The Folly of Multiculturalism

Rabbi Jonathan Wittenberg, Rev. Margaret Cave, Dean of Coventry John Witcombe and Assistant Secretary General of the Muslim Association of Great Britain Ibrahim Mogra at the start of the Coexist march at the London Central Mosque in Regent’s Park, London. (Dominic Lipinski/PA Wire)

PJ Media, by Raymond Ibrahim, June 19, 2018:

Exactly how beneficial to a society is multiculturalism, this word that is so celebrated in the West?

First one must first define the word: It is “the view that cultures, races, and ethnicities, particularly those of minority groups, deserve special acknowledgement of their differences within a dominant political culture.”

Note the immediate inaccuracies within this standard definition. “Races,” which indicate a people’s innate physical makeup, are conflated with “cultures” — which are neither innate nor physical, but learned and metaphysical.

This mix-up explains why for many in the West, the word “culture” often conjures at most physical, surface differences — “exotic” food or dress. In reality, cultures are nothing less than entire and distinct worldviews with their own unique sets of right and wrongs, often rooted in a religion or philosophy. Cultures bring much more than, say, the convenience of having Indian cuisine down the street.

As Anglo-French historian Hilaire Belloc once explained it:

Cultures spring from religions; ultimately the vital force which maintains any culture is its philosophy, its attitude toward the universe; the decay of a religion involves the decay of the culture corresponding to it — we see that most clearly in the breakdown of Christendom today.

Put differently, all values prized by the modern West — religious freedom, tolerance, humanism, gender equality, monogamy — did not develop in a vacuum but rather are inextricably rooted to Judeo-Christian principles which, over the course of some 2,000 years, have had a profound influence on Western epistemology, society and, of course, culture.

While they are now taken for granted and seen as “universal” virtues, it’s not for nothing that these values were born and nourished in Western — not Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, Confucian, or pagan — nations.

All this is missed by those ignorant of the spiritual and intellectual roots of Western civilization. This is, incidentally, why growing numbers of Western people arrogantly see themselves as the culmination of all human history and culture — “enlightened” thinkers who have left all cultural and religious baggage behind — and are thus convinced that cultures offer only minor, or superficial differences (always to be “celebrated”). They embrace notions of relativism and multiculturalism, the idea that all religions and cultures are at most “skin deep,” or more subtly, that they are destined to develop like the West, which is no longer seen as a distinct culture but rather the end point of all cultures.

In other words, if the boons of Western civilization are not a distinct product of Judeo-Christian principles, then they must be standard for and appreciable to all civilizations.

The folly of such thinking is especially on display in the context of Islam and Muslims, who in this new paradigm are seen as embryonic Westerners. Whatever a Muslim may say — calls for jihad, hate for infidels — surely deep down inside he values “secularism,” and appreciates the need to practice Islam privately, respect religious freedom, gender equality, and so on. Thus is he made “in our image” (except, of course, we forget the roots of “our image”).

Overlooked is that the Muslim has his own unique and ancient worldview and set of principles — his own culture — which in turn prompt behavior that is deemed “radical” by Western standards (falsely assumed to be “universal” standards).

Portraying what at root is a Christian paradigm as “universal,” and then applying it to an alien culture like Islam, is doomed to failure. The idea that Muslims can be true to their religion and yet naturally fit into Western society is false. The idea is built on an equally false premise: that Christianity somehow also had to moderate itself to fit into a secular society. In fact, Christian principles, which are so alien to Islam, were fundamental to the creation of the West.

Returning to the initial confusion, that cultures are often conflated with race, it bears stressing that being wary or critical of multiculturalism is in no way the same thing as being wary or critical of other races or ethnicities (that is, “racism”) but rather being wary of disunity. After all, racially homogenous but culturally heterogeneous nations are much more fractured than the reverse. One need look no further than to the United States, where “leftist” and “rightist” whites often abhor one another (as was on regular display during the last presidential election). Or look to the Middle East, where Muslims and Christians are racially, ethnically, and linguistically homogenous, but where the former are ruthlessly persecuting the latter, exclusively over religion.

In short, there’s nothing wrong and much to be celebrated if a nation’s citizenry is composed of every race and ethnicity — but only if they share the same worldview, the same priorities, the same ethics, the same rights and wrongs — in a word, the same culture. Then it will be a strong and healthy nation, perfectly capturing the meaning of E pluribus unum.

A New Global Metric of Muslim Beliefs and Practices

Key insights from a revealing new report.

Front Page Magazine, by William DiPuccio, June 21, 2018:

Surveys conducted by Pew Research have revealed a great deal about Muslim beliefs and practices across the globe.  But they fall short of providing an overall picture of the Muslim world because they are divided by country or region.

The Muslim Global Demographic Project was established to answer this need by compiling Pew survey information in order to compute global percentages and global population statistics on Islamic beliefs and practices as they relate to security, terrorism, and the potential threat to Western culture.[1]

Taken together, nearly 1.1 billion Muslims are represented in the 39 countries where Pew surveys were completed between 2008 and 2012.[2]  This encompasses two-thirds of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims (based on a 2010 estimate), though not every country was polled in all of the survey questions.[3]  Since the surveys cover only countries with substantial Muslim populations, the United States and Western Europe were not included.

Some of the key findings of the project are presented here.  For the complete report and analysis, see “Muslim Beliefs & Practices:  A Global Demographic Assessment.”

Most Muslims Believe there is Only One Islam

67% (736.3 million) of Muslims surveyed believe that there is only one true interpretation of Islam’s teachings.  Disagreements over the interpretation of Islam have sometimes resulted in deadly violence, mostly between Sunnis and Shias.  However, the acceptance of Shias by Sunni Muslims varies considerably between countries.  Though most Muslims are certain about the true interpretation of Islam, they are divided over how far to stretch the boundaries of Islam.

Devout Muslims—those who say their lives reflect the hadith and the sunna to a considerable degree—comprise 41% (369.7 million) of the survey population. [4]  Statistically, they are more likely to say that (1) sharia is the revealed word of Allah, (2) that Islam and sharia have only one interpretation, (3) that proselytizing is a religious duty, and (4) that sharia should be the official law of their country.[5]

Most Muslims Prefer to Live Under Sharia    

Though Muslims are evenly divided over the belief that there is only one interpretation of sharia, 64% (581 million) believe it is the revealed word of Allah, rather than a form of law developed by men and based on Allah’s word.  69% of Muslims (741.8 million) in the countries surveyed favor making sharia the official law of their country.  This was the highest number in the project’s survey questions.

About one-third (274.0 million) believe sharia should be applied to non-Muslims in some way, and about one-third to one-half of Muslims (352.2 million – 463.3 million) support extreme punishments such as whippings, amputations, stoning for adultery, and the death penalty for apostasy.

These punishments belong to a legal class of penalties known as Hudud.  They are prescribed by the Quran, the sunna (the example and teachings of Muhammad), and traditional sharia (see table below). Hudud offenses are considered crimes against Allah.

Offense

Hudud Punishment

Reference

Adultery Stoning Bukhari 6814, 6827, 6828; Ibn Ishaq 267, 652; Reliance o12.2
Fornication (or Sodomy) 100 Lashes Quran 24:2; Bukhari 6827, 6828, 6833; Reliance o12.2
False Accusation of Adultery 80 lashes Quran 24:4; Reliance o13.3
Drinking Alcohol Up to 80 lashes Muslim 4452; Bukhari 6780; Reliance o16.3
Theft or Highway Robbery Amputation of Hand and/or Foot Quran 5:33, 38; Bukhari 6787, 6789; Ibn Ishaq 678; Relianceo14.1, o15.0
Highway Robbery

with Homicide

Crucifixion or Death by Sword Quran 5:33 (see Bukhari 6802-6805); Ibn Ishaq 678; Reliance o15.2
Apostasy Death Bukhari 3017, 6922; Ibn Ishaq 550; Reliance o8.1
KEY:     Bukhari—A Sunni, canonical, hadith collection (Darussalem version numbering)

Ibn Ishaq—Life of Muhammad, trans. by A. Guillaume (Oxford U. Press, 1955)

RelianceReliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, trans. by Nuh Ha             Mim Keller (Amana Publications, 1991)

A Large Minority of Muslims Support Forced Veiling & Honor Killing

About one-third of Muslims surveyed support the forced veiling of women (349.4 million) and say that honor killings are justified (361.8 million), in at least some circumstances, for women who commit pre or extra-marital sex.  Muslims are less likely to justify honor killings for men who commit the same offences.

Honor killing is not taught in the Quran and it is condemned by many Muslim clerics.  Nevertheless, a provision of traditional sharia law called Qisas, which is found in some countries, provides a legal loophole for honor killing by allowing blood relatives to forgive the perpetrator.[6]

Many Muslims Reject Basic Universal Rights and Freedoms

When taken together, about one-third to one-half of Muslims (274.0 million – 463.3 million) in the survey countries uphold beliefs and practices (in addition to support for sharia) that are contrary to many Western values and internationally recognized human rights, as shown in this table.

Survey Question

Number Who Affirm

Conflict with Western

Principles & Values

Favor sharia in their country

69%

741.8 million

Separation of religion and state

Religious freedom

Apply sharia to non-Muslims

in their country

31%

274.0 million

Separation of religion and state

Religious freedom

Individual freedom

Freedom of speech

Equality of all persons under the law

Whippings and amputations for

crimes like theft and robbery

44%

456.7 million

Cruel and unusual punishment
Stoning for adultery

45%

463.3 million

Cruel and unusual punishment
Death penalty for apostasy

35%

352.2 million

Religious freedom

Freedom of speech

Cruel and unusual punishment

Forced veiling of women

32%

349.4 million

Individual rights

Gender equality

Justify honor killings for women who commit pre or extra-marital sex

40%

361.8 million

Religious freedom

Individual rights

Gender equality

Conspiracy to murder

Over 100 Million Muslims Can Justify Using Violence in Defense of Islam   

Nearly 17% (which includes 114.7 million adults) of the survey population said that violence against civilians, is justified in order to “defend Islam from its enemies.”  Though the percentage is small, the population number is significant and implies a substantial base of moral and, perhaps, material support for violence and terrorism.[7]  If we assume that 17% is representative of the global Muslim population as a whole (i.e., 1.75 billion in 2015), then the number rises to approximately 191.5 million adults.  Granting that only a small percentage of those who justify terrorism would actually commit a terrorist act, these numbers are still more than sufficient to sustain a significant global terrorist threat for the foreseeable future.

The defense of Islam can be broader than resistance to armed attacks.  For many Muslims, insulting Islam or Muhammad is regarded as an attack on Islam.  Historical support for this view comes from Islam’s traditional texts.  Those who criticized or mocked Muhammad, including women, the elderly, and possibly children, were assassinated at his behest or with his approval according to both the hadith (Bukhari 1067, 4037, Abu Dawud 4361) and Muhammad’s biography, the sira (Ibn Ishaq, 551, 665, 675).  Numerous terrorist threats and attacks on Western targets have been provoked by nothing more than words or pictures which some Muslims found offensive.

There are other important conclusions regarding the survey population which have major implications for immigration.  These are discussed in the full, project report:

  • Devout Muslims are more likely to reject the legitimacy of Western laws and government.
  • Converting non-Muslims and promoting sharia are religious imperatives for many Muslims.
  • Intolerance of non-Muslims is widespread and continues to be taught.
  • A significant minority of Muslims are conflicted about modern society
  • A pre-scientific worldview continues to inhibit Islamic historical and scientific inquiry.

The report analyzes 16 survey questions in detail, providing the historical, theological, political, and social background of Muslim beliefs and practices.  It also includes an assessment of security, terrorism, and areas of potential conflict with Western culture—information which is crucial for policymakers and analysts.

Notes:


[1] The project was made possible by a generous volunteer effort.  Greg Oxnard, former Project and Data Information Systems Manager for Manchester City Council, U.K, designed and managed the Excel spreadsheet, and organized the volunteer effort for data entry.  Marilyn “Micki” Neidich Lewis, a professional, freelance editor, volunteered her skills to proofread and edit this article and the final report.

[2] The Muslim Global Demographic Project is not affiliated with Pew Research.   The percentages and population numbers were calculated directly from Pew Research data which was taken at face value.  See, “The World’s Muslims: Unity and Diversity,”  (Pew Research Center, 2012)  http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2012/08/the-worlds-muslims-full-report.pdf ; “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society” (Pew Research Center, 2013) http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf ;  “Islam and Christianity in Sub-Sahara Africa” (Pew Research Center, 2010) http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2010/04/sub-saharan-africa-full-report.pdf

[3] The total number of Muslims represented by the questions selected for this project ranges from 826 million to 1.094 billion.

[4] The hadith contains the canonical traditions of Muhammad’s teachings.  The sunna refers to the example of Muhammad.

[5] Many devout Muslims in the U.S. and Western Europe may not share these views.  Over 90% of the survey population live in countries where Muslims number 50% or more.

[6] .  See “Women still victims of honour killings despite new law,” The Express Tribune (Oct. 31, 2017) https://tribune.com.pk/story/1545802/1-women-still-victims-honour-killings-despite-new-law/

[7] According to Radio Free Europe, “Reactions to the [2015 Charlie Hebdo] shooting in the Arab world have been mixed, with some outlets condemning the attack and others suggesting that the French satirical magazine had brought the attack on itself.”  “Muslim Press Reacts to Charlie Hebdo Attack,” by Joanna Paraszczuk (Jan, 9, 2015)  https://www.rferl.org/a/muslim-press-reacts-charlie-hebdo-attack/26783014.html.  A BBC sponsored poll following the attack found that, “Some 27 per cent of British Muslims sympathise with Paris gunmen, while more than one in ten say satirical cartoons ‘deserve’ to be attacked.”   See “Quarter of British Muslims sympathise with Charlie Hebdo terrorists,” by Matthew Holehouse, The Telegraph (Feb. 25, 2015) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11433776/Quarter-of-British-Muslims-sympathise-with-Charlie-Hebdo-terrorists.html

The Incomprehensible Argument

Understanding the Threat, June 20, 2018:

When U.S. federal courts side with a terrorist group (Hamas/CAIR) making a legal argument that muslims must be given the opportunity to abide by foreign law (sharia), it is dangerous and absurd.  When “freedom of religion” is sited as the reason, the argument becomes incomprehensible.

While there have been many judicial rulings surrendering liberty to jihadis in the U.S., last week’s ruling by a federal judge forcing the state of Washington to serve special meals at special times during Ramadan to muslims in the state prisons is an exemplar of how sharia gets imposed in Western nations by ignorant government officials.

The most widely used text book in U.S. Islamic schools – What Islam is All About – states “Islam is not a religion, however, but a complete way of life.”

All of Islam defines Islam as a “complete way of life” governed by sharia (Islamic law).

Yet, an organization – the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) – representing the terrorist group Hamas, pushes the narrative that America must make way for sharia (Islamic law) because it is a “religious right” for muslims.

In fact, sharia is a legal system that is obligatory for muslims to obey and commands how they dress, interact with their family, how they govern, how they wage war, and includes “every field of law – public and private, national and international, together with enormous amounts of material that Westerners would not regard as law at all.” (Islam: A Sacred Law, Feisal Abdul Rauf)

For any muslim to make the argument in a U.S. federal court that muslims must be granted “privileges” because it is their “religious right” when in fact they are seeking compliance with sharia (foreign law) is an absurd legal argument.  When the argument is made by a proxy for a terrorist group and American courts rule in favor of the jihadis/terrorists, the result is the forceful compliance of sharia upon U.S. citizens inside the U.S. legal system.

Sharia Crime Stoppers Podcast – Will We Allow Michigan to Transform America?

The United West, June 18, 2018:

In a few short weeks, Michigan voters in the Primary elections could make history that will reverberate across the Republic.  Is it possible that the Michigan primaries will elect a candidate for Governor:

  • Whose campaign is funded by national & Sharia financed sources
  • Is Sharia compliant which means Sharia first, Constitution second
  • Has stated Michigan would become a sanctuary state, protecting illegals over Michigan citizens
  • Would enable/promote Sharia which means women & girls live enslaved lives in the name of multi-culturalism

These life-changing possibilities are real enough that a panel of experts was  convened to explore and identify counter-measures for concerned Michigan citizens and discuss impacts that could affect every state across America.

Watch as these national security, counter-intelligence analysts express the facts of what Michigan is facing.

  • Frank Gaffney, President of the Center for Security Policy, presents: Michigan: A National Security Threat
  • Anni Cyrus, Ex-Muslim, presents: Sharia Crimes Against Women: Up Close & Personal I
  • Farah Prudence, Ex-Muslim, presents: Sharia Crimes Against Women: Up Close & Personal II
  • Philip Haney, retired Homeland Security officer, presents: Michigan’s Advanced Stage of Sharia Saturation
  • Pastor Don McKay, presents: Counter-Measures for “Such a Time as This”

***

Post-Webinar #1: Farrah Prudence – Personal Experience of Sharia Crime Against Women

Sharia Crime Stoppers Webinar participant Farrah Prudence, Ex-Muslim who has experienced the brutality of male supremacy under Sharia, responds to questions regarding honor killing, FGM, and the rape of Muslim and Non-Muslim women. She addresses the need for police to understand Sharia in order to uphold their oaths to protect Muslims and Non-Muslims from crime.

***

Post-Webinar #2: Frank Gaffney and Philip Haney June 16, 2018 Q&A

Webinar participants from the prior day (Philip Haney, Retired Homeland Security and Frank Gaffney, President – Center for Security Policy), who have a full understanding of the Sharia threat, especially what it is doing in Michigan. They address the need for police to understand Sharia in order to uphold their oaths to protect Muslims AND Non-Muslims from Sharia crimes.

They advise that Sharia is truly a threat to freedom and the local community. Michigan is in danger in the 2018 election cycle. What can you do? Listen and they relate how you can help!


Register NOW for the Next Webinar : Islamist Censorship: Its Roots, Purpose & Role in the 2018 MI Governor’s Race, Thursday June 21st,  7:15pm ET

Free Speech Infringements in Michigan:  Islamist Censorship – Its Roots, Purpose & Role in the 2018 Michigan Governor’s Race

Presenter: Deborah Weiss – Center for Security Policy
When: Thursday June 21st,  7:15pm ET
Where:  Your computer, comfort of your own home

Register here: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_P9MvBq3lTQSzRWyvC7RA-g

June 15, 1389: Islam Enters and Conquers Eastern Europe

The Battle of Kosovo

PJ Media, by Raymond Ibrahim, June 15, 2018:

Editor’s note: The following account is partially excerpted from the author’s new book, Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West (with a foreword by Victor Davis Hanson). 

—————————-

Why Eastern Europeans are much more reluctant to accept Muslim migrants than their Western counterparts can be traced back to circumstances surrounding a pivotal battle that took place today, June 15, in the year 1389. The Battle of Kosovo raged between Muslim invaders and Eastern European defenders, or the ancestors of those many Eastern Europeans today vociferously hostile to Islam.

Because the jihad is as old as Islam, it has been championed by diverse peoples (Arabs in the Middle East, Moors — Berbers and Africans — in Spain and Western Europe, etc.). Islam’s successful entry into Eastern Europe was spearheaded by the Turks, specifically that tribe centered in westernmost Anatolia (or Asia Minor) and thus nearest to Europe — the Ottoman Turks, so-named after their founder Osman Bey. As he lay dying in 1323, his parting words to his son and successor, Orhan, were for him “to propagate Islam by yours arms.”

This his son certainly did; the traveler Ibn Batutua, who once met Orhan in Bursa, observed that, although the jihadi had captured some one hundred Byzantine fortresses, “he had never stayed for a whole month in any one town,” because he “fights with the infidels continually and keeps them under siege.” Christian cities fell like dominos: Smyrna in 1329, Nicaea in 1331, and Nicomedia in 1337. By 1340, the whole of northwest Anatolia was under Turkic control. By now, and to quote a European contemporary:

[T]he foes of the cross, and the killers of the Christian people, that is, the Turks, [were] separated from Constantinople by a channel of three or four miles.

By 1354, the Ottoman Turks, under Orhan’s son, Suleiman, managed to cross over the Dardanelles and into the abandoned fortress town of Gallipoli, thereby establishing their first foothold in Europe: “Where there were churches he destroyed them or converted them to mosques,” writes an Ottoman chronicler. “Where there were bells, Suleiman broke them up and cast them into fires. Thus, in place of bells there were now muezzins.”

Cleansed of all Christian “filth,” Gallipoli became, as a later Ottoman bey boasted, “the Muslim throat that gulps down every Christian nation — that chokes and destroys the Christians.” From this dilapidated but strategically situated fortress town, the Ottomans launched a campaign of terror throughout the countryside, always convinced they were doing God’s work. “They live by the bow, the sword, and debauchery, finding pleasure in taking slaves, devoting themselves to murder, pillage, spoil,” explained Gregory Palamas, an Orthodox metropolitan who was taken captive in Gallipoli, adding:

[A]nd not only do they commit these crimes, but even — what an aberration — they believe that God approves them!

After Orhan’s death in 1360 and under his son Murad I — the first of his line to adopt the title “Sultan” — the westward jihad into the Balkans began in earnest and was unstoppable. By 1371 he had annexed portions of Bulgaria and Macedonia to his sultanate, which now so engulfed Constantinople that “a citizen could leave the empire simply by walking outside the city gates.”

Unsurprisingly, then, when Prince Lazar of Serbia (b. 1330) defeated Murad’s invading forces in 1387, “there was wild rejoicing among the Slavs of the Balkans. Serbians, Bosnians, Albanians, Bulgarians, Wallachians, and Hungarians from the frontier provinces all rallied around Lazar as never before, in a determination to drive the Turks out of Europe.”

Murad responded to this effrontery on June 15, 1389, in Kosovo.

There, a Serbian-majority coalition augmented by Hungarian, Polish, and Romanian contingents — twelve thousand men under the leadership of Lazar — fought thirty thousand Ottomans under the leadership of the sultan himself. Despite the initial downpour of Turkic arrows, the Serbian heavy cavalry plummeted through the Ottoman frontlines and broke the left wing; the Ottoman right, under Murad’s elder son Bayezid, reeled around and engulfed the Christians. The chaotic clash continued for hours.

On the night before battle, Murad had beseeched Allah “for the favour of dying for the true faith, the martyr’s death.” Sometime near the end of battle, his prayer was granted. According to tradition, Miloš Obilić, a Serbian knight, offered to defect to the Ottomans on condition that, in view of his own high rank, he be permitted to submit before the sultan himself. They brought him before Murad and, after Milos knelt in false submission, he lunged at and plunged a dagger deep into the Muslim warlord’s stomach (other sources say “with two thrusts which came out at his back”). The sultan’s otherwise slow guards responded by hacking the Serb to pieces. Drenched in and spluttering out blood, Murad lived long enough to see his archenemy, the by now captured Lazar, brought before him, tortured, and beheaded. A small conciliation, it may have put a smile on the dying martyr’s face.

Murad’s son Bayezid instantly took charge: “His first act as Sultan, over his father’s dead body, was to order the death, by strangulation with a bowstring, of his brother. This was Yaqub, his fellow-commander in the battle, who had won distinction in the field and popularity with his troops.” Next Bayezid brought the battle to a decisive end; he threw everything he had at the enemy, leading to the slaughter of every last Christian — but even more of his own men in the process.

So many birds flocked to and feasted on the vast field of carrion that posterity remembered Kosovo as the “Field of Blackbirds.” Though essentially a draw — or at best a Pyrrhic victory for the Ottomans — the Serbs, with less men and resources to start with in comparison to the ascendant Muslim empire, felt the sting more.

In the years following the battle of Kosovo, the Ottoman war machine became unstoppable: the nations of the Balkans were conquered by the Muslims — after withstanding a millennium of jihads, Constantinople itself permanently fell to Islam in 1453 — and they remained under Ottoman rule for centuries (as documented in my new book, Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West).

The collective memory of Eastern Europeans’ not too distant experiences with and under Islam should never be underestimated when considering why they are significantly more wary of — if not downright hostile to — Islam and its migrants than their Western counterparts.

Europe: Ramadan Roundup, 2018

In London, Southwark Cathedral hosted an iftar dinner — a meal after sunset during the month of Ramadan — as part of the program of events to mark the anniversary of the London Bridge attack. (Garry Knight/Wikimedia Commons)

Gatestone, by Soeren Kern, 

  • In France, the government, which previously vowed to reduce foreign influences on the practice of Islam in the country, approved visas for 300 imams from Algeria and Morocco to lead Ramadan services in French mosques.
  • “Every message, no matter how poisonous the message is, should have the right to be expressed.” — Ahmed Aboutaleb, Mayor of Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
  • “The Turkish minister of foreign affairs tried to teach me a lesson about my Islamic identity. It is going too far if a foreign state, which is far away, tries to teach the mayor of Rotterdam about Dutch law and how I should apply it.” — Ahmed Aboutaleb, Mayor of Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Muslims across Europe are marking the end of Ramadan, the Islamic holy month, which in 2018 was observed between May 17 and June 15, in accordance with the Islamic lunar calendar.

Ramadan, a major topic for public discussion in Europe this year, received considerable media coverage, a reflection of Islam’s rising influence.

Muslim leaders sought to leverage the media attention to showcase Ramadan — a time when Muslims abstain from eating and drinking between sunrise and sunset, to commemorate, according to Islamic tradition, the revelation of the Quran to Mohammed — as the peaceful nature of Islam in Europe.

European multiculturalists, normally strict enforcers of secularism when it comes to Christianity, made great efforts to draw up guidelines, issue instructions and carve out special privileges to ensure that Muslims were not offended by non-Muslims during the festival.

Breaking with the past, however, a growing number of European politicians publicly spoke out against Ramadan, especially regarding the adverse effects of prolonged fasting on school-aged children. The backlash, evidenced by the emergence of politically incorrect political parties in Europe, appears to reflect a growing wariness of runaway multiculturalism and the steady erosion of Western values.

Following is a brief summary of a few Ramadan-related occurrences in several European countries:

In Austria, the Secretary General of the Austrian People’s Party, Karl Nehammer, called for a ban on fasting for school-age children. He said that he had received “innumerable” reports from teachers about the welfare of children during Ramadan. “If religious rituals, regardless of religion, endanger the health of children, this is clearly going too far,” Nehammer said. “If religion is placed above the welfare of the child, that must stop.”

The Islamic Religious Community in Austria (Islamischen Glaubensgemeinschaft in Österreich, IGGiÖaccused Nehammer of trying to “ban” Ramadan. IGGiÖ spokeswoman Carla Amina Baghajati described Nehammer’s comments as “offensive and humiliating” and, in a twist of logic, claimed that Nehammer was actually pushing Muslim children toward Islamic fundamentalism:

“This leads to a dangerous alienation in society. Children and adolescents especially feel this enemy policy. They are in danger of deliberately turning away from local society and becoming even more susceptible to radical ideas.”

Peter Kusstatscher, director of HTL Villach, the largest school in Austria, said that Ramadan itself was radicalizing some Muslim students: “You now notice how they radicalize themselves in the subject matter of Islam and radically live out their beliefs.” He described an incident where a Muslim student insulted a female classmate because she was wearing make-up during Ramadan. “Of course, we intervened because this was not about showing tolerance towards a religious community,” he said.

In Belgium, Saint John’s Catholic church in Brussels hosted an iftar dinner — a meal after sunset during the month of Ramadan. “What we are doing tonight is an extraordinary symbol of the power that comes from common initiatives like this,” said Catholic priest Jacques Hanon. “We want to show a strength that lies in responding to setbacks, fears, violence, hatred and discrimination together.”

The chairman of the Islamic communities in Brussels, Lahcen Hammouche, said:

“We have chosen this moment of the holy month of Ramadan, the month of sharing and forgiveness, to celebrate and share with churches of all faiths and all cultures, to show that Muslims are not all terrorists and that we are all capable and must have a good coexistence among religions and other philosophies.”

Hammouche did not say whether Belgian mosques would reciprocate by celebrating Christian holidays at their facilities.

In Cyprus, the Department of Public Works announced that it had fast-tracked the taxpayer-funded renovation of a mosque in Paphos so that it would be available for use during Ramadan:

“Despite delays in the project, the Department of Public Works, respecting the request of the Muslim community to secure a comfortable and safe site in order for them to exercise their religious rights and given that it was not possible to find another site managed to get the contractor to go ahead with construction work in the mosque so that it may be completed and used with safety during Ramadan.”

In Denmark, Integration Minister Inger Støjberg called on practicing Muslims to take a vacation during Ramadan to avoid negatively impacting the rest of society. In an opinion article published by the Danish newspaper BT, she wrote:

“We must address the problems that Ramadan presents us in the present. Undeniably, the demands of a modern and efficient society such as that of Denmark are quite different from those in Mecca during the time of Mohammed….

“It can be very dangerous for all of us if the bus driver neither eats nor drinks during the whole day, and of course one does not perform at the same level at the factory or at the hospital if you do not eat and drink during daylight hours for a whole month.

“I respect that Muslims want to practice their religion and traditions, but I think religion is a private matter and that it is necessary for us to ensure that it does not become a social issue. I do not want to deprive Danish Muslims of the opportunity to cultivate their religion and religious holidays, but I would encourage them to go on vacation during the month of Ramadan so that it does not adversely affect the rest of the Danish society.”

In France, the government, which previously vowed to reduce foreign influences on the practice of Islam in the country, approved visas for 300 imams from Algeria and Morocco to lead Ramadan services in French mosques. The move sparked a backlash from across the political spectrum. “To ask Algeria and Morocco to send us imams during the month of Ramadan is unacceptable,” said the former Socialist Prime Minister Manuel Valls, who has pledged to “cut all bridges” between Muslims in France and “third countries.”

The leader of the National Front, Marine Le Pen, said that “it is unacceptable that the Ministry of the Interior organizes the arrival of 300 foreign imams in our country for Ramadan; it is a violation of the principle of secularism (laïcité).” Her former ally in the 2017 presidential race, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, demanded that foreign imams be required to swear an “oath of loyalty to France and the Republic.”

Elsewhere in France, in Chambourcy, the managers of a Carrefour hypermarket complied with Muslim demands to remove Israeli dates from the store’s “Ramadan department.” Customers complained that the presence of Israeli products was “an affront to Muslim customers.”

Europe 1 radio reported that Ramadan was a “commercial bonanza” for French retailers. Mimoun Ennebati, the head of a French Muslim association, said that “a priori, large distributors do not want to offend a certain clientele” during Ramadan. He estimated that practicing Muslims increase their spending by 30% during the month of Ramadan.

Meanwhile, in Mantes-la-Jolie, a suburb of Paris, a 42-year-old man was charged with manslaughter after shaking his five-month-old daughter to death. The man, confessing to the crime, said: “I was observing Ramadan and without eating, my nerves were on edge.”

In Germany, Martin Sichert, a lawmaker from the anti-immigration party, Alternative for Germany (AfD), called for Muslim doctors, nurses, pilots, bus and train drivers to be banned from working during Ramadan if they are fasting. “What patient should have to be operated on by a surgeon who has not had anything to drink for 12 hours?” asked Sichert, a member of the parliamentary committee for labor and social issues. “Why should people have to be transported around by other people who might face concentration problems and dehydration because they have been fasting for hours?”

Family Minister Franziska Giffey warned that “strict interpretations” about fasting were having an adverse impact on Muslim students: “Children need to drink and eat regularly, otherwise they can no longer pay attention in class or work together in physical education.” She also said there was growing peer pressure to observe the fast during Ramadan: “There should be no discrimination, no matter if someone is fasting or not.”

Heinz-Peter Meidinger, president of the German Teachers Union (Deutsche Lehrerverband), expressed concern that “a lot of students now take the fast very seriously.” He complained that Muslim parents increasingly were pressuring teachers to reschedule exams until after Ramadan. This delay, he said, was having a negative impact on non-Muslim students.

In Landshut, Bavaria, Christian politicians and clergy walked out of an inter-cultural Ramadan festival after Quranic verses were sung in Arabic, rather than in German, as initially promised. “Singing the Quran in Arabic is incompatible with the goals of successful integration,” said Thomas Haslinger, the district chairman of the Christian Social Union in Landshut.

Meanwhile, Deutschlandfunk, a German public radio station, in a segment about Ramadan, claimed that “Ramadan is an old German custom that has been around here longer than Oktoberfest.” Author Eren Güvercin added: “Islamic religious practice has long since found its home in Germany. And we German Muslims are looking forward to Ramadan in our Germany. Nobody can deny that to us.”

In Greece, hundreds of Arab and Kurdish asylum seekers clashed in a dispute over the Ramadan fast at the Moria Refugee Camp, on the island of Lesbos. Mohammed Khalil, a 19-year-old Kurdish migrant from Syria explained: “The fight began when some Arab youths started to fight with Kurds over fasting…. Some Arabs from Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Algeria came and said Rojava [Syrian Kurdistan] Kurds are infidels and are not allowed to fast. Then the fight started. The refugee Arabs left and later returned with reinforcements. A bloody fight ensued.”

In Iceland, where the sun at this time of the year rises at 3am and sets at midnight, Muslims observed the Ramadan fast according to Mecca time, where the sun sets at around 7pm, to avoid having to fast for 20 hours or more. Ahmad Seddeeq, an imam at the Islamic cultural center of Iceland who is originally from Egypt, said it was easier to fast in a cool climate: “I have done this for years, and I find it more difficult in my country, where it is 40 to 45 degrees Celsius (104-113F).”

Read more

UTT Answers the Critics

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, June 12, 2018:

Many jihadi and Marxist organizations frequently publish overtly defamatory and false comments about Understanding the Threat (UTT) and its President John Guandolo.

UTT would like to inject some truth into this situation.

The following is a list of the common attacks UTT endures, followed by UTT’s responses:

“Guandolo has made a career out of…promoting ludicrous Islamophobic conspiracy theories.”

In fact, UTT offers $1000 cash and the removal of relevant material we teach and publish to anyone who can bring something to our attention that is not true about sharia’s authority in Islam and what it says, or about the Muslim Brotherhood’s Jihadi Movement in the United States and their modus operandi.

UTT has made this offer on TV, radio, and in direct emails to U.S. Muslim Brotherhood leadership for over 3 years.

So far…no takers.

“Guandolo has made a career out of demonizing Muslims…”

UTT believes speaking truth about the evil and barbaric system that is Islam’s sharia brings light to muslims trapped in this system and who are enslaved by it.  This, to us, seems the best way to demonstrate love and compassion to the muslim community, as opposed to calling a barbaric system “good” and “peaceful.”

“Guandolo’s trainings are little more than anti-Muslim witch-hunts.”

In fact, sheriffs, police chiefs, and prosecutors have opened cases as a direct result of UTT’s 3-day “Understanding and Investigating the Jihadi Threat” for police, intelligence professionals, and military personnel.  One police officer who attended UTT’s 3-day program identified a wanted Al Qaeda terrorist wanted by the FBI less than one week after the training, and stated UTT’s training was the reason he was able to do so.

“At an event in 2011, Guandolo claimed mosques were fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Property records, leadership at U.S. Islamic centers/mosques, investigation by UTT, and testimony in federal courts reveal approximately 80% of the over 3000 mosques in all 50 United States are controlled by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.  The Muslim Brotherhood calls Islamic centers/mosques the “axis” of their Movement, and their stated objective is to wage jihad to establish an Islamic State under sharia – the same objective as ISIS and Al Qaeda.

“Guandolo was dismissed from the FBI.”

John Guandolo left the FBI on 1 December 2008 after being recruited out of the FBI by the Department of Defense for a significant pay increase and significantly more responsibility.  His departure from the FBI was voluntary and honorable.

“Among his many bizarre and Islamophobic claims…that former CIA Director John Brennan was a secret Muslim…”

In fact, in February 2013, UTT’s John Guandolo was the first to break the story on a TV show hosted by The United West’s Tom Trento discussing U.S. government personnel with direct knowledge of John Brennan’s conversion to Islam when Mr. Brennan was the CIA Station Chief in Saudi Arabia in the 1990’s.  In June 2017, former CIA Station Chief Brad Johnson publicly stated on the Glazov Gang TV show that many people in the CIA told him they heard and knew of John Brennan’s conversion to Islam.

See the video HERE.

“Among his many bizarre and Islamophobic claims…that Muslims are “obligated” to lie, and that it is “unprofessional” for officials to seek information about Islam from Islamic religious leaders (imams).”

Authoritative Islamic law – sharia – mandates lying by muslims to non-muslims when the objective is obligatory.  In Islamic law, jihad is obligatory.

The Um dat al Salik (Reliance of the Traveller) is authoritative sharia approved by the highest authority in Islam – Al Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt.  It states:   “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives…it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible…and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.”

Islamic scholars and all sharia mandate lying by muslims to non-muslims when the goal is obligatory.  Advancing Islam is obligatory.  Jihad is obligatory.  Islamic leaders who know and understand sharia lie to non-muslims to advance Islam and have been caught doing so on numerous occasions.

Therefore, it is unprofessional for a non-muslim to use an Islamic scholar or Imam as the source of understanding of Islam because Islamic scholars and Imams know sharia and, therefore, understand their duty under sharia to lie to police chiefs, pastors, Members of Congress, Presidents, school board officials, and others in order to advance Islam.

Guandolo claims most Islamic organizations in America are a threat.

The largest terrorism financing trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history – US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, Dallas 2008 – was the culmination of a 15 year FBI investigation.  The evidence in this case reveals there is an “Islamic Movement” in the United States primarily led by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.

The evidence also reveals the most prominent Islamic organizations in the United States are a part of this Muslim Brotherhood network whose stated objective is to wage “civilization jihad” until they establish an Islamic state (caliphate) under sharia (Islamic law).

The Muslim Brotherhood’s published By-Laws also reaffirm this.

Evidence in the US v HLF trial reveals the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood was ordered by MB headquarters in Egypt to create a Palestine Committee to be a node for the terrorist group Hamas in the United States.  The USMB created four (4) organizations to fulfill this mission, including the HLF and CAIR.

US v HLF and other evidence reveals MB groups in America include, but are not limited to:

Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)

Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)

North American Islamic Trust (NAIT)

Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA)

Muslim Students Association (MSA)

Muslim American Society (MAS)

Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA)

International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT)

Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)

Muslim Youth of North America (MYNA)

It is UTT’s hope the reader will read and study these responses so he/she can boldly speak truth using these responses as a guide.

UTT encourages our readers and followers not to be angry with our adversaries.  They are doing what they do.  We should pity them that all they have are lies and ad hominem attacks.

They certainly do not have the truth.

Also see: