In a meeting with world Jewish leaders, Pope Francis deplored the recent upsurge in antisemitism around the world.
Pope Francis told a visiting US Jewish delegation on Monday of his concerns about rising antisemitism and the importance of educating against prejudice.
The Pope tells his Jewish visitors from the Wiesenthal Center about his concern over “rising antisemitism,” but says nothing about the source of that increase. Is he not interested in that question, or does he suspect what the answer is, and prefers to ignore it? For as anyone paying attention knows, the increase in antisemitism is a result of the tens of millions of Muslims who have been allowed to settle in the West, where they bring with them, undeclared in their mental luggage, a virulent antisemitism that can be found in dozens of Qur’anic verses. While all non-Muslims are described in the Qur’an as “the most vile of created beings,” the Jews are singled out as the greatest enemies of the Muslims. Robert Spencer has compiled a list of Qur’anic verses specifically about the Jews: “The Qur’an depicts the Jews as inveterately evil and bent on destroying the wellbeing of the Muslims. They are the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82); as fabricating things and falsely ascribing them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181); claiming that Allah’s power is limited (5:64); loving to listen to lies (5:41); disobeying Allah and never observing his commands (5:13); disputing and quarreling (2:247); hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109); feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120); being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18); devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161); slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100); being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79); being cowardly (59:13-14); being miserly (4:53); being transformed into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166); and more.”
Condemning what he called the “barbaric upsurge of antisemitism,” the head of the Catholic Church assured the visitors from the Simon Wiesenthal Center — a Jewish human rights NGO based in Los Angeles — of his commitment to combating bigotry and discrimination against the Jewish people.
“I never tire of strongly condemning antisemitism in all its forms,” the pope said.
When has the Pope ever condemned antisemitism “in all its forms”? He has said nothing, ever, about “bigotry..against the Jewish people” that is inculcated in Muslims by the Qur’an itself. When he says he “never tires of strongly condemning antisemitism in all its forms,” what is he talking about? When did he ever even suggest that, just possibly, there might be something in Islam itself that promotes antisemitism, just the way certain Christian texts had done before Nostra Aetate? When has he said that there might be antisemitic texts in Arab and Muslim schoolbooks that should be removed? When has he ever criticized any sermon by any imam for promoting hatred of Jews, such as those by his friend Ahmed al-Tayeb, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar University, with whom he last February signed a document entitled “Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together”? He met again with Al-Tayeb at the Vatican in November, where they solemnly discussed “enhancing cooperation to spread tolerance, the principles of human brotherhood, and the culture of living together.” Bomfoggery. Did the Pope think to ask Al-Tayeb about the Qur’anic verse that describes non-Muslims as “the most vile of created beings”? Of course not. Can the Pope really be so ignorant of Islam, or does he merely wish to keep on claiming what is clearly false, that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence,” in the hope that it might thereby become true? And which explanation, do you think, would be more intolerable?
Did no one in the vast bureaucracy of the Vatican ever inform the Pope that Ahmed Al-Tayeb is a virulent antisemite? Al-Tayeb has said this about the Jews: “You shall find the strongest among men in enmity to the believers to be the Jews and the polytheists.” To an interviewer who said that “the Jews say they are the Chosen People,” Al-Tayeb replied: “That is why the Jewish religion is closed to others. They have no proselytism. They consider themselves to be the best creation, the Chosen People.” When the interviewer said “They [the Jews] consider everybody else to be inferior to them… “ Al-Tayeb replied: “Extremely inferior. They even have very peculiar laws. For instance, they are allowed to practice usury with non-Jews. Some things are not allowed among Jews, but are allowed between Jews and non-Jews. They practice a terrible hierarchy, and they are not ashamed to admit it, because it is written in the Torah – with regard to killing, enslavement, and so on [of non-Jews]….These practices and beliefs [of the Jews] have made people, even non-Muslims, hate them.”
Al-Tayeb has in another interview said that “a most devious and malicious plot was hatched [by the Jews] to plunge this dagger [i.e., Israel] into the body of the Arab world.” Sheikh Al-Tayeb said that “if it were not for Israel, there would be no problem, the region would have prospered.” Al-Tayeb has blamed Jews for ISIS and other jihadist terrorists, has declared “the issue of antisemitism is a lie,” and has given his support to homicide bombing in the wake of the 2002 Passover bombing in Netanya. Yet this is the man with whom Pope Francis has met with on several occasions, to discuss, and sign a solemn document, with, on the subject of “tolerance, world peace, and living together.”
The pope explained that he had stood in silent reflection when he visited Auschwitz in June 2016.
Silent reflection “allows us to hear the cry of humanity,” Pope Francis said, in order to “preserve memory.”
The pope added: “Without memory, we will destroy the future.”
True enough. But what memory needs to be preserved? Not just that of the Nazi murders, or of pogroms in Russia, but also the memory of 1,400 years of Islamic conquest of many lands and many peoples, and the subjugation of those peoples, who were given a choice of death, conversion to Islam, or the status of dhimmis, which entailed acceptance of many onerous conditions, of which the Jizyah tax is the best known. Does the Pope know anything about Islamic history, aside from what Ahmed Al-Tayeb tells him? Does he know how Christians and Jews fared under Muslim rule? Can he really be so ignorant, or has he decided to create an alternate reality because he fears offending Muslims today, and thinks that if he offers a distorted version of Islam, as tolerant and peaceful and brotherly-lovable, that somehow that version will be accepted by Muslims themselves? Does he care that in so doing, he is also misleading non-Muslims?
Endorsing initiatives based upon “integration, research and understanding of the other,” Pope Francis pointed to the “Nostra Aetate” declaration of 1965 as a model for reconciliation.
The declaration — a milestone in relations between the Catholic Church and the Jewish faith — had highlighted the “rich spiritual heritage common to Jews and Christians,” the Pope said.
A similar approach was needed today to “sweep away hatred,” the pope told his guests.
“We must help those who are victims of intolerance and discrimination,” he concluded.
The Pope wants to “sweep away hatred.” Fine. But one has the worrisome feeling that he is referring not to the real hatred of antisemitic (and anti-Christian) Muslims, but to the factitious hatred of “Islamophobes.” Is it ignorance, or calculation, that explains his refusal to speak about the antisemitism of Muslims? Who does he think are the “victims of intolerance and discrimination” who need help today? And how does one “sweep away [the] hatred” of Islamic antisemitism without examining its textual roots, in dozens of Qur’anic verses?
Did those Jewish visitors to the Vatican come away satisfied, or were they, rather, disquieted at the Pope’s seeming obliviousness to Islamic antisemitism? Perhaps they should now send a collective letter to the Pope, thanking him for his sincere desire to fight antisemitism, but also noting that, according to a study by the Anti-Defamation League, Muslims in Europe display levels of antisemitism three times higher than that of non-Muslims. In France alone, a dozen Jews have been murdered by Muslims. Many Jews in Europe are now afraid precisely because of attacks by antisemitic Muslims. The Wiesenthal Center officers might ask the Pope to explain forthrightly how he intends to deal with this reality, and whether passing over Muslim antisemitism in silence, as he has persistently done in the past, only makes matters worse.
The Pope needs to decide just how much about the surge in antisemitism he can bear, or dare, to utter. So far, his record on Islam, a faith scrubbed clean for its Vatican closeup, has been deplorable. We can only hope that the Pope will finally come round and, after so much papal prevarication, try the truth. What worked for Him, Pope Francis, might work for you.
mortimer says
Muslims are killing an average of 10 to 20 Christians every day of the year, but do you think Pope Francis knows this? Nope. Dope-Pope. He’s too busy singing Kum-by-ya.
‘Sweep away’ the hatred directed by Muslims against Christians, why doncha?
-Imam Abdul-Latif ibn Abdur-Rahman Rahimullah said, “It is not possible for someone to realize Tawheed (Islamic faith) and act upon it, and yet not be HOSTILE against the mushrikeen (i.e. wrong worshippers). So anyone who isn’t HOSTILE against the mushrikeen, then it cannot be said that he acts upon Tawheed nor that he realizes it.” [ad-Durar as-Saniyyah 8/167]
-“The doctrine of al Walaa wal Baraa is the REAL IMAGE for the actual practice of this faith.” – source “Al Walaa wal Baraa According to the Aqeedah of the Salaf”, by Sheikh Muhammad Saeed al Qatani, authoritative Saudi Sharia lawyer and imam at the Abu Bakr and Al Furqan Mosques in Mecca
– Dr. Muhammad Saeed Al-Qahtaani said: “Thus, it is clear that Al-Wala’ Wal-Bara calls on Muslims to “love” their fellow Muslims and hate the non-Muslim (or Kafir).”
– from Sufi scholar Ahmad Sirhindi (1564-1624): “The honour of Islam lies in INSULTING kufr and kafirs. One who respects the kafirs dishonours the Muslims… The real purpose of levying jiziya on them is to HUMILIATE them to such an extent that they may not be able to dress well and to live in grandeur. They should constantly remain TERRIFIED and TREMBLING. It is intended to hold them under CONTEMPT and to uphold the honour and might of Islam.”
– from ibn Taymiyya, “Book of Emaan”: “… true believers show ANIMOSITY and HATRED towards disbelievers and NEVER support them.”
– K. 28:86 says: “Lend not thou support in any way to those who reject Allah’s Message.”
– in the matter of relations with kafirs, a Muslim should … “Act like you are his friend. Then kill him.” – Sheikh Muburak Gilani
Someone, put the above quotes into the hand of the pope.
Frank Anderson says
Respected Mortimer, I think you could not provide a better and more convincing description of deliberate ignorance, as a minimum, and active, knowing collaboration. Is it a waste of time and effort to spend time trying to change the unchangeable?
What possibility of success would have existed to change the minds of any collaborator, in or outside of Germany, during the Nazi period? Hitler accomplished nothing by himself.
The only difference I see is that we have a clear example in history and still fail to employ the expensive lesson.
Roger Carlsen says
Frank Anderson: Too bad we don’t have a strong and intelligent Pope like Pope Pius XII who is credited in UNBIASED and well-documented history with actually saving 860,000 or more lives from Hitler through his many covert efforts now captured in various books and documentaries. For his efforts, the Chief Rabbi of Israel also honored and thanked Pope Pius XII. Israel will not honor this Pope and other religious leaders of all denominations who continue to act as useful idiots on behalf of Islam.
Also too bad that religious leaders of many denominations collaborated with Hitler and the Nazis.
Frank Anderson says
R.C. there are conflicting accounts of Pius XII that make me defer to people and sources who know more than I do. As I understand history from much reading and other information, any who did not collaborate with Hitler could easily find their way to a concentration camp to be worked to death or straight to a death camp to be gassed.
I suggest our fight today is to prevent that choice, collaboration or death, from being the only available choice; and to discredit and remove from power any who would force collaboration on us. I expect we share the desire to get as many out of their delusions and collaboration as we can before we really see the darkness again.
Roger Carlsen says
Frank Anderson (Reply button not available under your recent comment response, so I address you here): the “conflicting accounts” are only because of bigotry and bias toward the Catholic Church, and so the anti-Pius forces made and make up things about Pius XII. But see Rabbi David Dalin’s “The Myth of Hitler’s Pope” for more insights into the biased accounts of people such as John Cornwell and Gary Wills, and why the true record reflects that the vast majority of anti-Pius conclusions are just plain false, and that they were also written by disgruntled anti-Catholics, some of who were once Catholic. For more on what Pius actually did, and why he received the praise of many Jews for his efforts (Was the Chief Rabbi at that time a dupe?), also see Ronald Rychlak’s “Hitler, the War, and the Pope” and Mark Riebling’s “Church of Spies: The Pope’s Secret War Against Hitler” that also inspired a documentary a few years ago.
Merely sticking with “conflicting accounts” suggests that you are satisfied with the claims against Pius XII, especially since the anti-claims have been specifically taken up and refuted, but you claim you will defer to others instead of checking more deeply to see for yourself why the anti-claims are weak and unjustifiable. Moreover, your “conflicting accounts” claim and deferring to others in this regard did not prevent you from strongly suggesting that the Papacy cooperated with Hitler in your original post, so this reveals more acceptance of the anti-Pius claims, which is most unfortunate.
I do indeed join you in also desiring to rid people of their delusions concerning Islam. The truth must be proclaimed, and so also in this regard, I also hope that you will rid yourself of your delusions regarding Pius XII based on those accounts you currently accept despite their blatant errors and lies. Good luck.
Frank Anderson says
Roger, I had an extended exchange with Gravenimage months ago on Pius XII. The exchange convinced me that my reliance on Hitler’s Pope as a source was not well placed.
I wrote and conducted my official adopted mother’s funeral because I would not allow a person who had never met her to speak for her. I had been speaking for her since the death of my adopted father 30 years earlier. One of the issues I raised concerned questions which are not subject to answers. Pius XII’s conduct before and during the war is not essential to my opposition to collaboration then or now. I do not need to decide whether he aided many Nazis to use Catholic resources to escape Europe and war crimes trials. Those questions deal with people who for the most part are as dead as my adopted family, who I contend are forgiven for their errors as I hope I will be forgiven when my time comes. “The Fear (Respect) of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom; The Love (Power to forgive) of the Lord surpasses all (human) understanding.”
The question I think to be important is what can we learn and put to use today concerning collaboration, subversion, betrayal and destruction of our liberty and society. How many places can we look all around us for wisdom to help us recognize and deal with the problem before all opportunity to deal is lost?
Roger Carlsen says
Frank Anderson:
You write that “Pius XII’s conduct before and during the war is not essential to my opposition to collaboration then or now. I do not need to decide whether he aided many Nazis to use Catholic resources to escape Europe and war crimes trials.”
This is a most unfortunate and revealing statement by you that still reflects a misguided bias against Pius XII and the Catholic Church by extension.
Such false and malicious claims of collaboration have been refuted, but you continue to promote the notion that some of them are legitimate. Pius XII did not collaborate with the Nazis, so you libel him by suggesting/claiming otherwise as you continue to do. It is not an open-ended question: either he did or did not. The evidence says no, but you want to hold onto the myth that he did. In essence, you want him to be guilty, and so as you state, you actually have no interest in finding out the truth, because then you would have to give up your false claims and suggestions. I wonder. Do you believe other myths about the Catholic Church like those involving the Inquisition despite recent historical evidence that has sufficiently debunked these myths as well? Let me suggest a relatively short work by Protestant historian Rodney Stark. It is entitled “Bearing False Witness: Debunking Centuries of Anti-Catholic History.” Stark also addresses the Pius XII myth and adds his scholarship to debunking the nonsense too many people believe. He also mentions that much of the anti-Pius myth that gullible people believe was initiated by the former Soviet Union to help undermine Pius and the Church.
Also, we all have an obligation to the truth and to each other to not engage in making false claims or suggest things that may have occurred when the evidence is against such things. And when evidence is available to refute false charges, if we ignore the evidence and continue to make false charges, we act immorally and somewhat maliciously. You claim you want to focus only on X, but this has not stopped you from taking cheap shots and level false accusations against Pius and the Catholic Church. If all that matters to you is fighting Islam and preventing collaboration with it, then avoid suggesting wrongdoing of Pius and the Church that is simply not true.
Earlier you mentioned reading conflicting counts about Pius and the Holocaust. In your last comment, you mention only being challenged regarding “Hitler’s Pope.” What accounts have you actually read that can be largely classified as Pro-Pius XII? If you have not read the ones like those I mentioned, which ones have you read?
Frank Anderson says
Roger, I am at the stage in life where I have far more on my plate than what someone long dead did or did not do. I could agonize over questions concerning my official adopted father who died over 60 years ago. You are welcome of seek the truth on this question, just as I am welcome to elect to decide that I do not know and prefer to invest what little time I have in more productive inquiry.
Because I was not even alive during WWII, I am not a witness and must rely totally on the representations of others. I follow a basic teaching that while truth (wisdom) is all around us, whenever it is in human hands there is always some measure of error and deception. So, not only must an inquiry be made of the conduct of Pius XII, so also must the conduct, accuracy and motivation of all sources be considered. Having been a licensed attorney for just short of 40 years, I have done massive amounts of research and litigation as the only person in my office for which I have been paid little. I am retired.
I now play in a machine shop when I can assemble the strength to go and spend a few hours on my creation. I read and write comments. I read books and take care of the most important, beautiful, wonderful human being I have ever known, and wish that I had known her at least 30 years longer than I have. I accepted the fact that questions exist in this life for which we will not obtain answers when I wrote and conducted my mother’s funeral over 30 years ago. I also concluded because of the unfathomable Power of God to Forgive, and my hope that He will Forgive me, that spending rare and precious time on the issue of Pius XII is not a venture that is appropriate for me. I leave that to you.
Is glorifying a long dead pope more important than defending liberty for all non-muslims against conquest? It is the basic problem of economics, unlimited “wants” with limited available resources. Please let us work on the future instead of spending effort on things that cannot be changed. The God shared by Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Jesus wants us to live in freedom. Peace be with you.
Roger Carlsen says
Frank Anderson says: “So, not only must an inquiry be made of the conduct of Pius XII, so also must the conduct, accuracy and motivation of all sources be considered.”
This “inquiry” has already been done, but you don’t accept the verdict. You have made false accusations against another person, but you don’t care to see why, and in Adam Schiff-like fashion, you call for another inquiry.
Very sad, and your excuse about time is simply a rationalization to continue to libel Pius XII whenever it suits you; then claim no time to check into your libel to see for yourself the malicious and false nature of your libel. Very sad indeed, but so be it. One either loves the truth and pursues it or one does not.
Some things you can do to save more precious time: stop libeling Pius XII out of intentionally staying ignorant about his innocence, yet suggesting he could still be guilty of things he simply did not do. Also, cut back on all of your commenting to save more time.
Good luck.
Frank Anderson says
Roger, libel or slander does not occur when stating an opinion or lack of an opinion. You obviously know nothing about the legal requirements of a claim and the general court rule that a decision is not made without real parties in interest being adequately represented. I am not a real party in interest in this question. It does not matter to me what other people think of XII or other persons: I have my own opinions when I need to form them.
Your obsession with this question displays your own BIAS which makes your pitch a lot of hot air. Believe what you wish. You could be correct; or you could be in error. What other “authorities” say about their opinions is just as subject to question as those who oppose their opinions. I do not need to have an opinion on a question that has little relevance to the present. Please move on. We have better and more beneficial ways to invest our time. I wish you well.
Frank
commonsense says
Excellent, Mortimer..as usual.
gravenimage says
Good post, Mortimer.
Wellington says
Fine post, mortimer.
Rufolino says
By the end of this Papacy the Pope will have destroyed his own reputation. If he hasn’t done so already.
mortimer says
Pope Guido Sarducci.
jca reid says
The Pope is nothing but a dumb-cluck. Can’t wait for them to take over so he can come out of the paedophile closet along with the rest of his Priests! Seems hypocritical of him to visit Auschwitz when Muslims constantly state the Holocaust NEVER happened. Recently(mid-January 2020), doing the rounds of Facebook is a photograph of Dachau Concentration Camp with the words of, then General Dwight D. Eisenhower, stating that this has to be recorded & documented as a person or persons in the Future will deny that this ever happened. Western Religionists are a bunch of idiots, thinking just because they’re all “luvvy-duvvy”, the Rest of the World is! do they actually believe that on D-Day, June, 1944, Eisenhower should have unleashed, in the first day 120,000 people with big wooden crosses & brandishing Bibles the entire Nazi Reich would have collapsed? Strange though, the Arab Muslim World actively supported Hitler & the Nazis before, during & after WW2.
CogitoErgoSum says
Most Roman Catholic priests are not pedophiles and the Church does not condone harming children in any way. In addition, for centuries the Church has recognized that there is such a thing as a “Just War.” Why don’t you join me in hoping for a more conservative Pope to replace Francis instead of wishing for Muslims to destroy the Church?
gravenimage says
Agreed, CogitoErgoSum.
Wellington says
I second your agreement with CES, gravenimage.
jca reid says
CogitoErgoSum,I have added a comment to a clip just a few spaces above this one on the Pope. The Article’s Heading is: UK Top Cop involved in Muslim rape gang investigation……. I have lived most of my 60 odd years in my home town & the article I refer to in the newspaper, was the VERY first time I had heard of it. These “Churches” ARE NOTHING BUT CULTS! Thank God I’m an Atheist!!
CogitoErgoSum says
I saw your comment and left a reply.
gravenimage says
jca, there are Christians, Atheists, and many others who are in deep denial over the threat of Islam. It is not just Christian Churches that are the problem.
Wellington says
If I read you correctly, jca reid, you would welcome Muslims taking over the RC Church. Well, wanting Muslims to take over any part of the West, whether nations, religions, organizations, etc. is the height of foolishness because after they take over “them,” they will be coming for you.
One can, you know, find the present Pope highly objectionable (as I most certainly do) without wishing the demise of a religion which at its best upholds the dignity and worth of the individual here on this Earth far beyond anything Islam promotes in this regard. This is why Roman Catholicism and democracy can work quite well together, contra Islam and democracy because Islam is an inveterate enemy of liberty and without liberty any attempt at democracy is a sham.
Reconsider. That is if you are able.
mortimer says
Robert Spencer has this right: “passing over Muslim antisemitism in silence, as he has persistently done in the past, only makes matters worse.”
Francis’s silence on the anti-Jewish bigotry of Muslims only helps the perpetrators, never the persecuted.
Francis has an eleventh commandment for dhimmis like himself: THOU SHALT NOT CRITICIZE ISLAM.
– Francis, the Dhimmi Pope.
commonsense says
The article was written by the ineffable Hugh Fitzgerald, not Robert. I just want to give credit where credit is due!
gravenimage says
+1
No Muzzies Here says
The Pope, who kissed the imam on the lips, is doing everything he can to favor Islam and to replace Christianity with Islam.
US infidel says
Pope probably slipped the iman the tongue and got moans lipstick on him.yuck . Francis gives Catholics a bad name
Tony Naim says
The solution to radical Islam is a political one ( hopefully not military )
To blame the Pope for the incompetence and deficiencies in foreign policies of all western governments combined does not serve our come goal to defeat it.
In as much as our government is successful in applying economic sanctions on one Islamic country, I am sure we can exercise diplomatic pressure on all Islamic countries combined to abolish the laws of dhimmitude.
These laws are the starting point of discrimination and violence against non-Muslims.
I applaud president Trump on his stance to promote religious freedom globally. However, first and foremost, one has to identify the obstacle facing the application and exercise of religious freedom in Islamic countries :the Laws of Dhimmitude.
Lo and behold if we can gather enough political WILL to identify these laws as discriminatory , anti Human rights and illegal before one can start to produce a change in their abolition.
WPM says
The Pope is part of the problem not all of it, he is as guilty or more guilty because he is an unelected official who serves for life in his position as Pope. Presidents and PM and others of European countries, North America have to worry about the Moslem block voting in their cycle of elected positions ,not the Pope one of his main jobs is to speak up for Christians who are being killed because of their faith. He has failed in this , added to this his turning a blind eye towards anti-Semitic jihad against the Jewish people by Islam going into overdrive all over the world in the last 45 years. The Pope is a “political figure” who worries more about “communist causes” and his anti- western culture” bias get in his way of doing his job.
gravenimage says
Tony, no one is blaming that Pope for the whole problem of the West’s ignorance of the threat of Islam. But the pontiff is very influential, and his denial and willful ignorance re Islam does not help.
Then, I’m afraid the idea that dhimmitude is “radical Islam” is mistaken. Persecuting Infidels is in fact mainstream Islam. I don’t know that the West can end these policies, but at the very least we should stop sending foreign aid to nations that oppress non-Muslims, As you note, President Trump has already cut aid to Pakistan and the “Palestinian territories” for these reasons. I’m glad to see it, and hope other Western nations follow suit.
Tony Naim says
The Koranic verses that call for discrimination and violence Against Christians and Jews have been translated into a set of codified laws and regulations within Islamic jurisprudence to determine dealings of Muslims with non-Muslims .These laws are known as
Dhimmitude laws.
when Muslims immigrate to the west, they tend to preserve and respect those laws.
Dhimmitude laws are discriminatory, in the same way racism is, or the way anti-semitism is. Their abolition will most certainly sterilize Islam.
This is no different than all western countries pressuring South Africa to abolish apartheid.
Dhimmitude, apartheid , racism or anti-semitism are all the same.
I find it much more effective if all western nations will adopt a clear policy against Dhimmitude rather than delegating such political responsibility on the Pope !
gravenimage says
True, Tony.
Tony Naim says
Precisely, the persecution of infidels in Islamic societies is based on a set of codified laws and rules that are known as Dhimmitude laws in Islamic jurisprudence.
Dhimmitude is even worse than racism or anti-semitism because it is not just a sentiment or a personal inclination. It is a legal and political customary practice within Islam.
The abolition of dhimmitude is very much possible if the west can gather enough political will behind it.
Tony Naim says
To frame it differently:
Racism has the same relationship to apartheid like Islam has to Dhimmitude.
gravenimage says
And it’s not just legal, Tony–it is considered to be handed down from Allah:
Here’s the Pact of Omar:
https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/jewish/jews-umar.asp
Tony Naim says
https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/15/books/the-rise-of-dhimmi.html
gravenimage says
Bernard Lewis was very sharp. Most of us had not even heard about dhimmitude at the time.
gary fouse says
At the same time Francis laments anti-Semitism, he supports unrestricted flow of Mulsims into Europe, which has caused the problem to explode.
Now that the problem of anti-Semitism has exploded upon the public consciousness (finally), the great debate is assigning blame. No doubt it is coming from many directions, but it is too conveninet to blame it all on white nationalists, the righ, and Trump supporters while studiously ignoring the biggest source-the teachings of Islam. Even mainstram Jewish organizations like the ADL and the Jewish Federation are guilty of this.
This is a debate we must engage in.
Frank Anderson says
G.F., it is basic that the first requirement of any negotiation (debate) is a subject for a compromise.
A number of years ago, I had a case in court where I represented one brother, a minority shareholder in a family corporation, against his brother, the majority shareholder. The majority shareholder spent lavishly on perks, like nice cars and homes for himself and generous “charitable” contributions, while not paying corporate taxes and other obligations, The majority shareholder forged my client’s name on personal guarantees. At the first hearing the mindless judge who “did not want to hear it” ordered us to a conference room as though there were something to discuss. After a completely useless encounter, we tried the case for the First Time.
A week later, the office manager and secretary gave me sworn statements that they were ordered to falsify the company records concerning the payments to my client. A second trial exactly one week from the first made little progress. Then the corporation’s lawyer advised the firing of the secretary and office manager (a clear violation of bankruptcy law and federal obstruction of justice law). Third trial, one week after the second, and 2 weeks after the first: Case converted from a Chapter 11 reorganization to a Chapter 7 liquidation.
What was there to discuss? How much would my client get stuck with in fraudulently imposed corporate debt? He was the one who got out in the heat and operated construction equipment while Big Shot went around passing out money to “charitable causes” and failing to pay corporate taxes. My client at best was losing his job and income. Where did he have room to compromise.
What debate is required, necessary, useful or even mildly helpful when the issue is life or death, freedom or slavery? How much life or liberty is available to compromise? Islam declared WAR on all humanity 1400 years ago to enslave or kill all who do not come to their side. Until that is understood and accepted Islam teaches that any compromise made with non-believers is meaningless and binding only as long as needed for muslim strength to grow sufficiently to continue its world conquest. Depending on who is estimating and what areas are considered, between 250 and 1000 MILLION human beings have been killed by the Islamic conquest in 1400 years, and rising daily. So, what is to debate?
gravenimage says
Frank, not all debate is about compromise, It can also be about getting the truth out–which is important, especially re Islam today.
Frank Anderson says
GI, I was involved in many negotiations starting from the time I was a co-op student before graduating from engineering school, 7 years before starting law school.
There are truly and genuinely academic nuances of the word debate that may not involve compromise. But I believe the time for academic discussion and argument is long passed. The facts of Islam’s brutality and goals are clear. The “final, perfect, complete and Unchangeable” rules and goals are known for most of 1400 years and have killed millions, and continuing, aspiring to kill billions. What is needed for debate?
The information is right there on the streets and fields in blood and dead bodies.
gravenimage says
Unfortunately, Frank, this is still not clear to many people–many are in denial, and many more are just not paying much attention. I think that getting the word out–as Jihad Watch does–is still of key importance.
Frank Anderson says
GI, we CERTAINLY agree that exposure of the truth is the highest and most essential priority. I believe, like my refusal to negotiate with liars and thieves, that there is not anything to debate. Unlike muslim teaching of delay, deception and confusion, I believe in direct statements of truth; and suspect we agree on that too.
gravenimage says
Frank, I think we are using the word “debate: slightly differently, I use the word as making your case. While debates are–or should be–polite, that does not mean conceding points that are not true.
This is how Robert Spencer debates–exposing the whole truth. This is probably why so few Muslims dare engage with him any more. He knows his stuff, and will not concede any points that are not accurate.
Frank Anderson says
GI, I agree with that description and application. Transmitting information is obviously necessary. But negotiating some kind of deal or compromise with evil is not. There is no compromise between life and death.
gravenimage says
Frank, as I have noted, I was *not* suggesting compromising with evil.
gary fouse says
Frank, You completely missed my point. It is not about whether Islam is right or wrong, or whether anti-Semnitism is bad. The debate is who is responsible for most of the anti-Semitism in the world today? There are those out there-including some Jews- who blame it all on white racists, Trump etc. I argue-debate- that most anti-Semitism today comes from Islamic quarters, which others don’t want to admit and confront.
That is the debate. I know which side is true, but we have to confront the false narrative.
Frank Anderson says
G.F. If we have any disagreement whatever, it is a matter of minor nuance instead of relevant detail. There are actually some anti-Semitic Jews in positions of great power and influence, who have been active since WWII and continuing.
We, you and I, are not among them.
Islam has been anti-Jewish since Jews rejected Mo 1400 years ago when he was trying to peacefully win their conversion, before he changed to his campaign of violence and conquest that remains active today (ONE of many illustrations the “final, perfect, complete and unchangeable” revelations were CHANGED as the koran was made up/fabricated: A FACT totally obscured by the scrambled arrangement of chapters in the standard order of publication).
The population frequently labeled “white racists”, to me, are just another part of totalitarians who wish to dominate every aspect of the lives they permit to continue, and kill every person who does not fit their mold.
FYI says
If they love each other so much then maybe Jorge and Ahmed should…get married.
They are certainly an item:an interfaith Love story if you will,built on a rock solid foundation of their mutual love for islam ,contempt for Christianity and the West.
I mean as Jorge himself says when he is disguised as a pope ,francis, “who am I to judge?”
But rather than watch them slobber over each other in public would Jorge and Ahmed at least-please-get a Room?
Goofy says
The pope erroneously assumes that Allah and Jahveh are one and the same God. That Islam, Judaism and Christianity are three Abrahamic religions. Where has he got that from? No evidence of a connection between Ismael and prophet Muhammad has ever been presented. Anyhow, from their fruits you shall know them, and the fruits of Islam are diametrically opposite to the fruits of Christianity.
gravenimage says
Pope Francis Condemns Antisemitism But Again Misses the Elephant In the Room
……………………..
Yes–where does all of this “resurgence” of antisemitism come from? In Europe, it is almost entirely due to Muslim immigration.
tim gallagher says
The hatred of Jews seems to be more ferocious amongst Muslims than any other group, so I feel that the rising numbers of anti-Jewish attacks are largely the result of the Muslims who have been let into Europe. I don’t know why this Pope can’t see this, but I heard an interesting interview on the highest rating talk back radio station we have here in Sydney, Australia, 2GB, where a leader of the Jewish community seemed to be making the same mistake of not mentioning Muslims. Michael McLaren, the radio presenter, interviewed the Jewish leader (I can’t recall his name) because it was the 75th anniversary of when the horrors at Auschwitz were uncovered and the subject was the rising tide of anti-Semitism around the world, and especially Europe. I’m sure it is mainly because of Muslims. The Jewish leader out here in Australia didn’t mention Muslims at all, but proceeded to say how the far right in Germany was a big factor and said that many members of the AfD party were neo-Nazis or some such thing. I don’t know if this is true, but I think that the AfD mainly oppose Muslim migration, which is a goal I support. I don’t know if they include neo-Nazi types. My impression was that this particular Jewish leader was missing that elephant in the room, Islam and the Muslim migration into Europe. He sounded similar to the Pope. I don’t get it, this blindness to Islam’s evil, this strange protection racket for Islam. It’s the same with the Zuckerberg, Facebook report here on Jihad Watch. I don’t understand why they don’t see Islam’s evil and name it? In my opinion, there’s no excuse for not seeing it.
somehistory says
The pope “will never tire” being a fool and a tool for satan the devil.
He doesn’t care about the hatred toward the Jews….or Christians…that spills from the hearts of moslims and displays itself in murder, rape, lies, etc. He’s an empty mouthpiece for islam, as his soul is empty of any real good. He is closer to representing satan the devil than our Lord, Jesus Christ or His/our Heavenly Father.
No respect for this idiot for islam and his pretense at righteousness.
Frank Anderson says
S.H., agreeing with your proposition and appealing to Santayana’s “lessons of the past”, can you think of one Nazi who “saw the light” and turned on the regime? The 1938 plotters “planned” but remained loyal. Only in 1944 did an actual attempt occur. For 11 years, all who were involved stayed involved enough to keep where they were. I do not know of any defections (Rudolf Hess most certainly was not defecting when he flew to the UK to try to negotiate their surrender). I cannot see that any are happening now. Am I missing something?
How many defected from Stalin’s Soviet Union? I think the same description applies.
somehistory says
About 20 years ago, i met and got to know…somewhat…a woman who had been a guard in one of the concentration camps. (Idk why she was never charged with crimes as other nazi’s were, only that she had been allowed to come to the U.S. at some point.)
She claimed to be a follower of Christ at the time I met her, but when she spoke of her part in the war, she sounded proud of what she had done.
That disgusted me more than I can describe. Jesus condemns hypocrites, whatever their station in life.
Frank Anderson says
S.H. I think I understand and KNOW that I share your disgust. I recall a video recorded interview of a Brit who interrogated one of the female guards and vividly described her pride for the brutality of her conduct. These people are evil, not sick, but evil, and will always be as long as they are in this world. I doubt we will ever understand how so many escaped justice.
gravenimage says
Very disturbing, Somehistory–but not surprising. I just read the transcript of Shoah, and it was sickening how many who had been involved in the Holocaust still at that time either excused it, or–even worse–seemed proud of it. Of course, this was not new to me.
Anthony says
If the Pope want to fight antisemitism, he probably doesn’t need to go further than looking at the Quran…this this elephant in the room…see if he can get away with such verse….surah al tawbah, chapter 9…
29 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
…www.quranwow.com, yusuf ali translation
or when their Allah curses….
30 The Jews call ‘Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
Their Allah doesn’t even get it right, because no Jews believe in such thing !!!!
So the Pope should fight this stupid Allah and his antisemitism agenda brought by his favorite messenger, Mohammad !
Patriotliz says
Yeah, this worthless Pope thinks Islam is some sort of respectable “religion” and totally oblivious to Islamic anti-Semitism but, what is more horrendous is a Pope totally ignoring Islamic anti-Christianism and Christian genocide. It’s difficult to even refer to him as a “Pope.”