"My mother always said, 'We, the Arabs, we were born to hate Jews'"

'I have only one small correction for "mom". That should be: "We, the Muslims, we were born to hate Jews".'

Right on GI, "dear mom" committed technical blasphemy as it were, as an arab racist, since she didn't attribute and give all due credit to the real bastard, not the sucker arabs, who remain yet a small part still Christians, but all criminal hate crime and murder credit goes to old al and little buddie mo. They are the authentic evil frauds of the ol' gang of miscreants, everywhere, whatever race being immaterial.

I guess she's just a careless and prideful "old dear", isn't she?

TJFREEDOMJIHAD wrote:

I guess she's just a careless and prideful "old dear", isn't she?
.........................

"Mommy dearest" indeed, TJ...

Fiqh Al-Matter wrote:

But , seriously, even the non-Muslim Arabs are contributing to our problem.

EFF THE ARABS!
..............................

Well, I do understand your attitude—even many non-Muslim Arabs are what Hugh Fitzgerald calls "Islamo-Christians"—who have absorbed all too many of the ugly tenets of Islam, including virulent Jew-hatred.

But this is *not* true of everyone. Brigitte Gabriel, who grew up Christian in Lebanon, is one of the strongest Anti-Jihadists out there, and is an absolutely stalwart supporter of Israel.

After all, non-Arab Muslims—Persians, Pakistanis, sub-Saharan Africans, even Western "reverts"—can be every bit as vicious as their Arab coreligionists.

Ultimately, this is about a sick ideology, not race.

I have to disagree with you. Coptic Christians for example hate Islam as much or more as we do, they see it in action against them, they have more reason to hate it then we do. Have you ever seen a video of different religions in Arab countries? When they interview Christians you see a peace & calmness in their face & demeanor, you see that these are good people. Then when they show Muslims you see a mob & rage & hate, you see the poison of Islam. Big difference between the two.

Coptic Christians for example hate Islam as much or more as we do, they see it in action against them, they have more reason to hate it then we do.

True, but Copts are not Arabs. They are the original people of Egypt who were conquered by Arab invaders in 12th century and have since been under moslem occupation and all its horrors.

Graven,

Everything you’ve said there is quite correct, rationally, of course. But surely you wouldn’t deny that there is an ethic component? As you no doubt know (and I think I’m more or less paraphrasing Hugh here), Islam, despite its universalist pretentions, has always functioned, by default, not only as an Islamic ideologically supremacist ideology, but as a racially supremacist ideology.

This is not too hard for people to understand when they consider that, if one is a believing Muslim, and, therefore, one believes that the Quran is a book written by God – literally – and that book was written in Arabic, and dictated to an Arab (Muhammad), in Arabia, and one’s prayers don’t count unless they pray toward Arabia, and one is obligated to mimic Muhammad to the minutest detail, it ultimately means that you have to live your entire lifestyle in accord with 7th century Arab culture. Then, by default, the Arab ethnicity assumes an exalted status in the framework of this sick ideology.

One of the ways this ideology’s dominance is boosted is through this racial supremacism. To such a degree that many people who aren’t even Arab nonetheless claim to be Arab if they can “pass” just so that they can get a better lot in life in Muslim societies. This is one of the many reasons the term “Arab Spring” was so ridiculous. The countries to which the mainstream media were applying this term weren’t even comprised of Arabs. But, to “liberals,” any brown-skinned desert person is an “Arab.”

Why? Precisely because of the insidious racially supremacist nature of this ideology. Muslims have been so successful, through their conquests, of convincing everyone and anyone that Muslim=Arab that these dolts in the media mindlessly pass along this tripe. This is reflected in the language used by the woman in this news story. She saw her Arab ethnicity as a basis for her anti-Semitism, rather than its true basis, which was Islam, the ideology.

In my view, this is one of the major aspects of this conflict that needs to be addressed. We’ve got to start calling Islam out on its racial component. And, at the same time, we’ve got to start holding even non-Muslim Arabs responsible for their complicity.

Of course there are good non-Muslim Arabs. And I’d give my life for them. But, frankly, there aren’t enough of them. (Brigitte Gabriel is obviously an exception. She is one of my heroes.) But the sad truth is that most non-Muslim Arabs are carrying water for their Muslim overlords. The time has come for us to start dealing with this matter in bulk.

That is why I said: EFF THE ARABS! (I guess you could say I was speaking a bit metaphorically.) I don’t think that we should be afraid to say such a thing. (Although I’d add the caveat that, with equal vigor, we should continue to educate people that Muslim=/=Arab.)

If more non-Muslim Arabs want to become outspoken counter-Muslims, then we can change that position. But right now, both Muslims and non-Muslim Arabs, for the most part, make this a bulk ethnic issue, as well as an ideological one. And the craziest part is that there are actually very few Arabs in the world. But that’s the insidious power of this cancerous ideology.

Thank you thomas h. You said what I was about to say.

But , seriously, even the non-Muslim Arabs are contributing to our problem.

It is easy to understand your anger, but the “problems” some of the non-Muslim Arabs are contributing to are different with respect to their cause and immediate, and long term, consequences and gravity, then those caused by moslems generally.

Even if the hate of Jews were typical of all Arabs it is only the Moslems among them who attack, and murder Jews. The so called “Palestinian freedom fighters” who slaughter Jewish children in Israel and, with increasing frequency, attack and even murder Jews in Europe are NEVER Christian, but always moslem, Arabs. So, for Jews at least, it is a difference of life and death.

Additionally, and what matters to not only Jews, but ALL of us, the Christian Arabs don’t dream of destroying the Christian Western civilization and replacing it with pathology of Islam. That would be absurd.

hey Fiqh,
I sent in my last comment before reading your reply to graven.
regards,
Thomas

No worries Thomas. If you have any further thoughts, I welcome you to share them.
Cheers

Thanks, Fiqh.
Take care
Thomas

While our esteemed blog host may technically be of ethnic Syriac heritage, I'll bet his grandparents (or which ever generation got off the proverbial boat) were more comfortable with Arabic than with Syriac. The same might go for the commentator Michael Yussef, who is technically a Copt.

Nor should we forget about people like Brigitte Gabriel or Nonie Dariwsh, or half the people who post on Muslims for Israel.

you are wrong. They are Arabs and have been for centuries now. as you know I am from Iran and I have always told people anyone who tells you they are persian stay the hell away from.They are duplitios to say the least and they do not want to tell you that they are Iranians. we were persians 3000 years ago and then the arabs conqured us, then mongol, the turk, the ottomens, the british....... they did not have the geneva convention back then and thos who waged war saw it at their right to rape women. so we are more mixed than Americans. this case is also true about the copts. The reason that jews consider one a jew who is born from a jewish mother is because of this reason that I mentioned there were so much war and rape going on then that they knew who the mother was but not the father.
M

I think, but I am not quite sure, you are trying to say that Copts are not Copts because Persians are not Persians and the Jews are not really Jews because some of their ancestors were raped by, among other, Arabs.

Fascinating...

PS: You forgot to add that the Berbers are not really Berbers and the Basques are not really Basques and, of course, there is not such a thing as Greeks, or Armenians after a few centuries under the Turkish yoke.

How about Italians, French, Russians, Ukrainians or Poles? Are they real?

Fiqh Al-Matter wrote:

Graven,

Everything you’ve said there is quite correct, rationally, of course. But surely you wouldn’t deny that there is an ethic component? As you no doubt know (and I think I’m more or less paraphrasing Hugh here), Islam, despite its universalist pretentions, has always functioned, by default, not only as an Islamic ideologically supremacist ideology, but as a racially supremacist ideology.
..............................

Thanks for replying, Fiqh. I *absolutely* agree that Islam is an Arab supremacist creed, which expects its adherents to jettison their own history and adopt Arab norms and names.

This is why you—absurdly—find so many Pakistanis surnamed "Quereshi", although the idea that they are descended from the "Prophet's" Arabian tribe is pretty unlikely.

Another example is Pakistanis who consider Hindus to belong to an inferior race, even though they themselves obviously come from the same stock, and were Hindu themselves a few generations ago.

You also find more of this absurdity with Sudanese Muslims claiming to be "Arab", even though they look just like their Sahel black African victims.

In fact, Muslims are particularly condescending towards blacks, whom they consider slaves (abds). And, of course, this is hardly just rhetoric—Muslims still enslave sub-Saharan Africans *to this day*.

I believe this is less "ethnic" than yet another ugly aspect of Islam. I may be splitting hairs here, though.

More:

This is reflected in the language used by the woman in this news story. She saw her Arab ethnicity as a basis for her anti-Semitism, rather than its true basis, which was Islam, the ideology.
..............................

True.

More:

In my view, this is one of the major aspects of this conflict that needs to be addressed. We’ve got to start calling Islam out on its racial component.
..............................

I agree. It is insane, for instance, that many Western blacks—especially in America—consider Islam less racially problematic than Christianity. If only they knew Islam's history, especially its savage role in the slave trade, that both dwarfed and much preceded the West's involvement.

And Muslims more generally regularly claim that Islam has no racial component because it is universalist—a claim that is grotesque and easily disproven.

More:

And, at the same time, we’ve got to start holding even non-Muslim Arabs responsible for their complicity.
..............................

I agree—but this is a tough one. For Christian and other non-Muslim Arabs living as dhimmis in Dar-al-Islam, parroting Muslim prejudices has often been a matter of survival.

So—while I am disgusted by this pandering, I have more sympathy for it that in other cases.

There is one other point, as well: many Muslim apologists—both Muslims and their useful idiots—falsely claim that any criticism of the horrors of Islam is nothing more than "racism".

I don't want to give these creeps any "ammunition", even unintentionally.

So—while I believe that Islam is an Arab supremacist creed and that we should not be afraid to say so, I *would* balk at describing our fight being against Arabs, rather than the vile creed of Islam itself.

In any case, thank you for your considered comments.

"Jerusalem the Mother of us all". The Bible