The Middle East In The News

Evidence That Demands YOUR Verdict

Canadian Free Press 2008/3/11
...Sinisterist Radical Islam, like Fascism, Bolshevism and Nazism, preaches transitory alliances. Different groups of Moslems murder each other one day and form an alliance to murder third parties another day. It is not accidental that today Moslems work closely with North Korean Marxist atheists against Jews and Christians, who are “peoples of the book.” It is no accident that the Arabs, whose ethnicity is most closely associated with Islam, have the expression “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
This is just like all Sinisterists. As noted already, Fascists were one day friends with Bolsheviks and enemies of Nazis and the next day enemies of Bolsheviks and friends of Nazis. This cannibalism exists within Fascism, Bolshevism, Nazism and other forms of Sinisterism. Fascism purged itself of other Fascists. Bolshevism purged itself of other Bolsheviks. Nazism purged itself of other Nazis. Sinisterist Radical Islam purges itself of other Sinisterist Radical Moslems. The bewildering warfare within Sinister Radical Islam is explained best by a variation on the old phrase “Follow the money,” to wit: “Follow the power.” The purpose of Sinisterist Radical Islam is not just power, but crushing every internal and external opponent. There are no loyalties within it except an individual loyalty to the lust for power.
The pervasive cannibalism of Sinisterist Radical Islam is an important reason why Islamic nations fail. Although war against the unbeliever always is acceptable, the worldly pleasures that Islam embraces, the permission to lie and to murder and to rob are not the sorts of attitudes that can be carefully cordoned off so that only non-Moslems are deceived, murdered or robbed. A prime example of this is the savage and long war between Sunni and Shia. Many centuries since Christians peacefully resolved the Great Schism of Christianity, Moslems continue to kill and to persecute each other because of this schism in Islam. ...

Jihad in India

FrontPageMag 2007/11/29
...Our enemy is political Islam and a movement based upon it: the political Islamic movement. Political Islam holds that Islam should have a dominant say in governing the affairs of government. There are good reasons for this outlook, going back to Islamic scriptures. Islamic trilogy, consisting of the Koran, Hadith and Sira, is the basis of political Islam. In the past few years sophisticated scientific analysis of the trilogy has been carried out. The Center for Study of Political Islam has published a series along these lines. Their analysis points to a very dominant political nature of the trilogy – i.e. domination of political deeds of Islam’s founder Mohammed – as opposed to spirituality. Hence it is very reasonable to conclude that political Islam is almost Islam. In the context of the trilogy, inner political Islam prevents Muslims from acquiring new knowledge to create a better future for themselves; external political Islam commands them to wage a religious war (called jihad) with unbelievers until the whole humanity is converted to Islam. Trilogy-based evidence and early Islamic history suggest that political Islam’s intent on absolute control of Muslim masses and channeling of their energies toward conquest gives an impression of an ideology that is primarily designed for extending the powerbase of Mohammed during his times and that of extended tribes of Saudis, non-Saudi Arab Muslims and non-Arab Muslims (in that order) subsequent to his death. This strong political component also means that Islam may not be structurally amenable to reform or moderation. If one takes away this political component, there is no Islam. Mosques not only bring trilogy to Muslim communities but they also function as social centers. Due to the political domination of the trilogy, clerics are naturally inclined toward political activism, including multi-front jihad directed at unbelievers. It is ascertained in my book that political Islam, through its socially networked nodes called mosques, is the swamp that creates mosquitoes called jihadis, radicals, militants and extremists, and importantly, gets Muslim populations to support them. We should view political Islam, not radical or militant Islam, as our main enemy. Any movement based on the political ideology outlined in the trilogy has to have powerful and resourceful backers in order to be successful. Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan have powerful political Islamic movements within that fuel movements elsewhere – both in other Muslim majority nations and in nations with Muslim minorities. These three nations are called, Axis of Jihad in my book. Saudi and Iranian funding for mosques can be seen as the most efficient way of advancing jihad, by funding nodes of social network in Muslim communities. Also, the axis of jihad nations or political Islamic movements in these nations has created powerful proxies – be it Al-Qaeda, Afghan Taliban (by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan) or Hezbollah (by Iran). In this context we can now identify the weakness in American strategy in the war on terror. America is trying to neutralize proxies and radicals while doing little to neutralize the axis of jihad and the global political Islamic movement. While I agree with the initial assault on Saddam’s regime and the Taliban, the continued occupation of Iraq – and even Afghanistan appear to be expensive, time-consuming and draining diversions. We are now further identifying the enemy: a political ideology of conquest that inspires terror, mosques as the nodes that spawn jihad and axis of jihad as the main backer nations of the ideology and the nodes. ...The Koran was the first book of the trilogy to be put together, and that was done several decades after the death of Mohammed. In a Hadith it is said that Koranic verses were collected from bits of bone, stone, parchment, date palm leaves, and also from the memories of those who had memorized it. Clearly, leaves, stones, bits of bone, and people’s memory are not reliable forms of note-taking or information storage when Mohammed delivered his “revelations”. This is common sense. For something as profound as God’s “revelations,” there shouldn’t be an iota of doubt about their authenticity. We can make a powerful assertion that available evidence makes the claim of associating these revelations with God not scientifically credible. ...

Will You Believe Or Not?

Time Is Quickly Running Out To Escape What Will Soon Be Inescapable!

Choose Jesus Today! It Is YOUR Choice You Know.