By Walid Shoebat (Shoebat Exclusive)
The West, technologically is the fastest moving block on earth. But when it comes to Islam, the learning curve is taking decades, yet by large, they still do not get it. So I delved into the American mindset to search for clogs in the pipeline and I found many naive who still write about Islam as if they know what they are talking about. For example, in one article by Paul Mirengoff, one naive ‘expert on Islam’ picks the brains of another naive ‘expert on Islam’ named “Max Boot”, to give a typical western perspective:
Max Boot offers a sensible perspective: Is Islam a religion of peace, as many claim, or is it a religion dedicated to making war on unbelievers and infidels, as others assert? Are the terrorists the true Muslims–or are the law-abiding French Muslims truer to their faith?
The answer is “yes.” Both are true at once. Islam, like every other broad-based religion, is subject to numerous conflicting interpretations. Some use it to justify hateful violence; others use it to justify a path of nonviolence. It is impossible to say which is the true version because Islam is a decentralized faith that, unlike Catholicism, has no pope to rule on matters of theology.
With such a broad description of Islam, it is no wonder why Americans are slow to learn. First of all, central to Islam’s original design is a ‘centralized’ not “decentralized faith” just like Catholicism with a “pope to rule on matters of theology”. Islam’s ‘Vatican’ was simply removed in 1928 when the west temporarily decentralized Islam in which a Caliphate is returning in full force. Do these naive ever ask why Muslims are enraged? It is because they want their pope (the Caliph) back on his seat.
Also, how could two opposites by correct? Islam is a “religion of peace” and is also “a religion dedicated to making war on unbelievers and infidels”?
The infection spread by Booth to Mirengoff is the typical, which concluded that “Islam is peace” because surveys show that most Muslims do not like terrorism “57 percent said they had an unfavorable view of al-Qaeda while 51 percent had an unfavorable view of the Taliban”, so says Booth.
So if one survey showed that “65% of Catholics said that abortion should be legal in some cases”, would this mean that Catholicism, when it comes to the human fetus, is a violent religion? Had the Almighty allowed all the fetuses to carry signs and demonstrate in the womb, we would find millions of ultrasounds with banners that say “long live the Pope”. While such a survey calculates a certain mindset, it does not answer the questions of dogma, history and the convictions of the religious institution.
If it was up to me, I would agree with Muslims to have the west banned from writing anything about Islam and give such an authority to only Copts, Serbs, Armenians, Bulgarians, Russians, Croatians, Georgians, Romanians and any other nationality that tasted the bitter herb of Islam and have a history living under the Ottoman yoke. My judgment will surely prohibit many great western writers who get it, but this way I will ensure that the leaven of the West does not infect my healthy Islamophobic agenda.
Islam, like Christianity, should be evaluated based on the founders, not on many of the adherents since any religion, founded by devil or by God, was intended to change mindsets regardless of how many adherents object. Had surveys been conducted during Islamic Caliphates the numbers of Muslims who support violence against non-Muslims would be astounding. The reasons many Muslims are found “moderate” is not because of Islam, but is because the west after it gave a deathblow to the Islamic Caliphate introduced western civilization where Muslims tasted freedom, arts, education, critical thinking … and as many began to see these values dissipate with the rise of the Caliphate mentality, they began to lament of the good old days where a woman had her dignity instead of being sold off to the Souq al-Nakhasa (women slave market) where her breasts are revealed for paying clients.
Islam is the farthest from the true morality of Christianity. No one is an expert on Islam, no, not even the greatest of Muslim scholars, since the only way to understand Islam is to be the devil himself.
“Violence” is not the standard to make judgments and at times there is justified violence. The Crusader wielding a sword is not the same as the Muslim wielding a scimitar.
When evaluating Islam, the West, especially its Christians, practice much hypocrisy. When Charlie Hebdo who was anti-Christian was killed by Muslim terrorists, they jumped up and down and Islam all of the sudden becomes very violent. We reported on it and our articles spread faster than a lightening bolt. But when we report of the thousands of Christians murdered, so few even blink and then they object that the victims should not resort to violence, as if violence is the standard on evaluating everything.
Fact is, the Muslim world is divided, they compare between the old great tasting recipe of western values versus the old blood pie that is being fed to them by force. Here is an interview on Egyptian TV between a Muslim scholar and the naive Muslim woman who hosts a TV show in Egypt. Watch her shock at what the Al-Azhar scholar revealed. He owns a sex slave and shares the truth about how Islam permits nudity:
The next video shows slaves in Mecca and Medina and Tunisia and Morocco from the early 1900 which included Ghilman (boy sex slaves). In one, the Muslim old geezer is having the nude underage sex slave pour water for his ablution (washing) which Muslims do before they pray. Today the slave business still exists in Saudi Arabia under the name of Al-Kafeel awl-Ta’aqudat.
And we ask, is it best to trumpet the question “is Islam violent?” or should we also better ask “is Islam completely demonic?” Why does it take westerners so long to conclude such issues? 911 hit America and they said that “we must have offended them”, “its not Islam”, “its a few extremists”, “a lone wolf”, “we need to reform Islam”, “lets have a dialogue”. It is as if a group of surfers see shark fins protruding out of the water and one gives a survey on why its “rare to be bit by sharks” and yet another says that “we can perhaps communicate with sharks”, yet another says that “shark bites are simply part of an ecological balance” … yet none of them will even dare enter into the water. Why? Because they all trumpet what they learn when they know that there analysis has nothing to do with the reality at hand.
The west, with its analysts are clueless, still, as to what will be coming through the pipeline when it comes to Islam. When we first reported that Islam permits cannibalism and literally human sacrifice, they dismissed us as conspiracy theorists, until incidents revealed such reality.
Today there is a hunger for an Islamic Caliphate. I maintain that Islam never was, will not, and will never reform. Surveys are deceptive. Many Muslims hate ISIS, of course, they mostly kill other Muslims, but dare you show survey results had ISIS been killing only Jews. For that you must survey how Muslims feel about Hamas. In Indonesia, you will rarely find an Indonesian Muslim who condemns Hamas since Hamas only kills Jews.
Even your conservative analysts are wrong, especially if they are Jewish. Daniel Pipes for example, is considered conservative, he is a hopeful Jew and like a typical Jew (yes there are typical Jews) while he thinks that he is doing good for the world, he does immense damage when he writes “a reformed Islam can emerge” and that “Islam can be reformed”.
And I dare him or any other to counter this argument: the reformation of Islam is already underway with the very Turkish Model of Islam they speak of in their articles. It is already spreading throughout the Muslim world as we speak. Is there any evidence they can present for any glimpse of Muslim reformation?
When I first visited Mr. Pipes in his office, I told him that the Ottoman revival is on its way and that he is simply a “wishful thinker”. “Hope” is the motto of every Jew, of course, yet even hope does not exist within the vacuum of wishful hoping since to say that one is a Jew can only be advanced by reading his Bible. That Jew, as it seems, like many other Jews, would be caught dead quoting their grand fathers who etched the words that brought us civilization: the Bible. They fear more the labels of being passé much more than fearing the blade of the Muslim scimitar. The ironic thing is that Pipes knows I am right and that he is wrong, but public image, financial funders, and plain pride is always the first choice and bravery is the second. I have lost so many friends and so many others betrayed me for refusing to tow the line. The real war in the West is not against Islam, this is a myth, the real war is against Christianity itself. With the exception of Michael Savage and few others, few Jews see that Islam should be the first enemy for Judaism.
So lets see how its all turning out. The Turkish Model of Islam is the same old model, which only reforms certain aspects where it uses western industrial, western economics and western military development. The native Cherokee worshipped spirits while he fought the white man with arrows, but he did not change one single iota when he was able to trade skins with rifles. He only changed when he was taught how to go to church.
An ideology will always use whatever means as a vehicle and a shark is still a shark even if it learns how to shoot, it will still bite since it can never get rid of its sharkness.
When this new model of Islam completely encompasses the whole of the Muslim world, the west will be enamored, of course, for it failed to resort to the Bible which warned that “by peace he will deceive many”. American church attendance rose only right after 911 to later invite the Muslim shark on the pulpit so he can enamor them how “Islam is peace”.
When this revived Caliphate comes, westerners will reflect and say “ISIS is finally contained” to shortly after say “Ahhh, ISIS, these were the good old days. We were foolish indeed, for we have ignored the Bible”.