It's the War Theology, Stupid!

Aik TC SG

By James Lewis May 8, 2015 American Thinker

For many centuries, “shouting fire in a crowded theater” set the limits of free speech under English Common Law.

The reason wasn’t a rash of practical jokers shouting “fire!” in London theaters. It was endless, murderous religious preachers like Oliver Cromwell, a Calvinist war leader who ended up killing lots of Catholics and Royalists in England and Ireland between 1642 and 1651.

He did so with the best intentions, of course.

The English civil wars led to the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and much improved religious tolerance in England. Before 1776, the American Founders read their Bibles and their John Locke, but they also loved Blackstone on The Laws of England. Blackstone put a lot of thought into free speech and its legal limits, as we can see in our First Amendment, which is based on that legal tradition.

Today, most Americans are sunk in shameful ignorance about their own culture, so they can’t figure out what all the fuss is about with those nice Muslims next door. Aren’t they always telling us how peaceful they are? Liberals can’t be expected to understand the word “jihad” – any more than they ever bothered to read Karl Marx on “revolutionary terror.”

But it’s still the war theology, stupid.

Violent jihad is commanded in the Koran. What confuses liberals is that the Koran also has peaceful verses, so they invariably fall for the sucker bait.

As Obama said, the trouble has to be with those white folks in the Midwest, with their God and their guns.

Obama also blames the Crusades – which raged from 1095 to 1291.

As for jihad warfare – against Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Jains, Chinese, Russian Orthodox, Coptic Christians, and all the rest – it has never stopped. It goes on today in India and China, in Chechnya and Malaysia.

And no, the real problem isn’t those Palestinian refugees from 1949, whose great-great-grandchildren are still being brainwashed to hate Israel.

Liberals are indeed unbelievable idiots, as Lenin almost said. But just as Lenin openly called for hanging Russian mouzhiks if they owned a couple of cows, the Koran calls for killing infidels if they won’t surrender to the nearest warmongering priest. “Islam” means “surrender.” “Muslim” means “one who surrenders.” The word “surrender” means “grovel on the ground so they won’t kill your children”...if you’re lucky.

A thousand years ago, Muslim Ghurids killed all the Buddhist monks they could find in India, because the monks preferred to be slaughtered rather than surrender or defend themselves. According to Muslim historians, it was a glorious victory.

Today there are not many Buddhists left in India. Plenty in Japan, but not in India. In India, they didn’t defend themselves. In Japan, they did.

Every single time a young man named Mahmoud commits another bloody atrocity, the liberal wailing goes up, asking, Why? Why? Why?

It’s always the war theology, stupid. But they will never take the truth for an answer.

Video-gaming teenagers understand about war-priests in Dungeons and Dragons, but liberals don’t get how powerful Muslim war theology is for their followers. They think theology is something made up by Dead White Males, like those crazy radio preachers in the South.

Liberals are desperately anxious to stay in denial, and the sly ayatollahs of Iran play to their fathomless ignorance. Obama knows about real jihad war, too, because they had a big series of massacres in Jakarta before he went to school there, but Obama can sucker liberals 24 hours a day. So it’s okay for the president of the United States to sign a completely deceptive “executive peace agreement” with the war-loving ayatollahs, because he knows the liberals will never find out. This Congress knows the truth, but it will stay out of the Big Scam of Obama’s life, hoping that he will get the blame if Americans ever figure it out.

News flash: historian Michael Ledeen just reported that Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei has proclaimed a fatwa to his generals, commanding them to kill the House of Saud – the rulers of Saudi Arabia.

And be quick about it, dammit.

Gotta love those spiritual leaders.

Liberals are in denial because they can’t handle fear about real enemies. Today, the aggressor is not the Soviet Empire, but violent Islam. Liberals were always blind to the fact that Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Che, Mao, and Pol Pot were murderous aggressors, because the truth was much too scary. They will keep believing in peaceful ayatollahs until somebody holds a knife to their throats, when it will be too late.

But – there really are Muslims who oppose violent jihad.

The most important one today is Egypt’s President El-Sisi, who has said this to Egypt’s imams:

It is inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire Islamic world to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world. Impossible that this … is antagonizing the entire world. It's antagonizing the entire world! Does this mean that 1.6 billion people (Muslims) should want to kill the rest of the world's inhabitants – that is 7 billion – so that they themselves may live? Impossible!

Those words should be carved in marble and hung in the Oval Office, as soon as a better president is elected.

President Sisi is our natural ally in the Muslim world. He couldn’t explain it more clearly than he already has, and by fighting the violent Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, he is showing us it’s not just nice words.

(Obama adores the Muslim Brotherhood and keeps trying to undermine President El Sisi. Draw your own conclusions.)

As soon as we get a true leader in the White House, we can follow the examples of Canada and Australia and forge a common alliance with Muslims who do not want to wage jihad against the world. As soon as the Saudis are forced to shut down their warmongering imams in London and New York City, as soon as the next ayatollah is forced to do the same, jihadist violence will fade. Why do we have the U.S. Navy if we can’t stop the two big sources of religious violence in the world?

In Islam, it all depends on the authority figures – the priesthood.

Stop the war preachers, and their followers will stop, too. Turkey is an example of a modernizing country that has now been taken over by “neo-Ottoman” fascists. For seven decades after World War I, the Turks wanted peace and prosperity, but today the fascists are in charge again, whipping up hatred.

In Islam, it all comes down to the war preachers.

(See MEMRI.org for daily updates on Muslim warmongers and peacemakers. They both exist.)

Weychin SG

As in reference to Muslims, there are two surahs in the Koran, surah of Mecca and surah of Medina. Mecca surah preaches kindness and tolerance etc., whereas Medina surahs justifies violence to an end.

Both are words given by Allah through Prophet Muhamad. Mecca surah is earlier,and Medina later. The Medina overrides the teachings of Mecca surah.

It is true that Islam, which means submission or surrender by the way, is a peaceful religion, but then, not always, as there are verses that can justify violence when it wants to.

There are sincerely peaceful Muslims, without doubt.However, without the full renunciation of the Medina surahs, non believers of Islam will continue to be wary of Muslims.

Weychin SG

https://beyondthecusp.wordpress.com/2007/08/10/which-quran-mecca-or-medina/

The Quran as we know it today is in reality two quite different books. The older Quran was written in Mecca while the later Quran was written in Medina. This lead some scholars, both Muslim and non-Muslim, to refer to the Quran by its two parts, the Mecca Quran and the Medina Quran. Both were transcribed as told by Muhammad to a scribe, as Muhammad was illiterate as were a majority in his day. A majority of the Surah in the Quran were written in Mecca with the rest written in Medina. The problem is that the Surah in the Quran are not placed in chronological order, but are ordered as shown here, along with the city of origin of each Surah. This will have importance later in this article. By not ordering the Surah in their chronological order one must refer to the Hadiths and other Islamic texts to discern the original order as Muhammad received his visions from Allah. This added to the secretive mystery that was spun around the Quran making its reading less straightforward to non-Muslims.

The Mecca Quran was all about tolerance, tranquility, spirituality, acceptance, and inner cleansing through submission to the word of Allah. This earlier part of the Quran also dictated many of the rules that individual Muslims must perform and abide in their day-to-day lives. In my most humble opinion the Mecca Quran formed a basis for a religion that bridged some of the gaps and controversies between the Christians and the Jews. Where Christians no longer followed much of the Rules of Kashrut, the Jewish dietary laws, the Quran reinstated many of these laws. But in the Mecca Quran the idea of an eye for an eye was replaced by a more Christian philosophy. In many ways I see the Mecca Quran as an attempt at a compromise that would appeal to those Jews who found merit in the Christian teachings but refused to release from Jewish traditions while also appealing to those Christians who were not totally comfortable with having left so much of Judaism behind. Either way, Muhammad set about to preach his revelations and gain converts, mostly from among Christians and Jews. The major obstacle in Muhammad’s efforts was that times were economically very good and most people were quite content with their current way of life. When people are happy and things are going well, people are usually not open to change as change may upset the balance or whatever that gives them this comfort and wealth. With time, Muhammad became more vocal as he was probably very frustrated that so few were willing to accept his preaching of Allah. This lead to his being forcefully requested to depart Mecca. So, he and his core converts to Islam made their way to Medina.

Undaunted, upon his arrival in Medina Muhammad continued his preaching and search for converts. Initially Muhammad abided by the peaceable and tolerant words of the Mecca Quran. Early in the Medina period, the life for Muhammad and his followers was difficult as they faced a shortage of food as they had yet to become financially solvent within the society of Medina. This was resolved when Muhammad not only allowed for the raiding of the trade caravans, but blessed the actions and praised the raiders. This naturally upset many of the merchants who were dependant on these caravans for their livelihood. This combined with the rejection of the teaching proselytized by Muhammad by much of the Jewish tribes in Medina gave way to escalating violence. This conflict escalated finally leading to the attack by the forces of Muhammad upon the Banu-Nadhir Jews. During this period Muhammad started to reveal the parts of the Quran from Medina. He had originally ruled that Muslims prayed facing Jerusalem, but the opposition from the Jews had him replace Jerusalem as the center of faith to Mecca. His newer revelations were more violent and had the Jews as the primary focus of this violence. This Medina Quran also incorporated much of the moral blessings of violence and caravan raiding taken from the Arab tribes who thrived on these ventures. This lead to many of these tribes adopting this newer form of Islam as dictated by Muhammad thus supplying Muhammad with a sizeable army at his command.

These were the pressures and societal conditions that lead to the differences between the Mecca and Medina portions of the Quran. While in Mecca Muhammad enjoyed the shared wealth of his clan and his tribe. Living an easier life his writings were more inclusive and passive. After being forced from Mecca and taking up his new residence in Medina, Muhammad no longer had the clan and tribal support and was on his own. This harder reality affected his writings, which became more assertive and violent. The importance here is that Muhammad ruled that if a later Surah contradicted a previous Surah, then the most recent and newer Surah was the true word of Allah. This is why figuring out the chronological order of the Surah is so essential to understanding Islam. It is also why one must read the whole Quran and not listen and decide matters only on quotes of individual Surah. The fact that Surah exist that have opposite intent and meanings should be noted so one can discern the validity of each Surah. If one is quoting from the Mecca Quran and there is a contradicting Surah in the Medina Quran, then the quote is no longer valid. Where much of the rituals come from the Mecca Quran along with the calls for tolerance and peace, the more exclusionary and violence condoning Surah in the Medina Quran negate the peaceful intention of the Surah from the earlier Mecca writings. This is why one must be careful when accepting as fact anybody’s quoting of the Surah of the Quran.

Perhaps some day a scholar will write a version of the Quran with the Surah in chronological order with footnotes to denote which Surah have been superceded by later Surah. Until then we are left to research these discrepancies ourselves. Not an easy task, but a necessary one if we are to understand Islam and Muslims.

Beyond the Cusp

Weychin SG

Another article more critical on Prophet Muhammad here:-

http://www.renewamerica.com/analyses/060630hutchison.htm

Please click the link as I would like to post here, thanks for understanding!

An Eternal Now SG

"Stop the war preachers, and their followers will stop, too"

How is that even possible? I mean in Singapore we can use ISA. But in Middle Eastern countries? Rounding up Imams is not even within the sphere of possibility.

And as long as there is Quran, there will be Imams. There will be Imams who focus on various things. Some with a more moderate stance, some will focus on Jihad. It will never end... It's a big problem. It's the mindset and consciousness of the people. We can only hope and try to steer a "a revolution of consciousness and ethics" as the Egyptian President Al-sisi said.

Check this out:

Aik TC SG

Another article more critical on Prophet Muhammad here:-

http://www.renewamerica.com/analyses/060630hutchison.htm

Please click the link as I would like to post here, thanks for understanding!

Thanks for the links