---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emptybill@...> wrote :

 Contrary to political-correctness - and as demonstrated by the 1,400 year old 
track record of Islamic violence and "peace" - terrorism and the lack of 
intra-Muslim peaceful coexistence - Islam has never considered itself to be “a 
religion of peace”.
 

 I have a tendency to doubt you, pants. And here is one reason why: I believe 
you to be an inciter and a lover of conflict. At least, that is how you present 
yourself here. I post this as a way to counteract your incendiary piece below. 
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/09/islam-is-a-religion-of-peace-manal-omar-debate-islamic-state/
 
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/09/islam-is-a-religion-of-peace-manal-omar-debate-islamic-state/
 

 The volcano of Islamic terrorism
 By Yoram Ettinger -- Bio and Archives 
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/members/78054/YoramEttinger/971  January 
10, 2016
 mailto:letters@...
 
 Islamic terrorism has dominated the history of Islam, as demonstrated by the 
murder of three of the first four Caliphs succeeding Muhammed: Umar ibn Abd 
al-Khattab (644 AD), Uthman Ibn Affan (656 AD) and Ali ibn Abi Talib (661 AD).  
Islamic terrorism has been one of the most active and dangerous volcanoes - 
domestically, regionally and globally - since the initial eruption of Islam in 
the 7th century. Historically, all Arab regimes have achieved, sustained and 
eventually lost power through domestic violence, subversion or terrorism.
 
Currently, irrespective of Israeli policies and the Palestinian issue, Yemen, 
Iraq, Syria and Libya have become battlegrounds of rival Islamic terror 
organizations. All pro-US Arab regimes such as Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, 
Kuwait, Bahrain and the UAE face clear and present lethal terror threats. Iran 
and Saudi Arabia – the two leading world bankers of Islamic terrorism – 
confront each other militarily, economically, ideologically and religiously. 
Intra-Muslim fragmentation, unpredictability, instability, intolerance, 
subversion, terrorism and the provisional nature of Islamic regimes, their 
policies and agreements have been recently intensified in an unprecedented 
manner.

 The lava of Islamic terrorism has consumed mostly Muslims in the abode of 
Islam, but it is aiming to sweep the abode of the “infidel,” and is currently 
spreading into the streets of the USA, Europe, Russia, China, India, Africa, 
Asia and Australia. 

 

 While most terrorists are Muslims, the majority of Muslims are not terrorists. 
 However, most Muslim policy-makers have not represented the will of the 
majority, and the will of the majority has been systematically 
suppressed/oppressed in most Muslim societies (including Muslim communities in 
Western countries). These Muslim societies have never experienced democracy, 
exposing the majority to tectonic eruptions of violence by rogue regimes and 
organizations.
 

 Contrary to conventional “wisdom”, the 1,400 year old volcanic Islamic 
terrorism has not been triggered by social and economic deprivation or by the 
absence of civil liberties. It has been triggered by the fourteen century old 
megalomaniacal, supremacist, intolerant, anti-democratic, repressive, 
non-negotiable and eternal aspiration – led by educated Islamic “elites” - to 
force the world of the “infidel” and the “apostate” to submit to Islam. The 
latter is, supposedly, the only legitimate religion, divinely ordained to rule 
the world.
 


According to the Qur’an, Islam is the only worthy/legitimate successor to the 
Abrahamic and Mosaic Judaism. Thus, the subordination of humanity to the legacy 
of Muhammed should be achieved, preferably, via nonviolent means (da’wah), 
deceit/doubletalk (Taqiyya’) and immigration (Hijra’’). But, in face of defiant 
“infidels” and “apostates,” the “believers” should resort to non-compromising, 
non-merciful violence (jihad), subversion, breach of international accords and 
terrorism. 

 Unlike the Western definition of terrorism (the deliberate and systematic 
targeting of civilians), the Qur’anic definition of terrorist (irhab) is the 
derivative of the verb arhaba (to terrify, scare), which is a tactic employed 
against the “infidel,” in order to advance the goals of Islam (Qur’an, Sura 8, 
verse 60). The Muslim bottom line is that “there is no God but Allah and 
Muhammad is his prophet.”
 

 Contrary to political-correctness - and as demonstrated by the 1,400 year old 
track record of Islamic violence and terrorism and the lack of intra-Muslim 
peaceful coexistence - Islam has never considered itself to be “a religion of 
peace” as defined by Western dictionaries.  According to Muhammad’s legacy, the 
term salam – which is derived from the same root as Islam - is employed when 
addressing fellow Muslims, but not when addressing non-Muslims, unless 
constrained by temporary military, economic or political inferiority.
 

 Furthermore, Arab/Muslim societies invoke Quranic verses and Islamic history 
precedents as guidelines for contemporary, daily, personal, tribal, regional 
and national conduct. For example, Qur’an, Sura 20, verses 47 -48 state that 
“Peace be on whoever follows the guidance [of Allah]… and punishment shall 
afflict those who deny and turn their back [on Allah].” Thus, salam is reserved 
only for those who submit/surrender themselves to Islam, while those who renege 
on their commitment to Islam are doomed. Moreover, any agreement with the 
“infidel” is defined as sulh, hudna’, a tenuous truce of limited duration, 
until the balance of power facilitates total submission of the “infidel” to 
Islam.
 According to Hebrew University Prof. Moshe Sharon 
http://www.acpr.org.il/english-nativ/09-issue/sharon-9.htm, a world renowned 
authority on Islam, “Islam came to being as a fighting religion…. Mohammed 
imposed his authority by means of his military strength… Islam was born in 
order to rule [humanity], as is only fitting for the religion of Allah which is 
one and exclusive…. The laws of Jihad form the basis of the relations between 
the Muslim world and the West…. The only possible relations between Muslims and 
non-Muslims are war or a limited ceasefire…. Jihad is the strategy and, 
therefore, agreements are a [tactical] interlude in the war [against the 
infidel]…. An agreement which contains anything beyond a limited armistice or 
ceasefire is null and void.”
 

 Sacrificing reality and long-term national security on the altar of political 
correctness and short-term convenience, key Western policy-makers and public 
opinion molders have refused to recognize the central role (or any role) played 
by Islam – as advocated in Muslim schools, mosques, media and social media in 
Muslim and Western countries - in the intensifying threat of terrorism. These 
movers and shakers have, also, insisted that providing employment and 
educational opportunities is the most effective way to combat terrorism. Tariq 
Alhomayed, the former editor-in-chief of the leading Saudi daily, Asharq 
Al-Awsat, wrote on February 22, 2015: “ISIS is not looking for jobs, neither 
are Al Qaeda or Hezbollah…. According to President Obama, oppressing the 
opposition leads to extremism and terrorism.  However, the oppression of the 
Green Revolution by the Iranian regime has not led to extremism or terrorism in 
Iran…. Why is the entire Middle East, except Iran, targeted by terrorism? Why 
are some of Al Qaeda’s leaders in Iran?”
 

 Winston Churchill’s famous words on relations with communists apply even more 
so to terrorists: “Trying to maintain good relations with a communist is like 
wooing a crocodile. You do not know whether to tickle it under the chin or beat 
it over the head.  When it opens its mouth, you cannot tell whether it is 
trying to smile or preparing to eat you up…. An appeaser is one who feeds a 
crocodile, hoping that it will eat him last….”
  
 



Reply via email to