party, culminating in one group with a tendency to go decidedly monocultural as soon as it is in a position to do so.

There are the enablers of Islamisation who somehow have come to command the cultural heights – Saudi funded academics who prate about Orientalism; leftist ideologues who see Islam as an ally in their hatred of Western civilisation; journalists who call Muslim rape gangs “Asians”; churchmen who refuse to name who is slaughtering Christians from Nigeria to Pakistan; the Labour Party which opened the flood gates to Muslim immigration in order to “rub the Right’s nose in diversity” and then studiously looked the other way in Rochdale and Rotherham; and the politicians who laughably tell us that the monstrosity of ISIS has nothing to do with Islam.

And there are the elite who do not have to live with the consequences of their folly. That is left to Joe Bloggs who cannot escape to the leafy suburbs or the shires. What would have happened if jihadis had attacked Henley Regatta or if Muslim rape gangs, acting with the sanction of the Koran, had targeted Cheltenham Ladies College instead of the throwaway children in care? Imagine how the public discourse would have changed if it was the offices of the Guardian or the BBC that were bombed in 2005 rather than random Tube travellers.

But soldiers, grannies, package tour holidaymakers….who cares? There are plenty more where they came from. The important thing, after each atrocity, is to prevent an anti-Muslim backlash.

Our leaders are unlikely to admit that we are in a war, that of global jihad, until the establishment start to take the hit. Sadly, it will take more sacrificial victims, and many of them, before they come to their senses and realise what they have allowed to take root in the land. We can only hope, in the name of justice, that those who brought us to this sorry pass are properly represented in future losses.

Here is a guesstimate of the number of casualties from various sections of society, any one of which might produce a sea change in public awareness and force the government to seriously address the question “Who is our enemy?”

1000 ordinary Joes
500 soldiers (squaddies that is, or 50 officers)
200 police officers
100 academics
70 churchmen
30 journalists
20 celebrities
10 MPs
5 Government ministers
3 moneymen
1 Prime Minister or the Queen

Where will the next blow land? Place your bets now.

(1) And the dwellers of the Garden cry unto the dwellers of the Fire: We have found that which our Lord promised us (to be) the Truth. Have ye (too) found that which your Lord promised the Truth ? They say: Yea, verily. And a crier in between them crieth: The curse of Allah is on evil-doers (Koran 7:44)

(2) O ye wives of the Prophet! Whosoever of you committeth manifest lewdness, the punishment for her will be doubled, and that is easy for Allah.
And whosoever of you is submissive unto Allah and His messenger and doeth right, We shall give her her reward twice over, and We have prepared for her a rich provision. (33:30-31)

(3) For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah’s Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth. (5:32)
The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom. (5:33)

Just in case you have not come across this old chestnut, in 5:32 Allah is chiding the Jews for failing to follow the instruction he gave them in his Yahweh days. Taken in conjunction with 5:33 the two verses constitute a blood chilling warning to anyone, particularly Jews, who plan to commit corruption in the land (ie cross Mohammed/Allah).


Popes, priests and Islam



Do you remember when in 2006 Pope Benedict said:

“Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached”?

He was only quoting a mediaeval Byzantine emperor but, despite his apologies, the words were widely taken as his own or at least reflecting his views.

Affronted by the idea of Islam being linked with violence, the ummah responded with violent protests around the Muslim world. Several people were killed including a nun shot dead in Somalia and a priest beheaded in Iraq. Calls were made for the death of the Pope from various groups including, of course, Anjem Choudary and his gang.

Slightly more subtly giving the message that if you hurt Muslim feelings then you can expect trouble, the Pakistan Parliament issued a statement saying “The derogatory remarks of the Pope about the philosophy of jihad and Prophet Muhammad have injured sentiments across the Muslim world and pose the danger of spreading acrimony among the religions”. Their Foreign Ministry declared that “Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence.”

Abandoning subtlety altogether, Al Qaeda gleefully announced “We will break up the cross, spill the liquor and impose the jizya tax, then the only thing acceptable is conversion or the sword…. God enable us to slit their throats, and make their money and descendants the bounty of the Mujahideen.”

From among Catholics Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, was quoted as saying “Pope Benedict’s statements don’t reflect my own opinions….These statements will serve to destroy in 20 seconds the careful construction of a relationship with Islam that Pope John Paul II built over the last twenty years.”

Taken aback at the reaction to his words Benedict spent much of the rest of his papacy attempting to restore good relations, visiting mosques and calling on Christians in western countries “to open their arms and hearts to Muslim immigrants”. That did not stop al-Azhar breaking off relations with the Vatican when Benedict called for greater protection for Egypt’s Coptic Christians in Egypt after a church bombing in Alexandria left 23 people dead. Sheik el-Tayeb, Al Azhar’s chief imam, called Benedict’s remarks “unacceptable interference in Egypt’s affairs”.

When in 2013 Cardinal Bergoglio became the first Pope Francis, Sheik el-Tayyib sent him a message of congratulation including the request that “Islam asks for respect from the new pontiff”.

Not surprisingly many doubted the good faith of Francis’s partners in interfaith dialogue.

When Francis said:

“My wish is that the dialogue between us should help to build bridges connecting all people, in such a way that everyone can see in the other not an enemy, not a rival, but a brother or sister to be welcomed and embraced”

some remembered the Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayeed Qutb’s use of the same metaphor:

“The chasm between Islam and Jahiliyyah [the society of unbelievers] is great, and a bridge is not to be built across it so that the people on the two sides may mix with each other, but only so that the people of Jahiliyyah may come over to Islam.”

In June 2014 Pope Francis held a Peace Gathering in the Vatican gardens where a Christian priest, a Jewish rabbi and a Muslim imam prayed for peace in the Holy Land. Sounds like the start of a joke doesn’t it (1) and in fact things turned out quite like that. Along with his prayer for peace the unnamed Palestinian imam added the last 3 verses of sura 2 of the Koran (2). The last line of 2:286 says:

“You are our guardian, so make us victorious over the tribe of unbelievers.”

making it plain to Arabic listeners just what his idea of peace was. In fact this is completely in line with orthodox Islamic teaching that peace will ensue only after the defeat and subjugation of all unbelievers.

Not only did the imam stab Francis in the back but also managed to tweak Benedict’s nose at the same time. The last line of 2:284 says:

“And He will forgive whomever he wants and will punish whomever he wants, and Allah is able to do all things”

ie Allah does whatever he likes, ruling the universe by caprice. The imam was defiantly confirming what Benedict was trying to get at in his Regensburg address which, underneath all the brouhaha, was actually about the relationship between faith and reason:

“…not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s nature…But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality.”

The Vatican edited the offending suras out of the video it released of the gathering. They must have been fairly keen for the world not to get the idea that they were being taken for fools. Fortunately some tenacious counter-jihadists exposed the intended deception.

In November 2013 Pope Francis said “Faced with disconcerting episodes of violent fundamentalism, our respect for true followers of Islam should lead us to avoid hateful generalisations, for authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence.”

Is this not an astonishing statement for a learned man to make since the most cursory reading of the Koran shows it to be dripping with calls for violence? Where did he get such an idea? Not from any traditional Catholic understanding of Islam. Here is the the Catholic Encyclopedia (1908 edition):

“In matters political, Islam is a system of despotism at home and aggression abroad… The rights of non-Moslem subjects are of the vaguest and most limited kind, and a religious war is a sacred duty whenever there is a chance of success against the “Infidel”. Medieval and Modern Mohammedan, especially Turkish, persecutions of both Jews and Christians are perhaps the best illustration of this fanatical religious and political spirit.”

Nor from his own secretary Father Yoannis Lahzi Gaido, a Coptic Catholic Christian. Here he writes of the:

“…difficulties under which Christians must live in places with a Muslim majority. These difficulties are not caused by a few Islamists, but by a culture of death and violence that is based on very clear verses [of their scripture] that they quote, calling for violence and jihad, saying they should murder all who are different and killing [those who express] freedom of conscience. Just to think differently is enough to be sentenced to death.”

Lately, Catholic thinkers have started to come out flatly contradicting the Pope’s position. Here are three of them:

Rev. James V. Schall, ex-Professor of Political Philosophy at Georgetown University

“The Islamic State and the broader jihadist movements throughout the world that agree with it are, I think, correct in their basic understanding of Islam. Plenty of evidence is found, both in the long history of early Muslim military expansion and in its theoretical interpretation of the Qur’an itself, to conclude that the Islamic State and its sympathizers have it basically right.”

Regis Martin, Professor of Theology at the Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio

“The fact is, Islam remains fundamentally and unmistakably a religion of violence. The murderousness of Muslim theology is not an accidental or episodic affair, such as from time to time overcomes the better angels of their nature. It is entirely intrinsic to the beliefs all Muslims profess. How could it be otherwise when its founding document, the Koran, is replete with what can only be described as the poisonous rhetoric of hatred and intolerance?”

Rev. Martin Rhonheimer, Professor of Ethics and Political Philosophy at the Pontifical Santa Croce University in Rome

“You do not hear many official Muslim voices condemning Islamic State, and when it finally happens, it is usually only to condemn the bestiality because it harms Islam’s reputation. The Islamic State is no heresy, but a recurring pattern in the history of violent expansion. The model is Muhammad himself.”

So, Pope Francis does not mind being led up the garden path by his inter-faith dialogue partners nor does he see the obvious connection between Islam and violence. Neither of theses things would matter too much if it were not for the fact that they obviously inform his position on Muslim immigration to Europe.

After 366 people died in a shipwreck off Lampedusa in October 2013 Francis called the episode shameful and, in the land of lentocracy (slow government), the search and rescue operation Mare Nostrum started operating two weeks later. In the year since its inception the Italian Navy and Coastguard have rescued over 90,000 migrants and landed them in Southern Italy. In total, according to the Italian Interior Ministry, 120,000 people have made it to Italy since the beginning of 2014 as opposed to 42,000 in 2013. What does that suggest for 2015 and 2016? Since there is confusion about whether Italy will continue funding Mare Nostrum and whether the EU will pick it up, the likely outcome must be either a great many more immigrants or a great many more drownings.

The Italians feel very virtuous about what they are doing, leaving only the Northern League, one of whose leaders used to sport a Mohammed cartoon T-shirt, to cry “Basta!” By law all the immigrants should be processed in Italy but in practice the authorities look the other way when they slip away from the reception centres. Few of the new arrivals stay in Italy where benefits are slim, most heading north in particular to Germany and Sweden. A proportion can be seen any day besieging the port of Calais.

If you think that the new arrivals will add to the harmony and well being of Europe then you will applaud Francis’s efforts. If you think that, on balance, they will add to the welfare burden, criminality and hostility to be found in the no-go areas of Malmo and Paris, and the areas in England where the authorities turn a blind eye, then you might well take another view. If, even worse, you expect ever greater occurrences of sectarian violence, anti-Semitism, subversion and random jihadist attacks on the unbelievers as called for by IS, then you might view his stance as not only irresponsible but grievously damaging to European civilisation.

I take the latter view, partly because of the figures and partly because of what we all see around us on a daily basis. We were all shocked a few years ago when a slew of polls came out showing just how radical many Muslims in the West really are but there are three recently surfaced figures which seem to clearly spell out our likely future. The first is that 5% of the British population are Muslim. The second is that 10% of under 5’s are Muslim. The third is that there are more British Muslims fighting against Britain with IS than there are fighting for her in the armed forces. As regards what we see around us, just a few days ago four British Muslims, one of them recently returned from Syria, were charged with plotting to murder police officers or soldiers on the street. Just today, as if we did not know that there is a world wide jihad going on, comes the news that a Muslim convert has run down two soldiers in Canada.

Where exactly is the Pope in this unfolding drama? The answer is right at the centre of the developing conflict. IS have digitally raised their flag over St Peter’s Square and, according to the Iraqi ambassador to the Vatican, intend to assassinate Francis. It would be a major propaganda coup if IS were to achieve this. They have shown already with their atrocities in Syria that they go with the maxim that there is no such thing as bad publicity. And yet this seems puzzling since, by lulling the masses with the fiction of a peaceful Islam, Francis is unwittingly the best friend of Islamic supremacism outside Westminster and Capitol Hill. Perhaps the answer to that lies in the two kinds of Islamic supremacism, the Muslim Brotherhood kind which relies primarily on demography and subversion to spread Islam and the IS kind which longs to smash the “Roman Crusaders” by military means – apparently so different yet with a common destination, 7th century Medina.

Still in the early stages of this great game between civilisation and Islam, we have barely seen the pawns move yet. It will take more pieces lost to atrocities before the King wakes up. The grim reality is that with each IS beheading or other act of barbarism, the more threadbare become our leaders’ platitudes and the more people in the West start to realise that this is for real. Suppose IS did assassinate Francis. It would not be difficult as he refuses to barricade himself behind security. It would be the biggest possible wake up call to the world’s Catholics in particular and the rest of us in general. That is why, horrible as it is to admit, it would be good news for civilisation. Think of it as a bishop (of Rome) sacrifice.

(1) A rabbi, a priest and an imam enter into dialogue.
The rabbi says I will agree to show respect to Christianity and Islam.
The priest says I will agree to show respect to Judaism and Islam.
The imam says great, so we all agree to respect Islam.

(2) Sura 2:284 In the name of Allah the beneficent and merciful. To Allah belongs everything that is in heaven and on earth. And whether you show what is inside you or hide it Allah will bring you to account. And He will forgive whomever he wants and will punish whomever he wants, and Allah is able to do all things.

Sura 2:285 The messenger has believed in what was sent down to him by his Lord, and the believers all have believed in Allah and his angels and his books and his messengers. We don’t make any distinction amongst the messengers. They say: “We hear and we obey so that you forgive us, our Lord, and towards you is the destination.

Sura 2:286 God will not burden any soul except according to its capacity. It will earn what it gains and to him will be what he earns (of evil). Our Lord, don’t blame us when we forget or make mistakes. Our Lord, and don’t put on us same kind of burden that you put on those before us, and don’t burden us with what we have no capacity to bear. And pardon us and forgive us and have mercy on us. You are our guardian, so make us victorious over the tribe of unbelievers.