• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Hugh Fitzgerald: An update on the “islamochristian”

Feb 1, 2016 1:38 pm By Hugh Fitzgerald

Gregory III Laham

The phenomenon of the “islamochristian” deserves wider attention, and the word wider use. An “islamochristian” is, in its strictest sense, a Christian Arab who identifies with and works to advance the Islamic agenda, out of fear or out of a belief that his “Arabness” requires loyalty to Islam. Islamization by the Arab Muslim conquerors of Mesopotamia, Syria, and North Africa was a vehicle for Arab imperialism. This imperialism, the most successful in human history, convinced those who accepted Islam to also forget their own pre-Islamic or non-Islamic pasts. It caused them, in many cases, to forget their own languages and to adopt Arabic — and in using Arabic, and in adopting Arabic names, within a few generations they had convinced themselves that they were Arabs.

Some held out. The Copts in Egypt today are simply the remnants of a population that was entirely Coptic, and that has suffered steady and slow asphyxiation. How many of Egypt’s Arabs are in fact Copts who fail to realize this, much less have any sympathy or interest in how their Coptic ancestors, out of intolerable pressure, assumed the identity of Arabs?

In Lebanon, the mountains provided a refuge for the Maronites, by far the most successful group to withstand the Muslims. And most Maronites are quick to make the important distinction that, while they are “users of Arabic,” that does not make them “Arabs.” When they claim that they predate the Arab invasion (which of course they do) and are the descendants of the previous inhabitants of Lebanon, the Phoenicians, they are greeted with ridicule. But why? Where did the Phoenicians go? Did they just disappear? It is far more plausible to believe that the Maronites and the others in Lebanon are, most of them (for how many real “Arabs” actually came from the Arabian peninsula to conquer far more numerous populations of non-Arabs?) the descendants of those Phoenicians. The Maronites recognize this; the Muslims do not, because for them the superior people, the people to whom the Qur’an was “given” and “in their language,” are the Arabs. The sense of Arab supremacy comes not only from the fact that the Qur’an was written in Arabic (with bits of Aramaic still floating in it), but because the Sunna, the other great guide for Muslims, consists of, and is derived from, the hadith and the sira, and reflects the life of people in 7th century Arabia.

Thus one sees the forcibly-converted descendants of Hindus, the Muslims of India and Pakistan, full of supposed “descendants of the Prophet” who are identified by the name “Sayeed.” It is as if, in the middle of a former British colony, say Uganda, black Africans gave themselves such names as Anthony Chenevix-ffrench or Charles Hardcastle, and dressed like remote Englishmen at Agincourt, or Ascot, and insisted, to one and all, that they were indeed lineal descendants of Elizabeth the Virgin Queen, or Hereward the Wake, or Ethelred the Unready.

Yet when those whose ancestors were forcibly converted to Islam (and force can be not military force, but the incessant and relentless pressure of dhimmitude, which will over time cause many to give up and embrace the belief-system of the oppressor) and adopted the names, and mimicked the dress and the manners and customs of Muslims — which are essentially those of a distant time and place (Arabia, more than a thousand years ago) — we do not smile or think it absurd. A few Muslim “intellectuals” in East Asia occasionally suggest that local customs and ways, even local expressions of music and art, ought not to be sacrificed to the Sunna of Islam, but to no avail.

And so strong is the power of Islam among the Arabs, so ingrained is their desire to ward off Muslim displeasure, that unless they do not feel themselves to be Arabs but a self-contained community (Copts, Maronites) that has managed to survive, they are very likely to reflect the Muslim views and promote the Muslim agenda.

Nowhere can this be seen better than among the “Palestinian” Arabs. Michel Sabbagh is only one example. The Sabbagh who gave $6.5 million to support John Esposito’s pro-Muslim empire at Georgetown was a “Christian.” (Note to James V. Schall: can you convince Georgetown’s administration to sever its now-embarrassing tie to Esposito? At some point he, and Georgetown, have to part ways, for the sake of Georgetown’s reputation and continued support from alumni.) The gun-running icon-stealing Archbishop Hilarion Cappucci was, in name, a Melkite Greek Catholic; he was, in his essence, a PLO supporter.

Islamochristian promoters of the Jihad — beginning with the Jihad against Israel — include a few “Palestinian” Presybterians who have carefully burrowed within, and risen within, the bureaucracy of the Presbyterian Church in America (no names here, but you can easily find them out), and Naim Ateek, who comes to delude audiences of Christians about the “Palestinian struggle” even as the Christian population of the “Palestinian” territories has plummeted, since Israel relinquished control, from 20% to 2% — out of fear of Muslim “Palestinians.”

Nor, of course, do Michel Sabbagh and his ilk pay much attention to the situation of Christians in the Sudan, or Indonesia, or Pakistan. Why would they? It would get in the way of their promotion of the Islamic attempt not only to reduce Israel to the dimensions that will allow them to go in for the final kill, but to seize control of the Holy Land. What, after all, do you think would happen to that Holy Land if Israel were to disappear? Do you think the Christian sites would be as scrupulously preserved? As available to pilgrims? Would Christians walk around Jerusalem if it were under the rule of Muslims with quite the same feelings of security that they do now?

The above is, in full, an article I wrote and published here at Jihad Watch in 2005. Since I wrote it, the Christian communities of Iraq (Chaldeans, Assyrians) and Syria (Melkites, Orthodox, Roman Catholics) have been decimated; the Coptic community in Egypt been under continuous assault, and not only during the hyper-Islamic regime of Morsi; and Christians and churches have been attacked in Pakistan, the Philippines, and Indonesia by Muslims. And Muslim terrorists attack Infidel Christians in Dar al-Harb itself, in Paris and London and Amsterdam and Madrid and Moscow, as they have in New York, Washington, Boston, Fort Hood, and San Bernardino.

Given the past decade of Christian victims of Muslim despoliation and delirium — and with the list above I was just getting started — one might have assumed that the “islamochristian” was no longer to be found. But just the other day, Gregory III Laham, the Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch of Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem and All the East, surfaced to solemnly declare: “We, the Arab Christians, always defend Islam and our Muslim brothers – no one defends Islam like the Arab Christians do.” Robert Spencer took the good Gregory to task, pointing out that this classic encapsulation of the dhimmi phenomenon had never won the Melkites any special favors, and that they had suffered just as much from Muslim aggression when they parroted this kind of nonsense as they would have had the good Gregory tried verbally to smite the Muslims hip and thigh. Perhaps, Spencer suggested, the time for dhimmitude had long passed, it never having panned out, and it was time for assorted patriarchs of the East to try a different and truer tack — what, after all, did the Melkites at this point have to lose? How much worse could their situation be under the Muslim thumb than it already is? Perhaps, if he could break with the past, and come to his senses, the Melkite bishop might recognize his first duty: to warn his own flock, and to warn other Christians too, about Islam. 

A second Christian who has had nothing but good things to say about Islam is one Craig Considine. He’s a mere lean lecturer in sociology, not so grand as Gregory, but even more obtuse. Not being an ethnic Arab, he doesn’t fit the strictest definition of the “islamochristian,” but as a declared Christian (Roman Catholic) working full-time to defend and promote Islam — and to accuse Israel, unsurprisingly, of every possible crime — he deserves a place in the pantheon here. Craig Considine’s studies — he’s been burning the midnight oil for years — have revealed to him that “Christians and Muslims share a similar ‘jihad.’ This ‘jihad’ is one of non-violence, the love of humanity, the perfection of the soul, and the search for knowledge.”

This will come as a surprise to any Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus who, at many different times and in many different places, have been on the receiving end of that Muslim “non-violence, love of humanity, perfection of the soul, and search for knowledge.” It came as a surprise to me. It no doubt comes as a surprise to you. And as I can add nothing to Robert Spencer’s dismemberment of Considine, readers are directed to this death on the installment plan here and here and here and here.

The ability of people to deny an unpleasant reality can be impressive. Look at Patriarch Gregory. Look at Craig Considine. Be suitably impressed.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: dhimmitude, Featured, Hugh Fitzgerald, Useful idiots Tagged With: Craig Considine, Gregory III Laham, Michel Sabbagh


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Angemon says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 2:02 pm

    Islamization by the Arab Muslim conquerors of Mesopotamia, Syria, and North Africa was a vehicle for Arab imperialism. This imperialism, the most successful in human history

    An imperialism that no Arab or Turk ever acknowledged, let alone apologize for. But European nations and the US? Oh, the horror! The horror! The imperialism!

    • DFD says

      Feb 2, 2016 at 6:20 pm

      Angemon says “… But European nations and the US? Oh, the horror! The horror! The imperialism!”

      Indeed. Soon we will have to greet each other with: “May the Muslims are not too offended about, us and forgive us our sins…”

      What do you think, in a year or two?

      • Angemon says

        Feb 4, 2016 at 9:33 pm

        Nah, I think the official tune will be “how much do I have to pay you today to make you forget all the oppression you endured at the hands of my racist white imperialist ancestors, an oppression whose fruits I’ve enjoyed my whole live without ever bothering to check my privilege?”. Or maybe just paying the jiziya outright while kneeling, looking down, being slapped in the back of the neck and spat on the face.

  2. Dan Jones says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 2:40 pm

    Total heresy…

    More End Time News At:
    http://www.shininginthedark.com/?page_id=4526

  3. Lee says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 4:56 pm

    The concept of Islamochristian makes as much sense as JudeoNazi. A Christian who advocates sharia is not a Christian except possibly, and this would even here be extremely tangential, in the ethnic cultural sense. For example, the comments from another article expounding how Islam and Christianity are centered around the same god. The heathen do not worship God, nor can they. They cannot know God, they cannot please God, and they cannot worship Him (ref 1 Corinthians 2:14). If one is a Muslim one must deny the diety of Christ. Denying the diety of Christ, how can one hope to be in dwelt by The Spirit?

    • Champ ✞ says

      Feb 1, 2016 at 5:05 pm

      “If one is a Muslim one must deny the diety of Christ.”

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      Precisely, Lee!

    • Lucretius says

      Feb 1, 2016 at 6:20 pm

      You’re misunderstanding the article. An islamochristian is a dhimmi suck-up or collaborator. And there were “JudeoNazis” if that means Jewish collaborators. Just look up Jewish Ghetto Police, concentration camp Kapo, and Judenrat. Mr. Fitzgerald wasn’t talking about sharing the same articles of faith and orthopraxis, which is what you are finding (rightly) nonsensical, when he coined the term islamochristian.

  4. Kepha says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 5:48 pm

    I believe the Presbyterian body that is seeking BDS in not the Presbyterian Church in America, but the United Presbyterian Church in the USA. The latter is the large, well-endowed modernist body; the former is a more conservative group that initially broke off the Southern Presbyterians in the 1970’s, then joined with a northern group called the Reformed Presbyterian Church Evangelical Synod. The PCA’s commitments are more toward traditional belief and Evangelism, refuses to ordain women, holds to traditional marriage, and would excommunicate anyone who said that Muhammed was another prophet. It is the UPCUSA that holds to an inclusivist theology, openness to Islam and other non-Christian religions, and follows an agenda that it calls “peace and justice” (which it ain’t, due to embrace of the radical Left and Islamic ferment).

    The PCA holds to the traditional Reformed covenantal theology, and hence does not always echo the Dispensational fundamentalist “end times” focus on the restoration of ethnic Israel. However, its eschatological views do leave room for the possibility of such a thing.

    Keep in mind that there are a number of smaller, conservative bodies with the name “Presbyterian” in their titles; and they might not necessarily see the Middle East conflict through the same lenses as the “mainline” body.

  5. Rob says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 6:19 pm

    The Lebanese Christians were beguiled by Nasser’s ‘Pan-Arabism’. They thought the bond of being Arab was stronger than the division of being Christian.
    So, what did they do in the spirit of Pan-Arabism?
    We’ll they admitted countless Muslim refugees and once the Christian majority had been eroded, Lebanon began its death spiral.

  6. dom107 says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 6:25 pm

    From the point of view of an atheist/rationalist they are all “nuts” believing and fighting to the death over a non existent being. Catholicism has some similarities to Islam although today soft pedals many of the dictatorial doctrines it use to proclaim .In England 450 years ago practicing Catholicism was synonymous wih treason and a drawn out form of the death penalty exceeding the methods of ISIS called hang drawing and quartering was applied. One of the ways the Pope used to get around the more gruesome parts of the Bible was to proclaim that that part was not inspired by God. Muslims cant do that because all of the Qur’an is claimed to be the actual words of God who conveniently was fluent in Arabic.
    Todays Catholics are(thank rationalism) rather a la carte. Catholics in Germany during the Nazi period were quiet understandably although many must have been Nazis and so also was the Pope who feared they would be persecuted by Hitler himself a cradle Catholic. He stated he would sort out all the Christian clergy once he had won the War (he recognised the powerful hold religion had over the masses)
    .In the same way the early Christians were somewhat deferential to the Romans and the Gospels have been accused of blaming the Jews for Jesus’ crucifixion rather than the Romans who actually done the deed.( provided the whole thing is not an invention by his followers).
    Religions can be very “flexible” when their own survival is at stake.Thats why they are still around today despite the advance of scientific truth.

    • Kepha says

      Feb 1, 2016 at 6:28 pm

      BTW, a not long-deceased PCA theologian by the name of Robert Reymond wrote a series of articles critiquing Islam which may possibly be found at the website of the Trinity Foundation of Unicoi, TN.

    • revereridesagain says

      Feb 1, 2016 at 10:46 pm

      Living with the mystical myths of the distant past can be enriching. Living IN them all too often brings stagnation, death and destruction. Those of us who refuse to do so can only hope to survive these clashes of the followers of the multitudinous gods of myth, since no “believer” is willing to relinquish the dream of heaven to better life on earth..

    • Nimrod says

      Feb 2, 2016 at 10:08 am

      I should point out that from a rationalist, scientific (evidence exists), non-ideological point of view the “non-existent beings” do actually exist at least as distributed social-cognitive objects. That wouldn’t make them necessarily what anyone in particular claims (creator beings, etc) but theory of mind objects for these things exist with certainty equal to the certainty that ToMM objects exist at all. Whether that makes them beings or distributed minds is much more difficult to determine.

      Science doesn’t get anywhere when ideology (atheism) gets in the way of considering possibilities.

      • worldcitizen1919 says

        Feb 2, 2016 at 5:55 pm

        I think this tradition that Muslims are well aware of as ‘sign’ of the time of the end of Islam as we know it is very appropriate and fits exactly the description of what is going on. You can find it anywhere on the Internet as its well known amongst Muslims.

        “The Apostle of God said: `There will come a time for my people when there will remain nothing of the Qur’an except its outward form and nothing of Islam except its name and they will call themselves by this name even though they are the people furthest from it. The mosques will be full of people but they will be empty of right guidance. The religious leaders (Fuqaha) of that day will be the most evil religious leaders under the heavens; sedition and dissension will go out from them and to them will it return.’ ” -ibn Babuya, Thawab u –

      • dom107 says

        Feb 3, 2016 at 7:34 am

        Atheism is not an ideology as it only means one doesn’t believe in the supernatural (i.e. can never be explained or understood).I prefer the word Rationalist which lays open the consideration of hypothesis with good evidence which may not be conclusive but may lead to scientific truth and theory(in the scientific not the colloquial sense).
        Scientific knowledge is widely available today like it never was before through media such as books ,magazines, courses, You Tube e.t.c so there is no excuse for the primitive non-thinking of religious belief systems, The biggest and worst being Islam but they are present in even advanced countries like the USA
        Our caveman ancestors can be forgiven for misidentifying natural events like thunderstorms for “anger of the great god in the sky” but this wont do for 2016 Homo Sapiens.
        And Kepha I cant prove that Elvis and Princess Diana are happily married and living on the moon Europa but it would be ridiculous to believe that so your statement is no argument at all.
        Science is nothing to do with being materialistic. You can appreciate the beauty and wonder of the Universe as an average citizen without many material possessions using the media as mentioned above. Science doesn’t deny the life of the mind indeed the best scientists like Stephen Hawking use their imagination combined with their rationality to achieve great things
        Art produced by humans is hardly scientific but I would hate the World to be without it.Fractal patterns, planetary and galactic/nebula imagery, the natural world, todays electronic music e.t.c all come out of scientific advancement.
        A rationalist doesn’t have to be an ” obscessed with money” Wall St dealer as you seem to suggest. You are right that we seemed to be “wired by evolution” to have a belief system but we are probably wired for a lot of other things which may have had some survival value in the past but are not such a good idea today. The higher mind should over-rule primitive impulses
        Sometimes scientific knowledge has been destructive as in weapons of war but mostly constructive. Look around you for evidence of that.I think that if an Atheist gets it totally wrong dies and goes to the pearly gate he will see a sign saying .ONLY ATHEISTS TO COME IN THE REST OF YOU DIDNT USE THE WONDERFUL BRAIN I GAVE YOU!!! signed GOD(don’t ask me which one !!!!) Heh heh!!
        And finally Sandra, Yes there are some good scientists who hold religious beliefs and function very well in their field but not that many because logically it is a totally false way at arriving at anything like objective fact. Most if pressed would admit to being atheist or agnostic (if they want to hedge their bets) Personally I think science and Biblical “truth” are incompatible. Genesis would be a very rough and inaccurate assessment of the beginning of the Universe which is why it is not used in Cosmology 101 !!!!! Ho Ho

    • Sandra Lee Smith says

      Feb 2, 2016 at 10:36 am

      True science and Biblical truth are NOT mutually exclusive; however, the faux “science” that has become an idol to many professed “atheists” is anti-God. 2 problems here: first, Yhwh God created both the laws that real science investigates and seeks to understand; and second, all humans are “hardwired” to worship something, be it Yhwh or some idol of their own making. Thing is, today, idols do not always look like the idols of paganism historically did.

    • Kepha says

      Feb 2, 2016 at 1:37 pm

      Dom, your insistence that God does not exist is also an axiom that cannot be proven.

      And don’t tell me that the attempt to apply the principles of evolutionary materialistic science to human affairs did not prove highly destructive.

  7. Kepha says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 6:27 pm

    I note a number of dynamics at work among Islamochristians (including pro-Falastin Westerners in church organizations). The first, which explains people like Gregory Laham and Hilarion Capucci, is the necessity of living as Dhimmi under persistent Islamic pressure.

    We might also note a number of Christian contributions to Arab nationalism itself. Middle Eastern Christians, who started going West for higher education long before their Muslim neighbors and who had, in their ranks, a number of traditional dragomans with access to foreigners and their ideas, were always far more open to the cross-currents of Western thought, including the nationalism unleashed by the French Revolution. Michel Aflaq invented the Ba’ath ideology while still ostensibly a Christian, and only later converted to Islam. In the partition of British-mandated Palestine and ensuing warfare, the massacre of the Christian villagers at Deir Yassein by the Shtern Gang provided a powerful Arab nationalist symbol. Indeed, throughout the period from the aftermath of World War I down through the most recent Falastin intifadas, Arabic-speaking Christians have generally allied with Muslims. Alliances with the Israelis by other Arabic-speaking Christians (southern Lebanon; recent pro-Israel sentiment among some Christian Israeli Arabs) is very much a response to an exclusivist Islamic upsurge.

    In the West, “Islamochtistians” in the various “Mainline” denominations reflect the shift away from orthodoxy and mission-orientation towards theological relativism and a quest for “dialogue”. The absence of solid, Christian theological grounding evident in Graig Confused Considine’s HuffPo article is a case in point. This shift has also produced church bodies that seek to be in tune with the general drift of what is called “progressive”, including openness towards Zionism in the late 1940’s and openness to the Falastin Arab cause since the 1970’s.

    Further, “Mainline” so-called Protestantism’s tilt towards the Arabs and Islam does not reflect the “supercessionism” found in certain kinds of traditional Christian theology, but the determination to embrace what the world calls “progressive”. This includes that anti-colonialist narrative which insists on seeing modern Israel as a Western plant in the Middle East (and note that in this narrative, while Cold War clients of the USA are fair game for criticism, former Soviet clients invariably get a pass). It’s worth noting that many of the same denominations that seek dialogue with Islam are the same ones that accept women’s ordination, the LGBT agenda, and every modernist theological fad from the “death of God” onward.

    In any case, Considinian and other Western “Islamochristianity” is possible only because of the decay of theological knowledge among professing Christians. My own response to all of this is to not only study the Scriptures, but also blow the dust off the Westminster Larger and Shorter Catechisms, the Heidelberg Catechism, Augustine, Calvin, Thomas Watson, and a few others.

    • deja vu says

      Feb 2, 2016 at 6:34 pm

      An eloquent post, Kepha – you make several excellent points. The spread of Christianity-lite, ‘seeker sensitive’, mega entertainment centres – er- churches from the States is very unfortunate. Thankfully, here in the Antipodes, there’s a revival of interest in the teachings of the Puritans and a revisiting of the various Catechisms. Churches which value sound expository teaching are a minority, but we’re finding that starving sheep are increasingly seeking them out

      • Kepha says

        Feb 2, 2016 at 7:52 pm

        deja vu:

        American Christianity is in lamentable decline. A lot of us were very hopeful back in the late 1970’s and ’80’s that we were seeing a revival of Bible-oriented, historic Protestantism, but that proved ephemeral.

  8. Matthieu Baudin says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 7:20 pm

    “…This imperialism, the most successful in human history, convinced those who accepted Islam to also forget their own pre-Islamic or non-Islamic pasts. It caused them, in many cases, to forget their own languages and to adopt Arabic — and in using Arabic, and in adopting Arabic names, within a few generations they had convinced themselves that they were Arabs…”

    This is a (perhaps the) central theme in V.S. Naipaul’s book ‘Beyond Belief’ covering post conquest Islamic Societies in his travels from Indonesia through Iran and on to Pakistan. Well worth reading.

  9. Christian says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 7:23 pm

    you guys are nit living there where 10% Christians under all kind of risk but yet we school them in what to say, they are trying to survive so what expect them to say, death is in every corner then we think that these Christians has the freadon to say Muhammad was nothing but an animal, this man is trying to save his people not to save Islam but at the end who care let the Arab Christians die, we arm the Muslims there to kill the Christians and we watch them die and then we judge them for statment all of us know its made for what reason.

  10. sidney penny says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 8:03 pm

    “This will come as a surprise to any Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus who, at many different times and in many different places, have been on the receiving end of that Muslim “non-violence, love of humanity, perfection of the soul, and search for knowledge.” ”

    If you are talking about religions “on the receiving end of that Muslim “non-violence, love of humanity, perfection of the soul, and search for knowledge.” ” then include the Sikhs as well.

    Muslim Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb ordered the public execution of Guru Teg Bahadur Ji at Delhi on the 11th November, 1675. The execution was ordered by the emperor after inviting the Guru to embrace Islam. The Guru declined, thus attracting the penalty of death according to the basic state-law of Islam: amaa al-qatl wa amaa al –Islaam. “

  11. Sam says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 9:40 pm

    An Egyptian who doesn’t who doesn’t belong to an Arab tribe is basically Coptic, the Literate Egyptians are aware of this but the illeratere ones are unaware with lack of sympthathy.

  12. worldcitizen1919 says

    Feb 1, 2016 at 9:53 pm

    Politically I can’t see unity between Christians and Muslims but as far as spiritual things like prayer and groups of experts such as scientists and professors coming together on neutral ground, I think that’s already happening.

    I think in many ways such as this Christians and Muslims come together just politically they are separate.

    • Sam says

      Feb 1, 2016 at 10:57 pm

      In Egypt there United when they wanted to over throw Morsi out of power in 2013 but the illiterate ones wanted Morsi in other words Islamic radicals or extremists.

  13. Halaku says

    Feb 2, 2016 at 12:19 am

    From a song “The Snake” by Al Wilson. As a reminder for the IslamoChristians suffering from Stockholm syndrome:
    “I saved you,” cried that woman
    “And you’ve bit me even, why?
    You know your bite is poisonous and now I’m going to die”
    “Oh shut up, silly woman,” said the reptile with a grin
    “You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in

  14. R says

    Feb 2, 2016 at 3:00 am

    “A second Christian who has had nothing but good things to say about Islam is one Craig Considine.”

    Considine is no Christian. He denies the divinity of Christ. He’s a moron, who knows nothing about either Christianity or Islam.

    • Champ says

      Feb 2, 2016 at 3:18 am

      ?

    • Peter Herz says

      Feb 2, 2016 at 7:57 pm

      I agree that Considine’s denial of the deity of Jesus Christ renders him un-Christian. Unhappily, he is representative of a large swathe of the American population which, since the 1800’s, have been busy jettisoning the traditional doctrines of Christianity, yet claiming that they somehow remain “Christian”. For the first half of the 20th century, this was largely a Protestant disease; but since Vatican II, it has infected the Roman communion as well.

  15. awake says

    Feb 2, 2016 at 9:59 am

    I would state that Considine is certifiably insane, if it weren’t for the abject sinisterness of his paid-for siren song. It is logically apparent that the belief systems of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are mutually exclusive to each other.

  16. Marty says

    Feb 2, 2016 at 12:06 pm

    In the UK islamochristians are called “Anglicans”.

  17. Alarmed Pig Farmer says

    Feb 2, 2016 at 3:24 pm

    The above is, in full, an article I wrote and published here at Jihad Watch in 2005. Since I wrote it, the Christian communities of Iraq (Chaldeans, Assyrians) and Syria (Melkites, Orthodox, Roman Catholics) have been decimated; the Coptic community in Egypt been under continuous assault, and not only during the hyper-Islamic regime of Morsi; and Christians and churches have been attacked in Pakistan, the Philippines, and Indonesia by Muslims. And Muslim terrorists attack Infidel Christians in Dar al-Harb itself, in Paris and London and Amsterdam and Madrid and Moscow, as they have in New York, Washington, Boston, Fort Hood, and San Bernardino.

    As we sell out the others in hope that the Moslems will have their fill and finally calm down, after 1,400, yrs, we too are being loaded on to the conveyor belt to be processed through the machine. Adopting fictive reality bears profound costs.

  18. Mazo says

    Feb 2, 2016 at 6:14 pm

    There are both descendants of real Arabs and Arabized locals in of the Middle East and North Africa.

    There are Arab Christians in Jordan who are descended from real tribal Arabs from the Arabian peninsula like the Ghassanids.

    The Maronite Shihab founders of Lebanon are descended from a section of the Prophet’s Quraysh tribe who moved to Lebanon and converted to Maronite. They are definitely not “Phonecian” or “Arabized”. They are real tribal Arabs.

    In Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia there are both descendants of real tribal Arabs like the Sharifians and Banu Hilal and other tribes from the peninsula, living next Arabized Berbers and Berbers.

    The descendants of actual Arabs belong to tribes and know their family trees back to the Arabian peninsula. The Arabized locals don’t have family trees or genealogies and don’t belong to Arab tribes.

    Iraq had a massive influx of tribal Arabs from the peninsula in the 19th century.

    The Ummayad rulers of Spain were descended from Arab Quraysh tribe from the Arabian peninsula. They banged Spanish women so their children had blue eyes but they still were Arabs. If you claim they are “Arabized Spaniards” you will be laughed at as a clown and a fool.

    And anyone claiming the Abbasids in Iraq must be “Arabized Babylonians” is a humongous dunce.

    There are Arab tribes living in southwestern Iran and they are not “Arabized Persians” but rather migrants from the Arabian peninsula.

    For all the Arabized peoples to have learned Arabic in the first place they had to have contact with real Arabs.

    During the Spanish conquest of the Americas many white Spaniards moved to the new continent where their descensants live today. Go tell a white Mexican that he is a “Spanicized” Aztec or Maya and he will laugh at your retarded ass. Or go tell Fidel Castro that he is a “Spanicized” Taino and see how he reacts. The local Aztec and Mayan descendants learned Spanish because they lived right next to Mestizos and white Spaniards who spoke the language to them. President Evo Morales of Bolovia speaks Spanish because of the white Spanish elite who have been ruling his country for centuries and forced him to learn it. The white Spanish descendants are still living in Bolivia today,

    The King of Morocco is a Sharif and descendant of an Arab who migrated to Morocco hundreds of years ago in the Middle Ages. Calling him a Berber is like calling George W. Bush a Commanche.

    FYI many Indian Hindu nationalists claim Indian Muslims are all foreign invaders rape babies. Its not themselves just claiming foreign descent. And many Indian Muslims are descendants of foreigners. The Mughal invaders from Central Asia took Indian concubines and poets like Ghalib are descended from Central Asians. Many Indian Muslims boast about Mughal or Persian descent who are not Arabs.

  19. heroyalwhyness says

    Feb 3, 2016 at 12:34 am

    A question for Hugh Fitzgerald…any thoughts on:
    NYT: Marakesh Declaration

    and

    shariah compliant jihad insurance?

    Insurance Journal: Cobalt, Chaucer Offer 1st Lloyd’s Shariah Compliant Political Violence Cover

  20. ahem says

    Feb 3, 2016 at 10:41 am

    The situation is far more complex than you may realize.

    It’s not like there’s a complete separation of Christians and Muslims in the middle east, with very clear lines of distinction between one camp and another. Large middle eastern families are often composed of both Christians and Muslims. That priest’s mom, for example, might have second cousins that are Muslim, They don’t follow the same faith, but they tolerate, and even love, each other.

    Until the last few years, there was quite a lot of interfaith tolerance in Syria. Christians, Muslims, Alawites and Jews lived in more-or-less peaceful coexistence: they didn’t approve of each other, but they weren’t trying to kill each other, either. Assad made sure of that. Christian cab drivers in Syria, for example, could drive around with crosses and icons decorating their cabs, unmolested. Large families often include both faiths. So, middle eastern Christians are going to be very protective of their Muslim cousins because the vast preponderance of them are not extremists. Their society is, or was, much more sophisticated than you might be led to believe.

    That all went our the door when the US decided that that social balance just wasn’t good enough. In trying to make something ‘perfect’ they destroyed the good. Now we have the Islamic State

    Unfortunately, there’s little information about this subject.

  21. X@mailinator.com says

    Feb 3, 2016 at 10:24 pm

    Requesting all Christian supporters to immediately join, organize, and set forth new legislation banning the implementation of Sharia as a valid legal mechanism, in each and every individual state of the USA. I will vote yes on that initiative. We are a Christian nation and sharia is not acceptable law in the USA. We need peaceful solutions before the Islamists numbers get up, and they get out of control, which they surely will betray the trust when their numbers grow enough.

    • worldcitizen1919 says

      Feb 4, 2016 at 12:11 am

      You don’t have Shariah in the USA. There’s no reason you would have it as the USA already has its own constitution.

      They won’t change the Constitution,

      • Sandra Lee Smith says

        Feb 4, 2016 at 12:59 am

        Yes, we do; creeping in via our first Amendment, and our all too accommodating traitorous “leaders”; not full-on, but it’s sneaking in bit by bit.

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • iconoclast123 on India: Police make first arrest for ‘love jihad’ under new law
  • gravenimage on Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, France and UAE conduct joint military exercises amid rising Turkish threat
  • Brando on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • gravenimage on Audio: Robert Spencer on Muslim Brotherhood influence in a Biden/Harris administration
  • Boycott Turkey on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.