III
Delusion, extreme wishful-thinking, relativism and that lowest of low bars, have been dished out in spadefuls in response to MK Mansour Abbas’ Holocaust Remembrance Day speech in the Knesset. Here is a small sampling from the comments sections of articles and from Twitter:
“This is really and incredibly moving speech.”
“Words well spoken, we need to give credit where it is due.”
“What a great speech! Keep on surprising abbas, maybe one day we can all live in peace and respect each other. if we only heard this 70 years ago… but still, I‘m happy to hear it now.”
“Very moving gesture and a commendable act to speak up this way. I admire his honesty and courage.”
“Beautiful!”
“A moving and powerful speech. Much appreciated.”
“kol hakavod, …that someone from that side had the courage to say it should be appreciated. the response to something good should always be thank you, that usually encourages more.”
Such delusion and incredible naivety is by no means universal. Thankfully, not everyone is so ignorant of Islam, Muslims and the jihad against Israel.
“Seriously – the Islamic Movement is Antisemitic in its core. Worst the Koran is equivalent to mein kamf – after the move to Medina it is a antisemitic racist document – the newer verses are the ones that count. This is simply a show for the idiots who fall for it. LIke the way the PA and other speak one way in Arabic and another in English. Depends on the Audience.”
‘Abbas said that he would speak about the Holocaust, “not from books or from internet quotes, but rather from an moral worldview and internal contemplation on the person inside me and historical insights” – well said. First of all, he should speak about Amin al-Hussein.’
The speech drew rejection, too, from “Rabbi Fire,” who tweeted,
“An Israeli Mk, Israeli citizen and official Israel elected is referring to himself as “Arab-palestinian”, not as Israeli. Anywhere else in the world this would raise questions of dualities and loyalties. Only in Israel can an elected official identify as an enemy of the state…”
Rabbi Fire is, of course, correct, but he also misses Mansour Abbas’ far more serious self-indictment. During his speech, he also referred to himself as a “religious Muslim” and a “believing Muslim.” Had he simply described himself as a “Muslim,” rather than specifically as a “religious Muslim,” there might have been some room for interpretation, some latitude for charity.
We ask for the reader’s patience for a lengthy digression into the political economy of Islam and the tortured psychology of Muslims. Decent human beings unfortunate enough to have been brought up under Islam find themselves trapped in one of the most complex forms of denial: I am what I am, and what I am I am not. Islam is what it is; its texts are clear, as is its long terrible record. There can be no ambiguity about what this religion is: a brutal totalitarian device for world conquest and the monstrous subjugation of all under Muslim supremacy and overlordship. There have been many similar systems throughout history, but none have endured as Islam has, the latter having been devised by barbarians in late antiquity, and proven extremely successful in a brutal, ignorant world. When its conquests were finally halted and partially reversed, it consolidated and preserved that brutal, ignorant world within its dominions, relying on an ingenious feature that sets it apart from all other religions: it is futureproof, ensuring that for as long as it exists, it will always be what it has always been, impervious to the social evolution and ethical and technical advances of the rest of humanity. Over time, its self-imposed ossification would bring it into conflict with its own adherents, who evolve, both ethically and in the complexity of their needs, just as all human beings do. This brings us to the Muslim.
A Muslim is not what a Muslim is. A Muslim is raised to identify with Islam 100%. His or her identity is inseparable from Islam, and hence from its demonym “Muslim.” It is purely a matter of extreme hardwiring during early childhood. The very fact that there are so few Muslims who actually practise Islam as Islam, means that there are probably more Muslims against Islam than there are non-Muslims against Islam. Muslims, as human beings with natural human desires, needs, preferences and passions, give effect to their opposition to Islam by simply ignoring most of its commandments while feigning piety. They all know that they all do it. There is no other way of being a Muslim without being a psychopathic, sex-crazed, barbarian, plunderer and mass-murderer, except by ignoring most of Islam, a system specifically designed to ensure that psychopathic, sex-crazed, barbarian plunderers and mass-murderers prevail. To the extent that a Muslim manages to escape Islam without escaping Islam, to that extent is he able to be a civilised human being, provided he is accomplished at pretence. The closer he gets to what Islam expects of him, the more brutal he becomes, and the more honest he can allow himself to be.
Given Islam’s built-in self-preservation mechanisms, both in the raising of the child and in the punishing of the adult, a civilised Muslim, by the very nature of the case, is an extremely conflicted creature, perforce an incurable liar and hypocrite, both attributes essential to his self-preservation within Islam. The refrain, “The only good Muslim is an ex-Muslim,” will strike the humane and charitable non-Muslim as a particularly nasty and unbelievable stereotype of all Muslims. In the hands of anti-Muslim bigots, a nasty stereotype is exactly what it is, for behind it lies no understanding at all for what the Muslim must go through to be good according to civilisation, rather than good according to Islam. In the hands of those who know Muslims, it is a perfectly sound assertion.
Iraqi Ayatollah Ali Sistani was not being flippant when he declared, “Islam and civilisation are two different things.” Muslims get very upset when their unshakeable belief that Muhammad was the perfect man is disparaged and ridiculed. Yet they are correct: Muhammad was the perfect man, and in fact, Islam is the perfect religion. Perfection is a value judgement, and the values according to which Muhammad and Islam were judged at the time the claims for their perfection were first laid down were the values of barbarism. The claim is simply that Muhammad was the perfect barbarian, and since his religion and way of life, Islam, successfully slaughtered its way through people after people after people to the ends of continents, Islam is the perfect religion for a barbarian people, which, by the way, is why the Turkic tribesmen so eagerly adopted it. Islam is nothing more than barbarism perfected.
These claims to perfection are neither fanciful nor exaggerated, for the only reality that Muslims knew at the time of making these claims and embedding them in their religion was the world of barbarism. As far as they knew, barbarism was all there was. The Qur’an is perfect because it is the compilation into handy form of all that is needed to make a barbarian society prevail over other barbarian societies, and if the Qur’an is the “what,” then the life of Muhammad is the “how.” Islam presumes that there is only barbarism and there will only ever be barbarism. Islam, through its demonym “Muslim,” entraps those of its adherent who have strayed into civilisation. So deeply is “I am a Muslim” embedded into the psyche of the Muslim that even if they have rejected Islam in its entirety, many will have no other conception of themselves except, “I am a Muslim.” It is the hermetic identity of the oasis tribe, hence the proliferation of qualifying adjectives amongst many who have left Islam, but are unable to quite give up being Muslim. So-called “cultural Muslims” are apostates from Islam who simply cannot bring themselves to acknowledge, “I am not a Muslim.”
Between the ISIS sex-slaver / Saudi beheader / Iranian woman-stoner / Pakistani child-abductor / Lebanese car-bomber / Somali FGM-cutter / Nigerian priest-slayer / European illegal immigrant rapist / Afghan jihad mass-murderer / Indian disease-spreader / “Palestinian” suicide-bomber / British gang-rapist / Mauritanian slave-trader / Indonesian church-bomber / Iraqi mosque-bomber / Egyptian wife-abductor / etc., etc., on the one hand, and the apostate on the other, there is the fluid indeterminacy of combining elements of barbarism with elements of civilisation, thereby rendering most Muslims both unable to be Muslim and unable to not be Muslim. Each such Muslim finds his or her balance between Islam and civilisation so they might at least be able to get on with their lives, but it is a precarious balance in which Islam demands all while civilisation’s call grows steadily louder within them.
The Muslim that the non-Muslim deals with at that moment in time could be anything. And it is in their interactions with such Muslims that non-Muslims must every day throw the dice, and every day we read of the tragic consequences of the dice falling the wrong way. Muslims get upset when infidels are suspicious of them, but they are not entitled to expect infidels to indulge their hypocrisy, especially not at risk to their own safety and security. Muslims, if you want non-Muslims to trust that you are not about to kill them, then leave Islam and make that fact known.
Non-Muslims well outside the Islamic world tend to encounter Muslims whose public behaviour and utterances place them further from the Islamic end and closer to the civilised end of that fluid indeterminacy. Non-Muslims in closer proximity to the Islamic world see Muslim behaviour closer to the Islamic end and further from the civilised end. Those non-Muslims unfortunate enough to reside in the Dar-al-Islam endure the full brunt of Muslims who live Islam as Islam.
But let us not forget that the most important tenet of Islam is jihad, and for the non-Muslim, the most dangerous Muslim is precisely the Muslim in that fluid indeterminacy, the vast majority of Muslims. All behaviours, from one extreme to the other, can be in evidence in the same individual, while none of it is ever fixed, changing as the Muslim needs them to change, recombining as the Muslim needs them to recombine; flexibility to accommodate rigidity. This existential fluidity, together with the Islamic doctrine of deceit, taqiyya, rather than the simple vagueness and non-committal playing-to-the-gallery of elected politicians, lubricates the behaviour of those on da’wa proselytising for Islam and those on jihad conquering the world for Islam.
A Member of Knesset for the Arab Joint List, Deputy leader of the Islamic Movement, Mansour Abbas, demonstrated taqiyya in high gear when he made his Holocaust Remembrance Day speech. This was no Oslo. He was giving a crystal-clear assurance to his constituents that he was well aware of what the Qur’an and the Hadith expect of him, and that he was living up to those expectations. Everyone else, it seems, was seduced by this “religious Muslim,” this “man of faith.”
Had Israeli Jews studied the Qur’an and the life of Muhammad, they would recognise the popular sound bite, “Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity,” as dangerously complacent. They would realise that instead, the “Palestinians,” whichever side of the Green Line they’re on, always find an opportunity to find an opportunity. Israel might want peace and be prepared to sacrifice much for it, but the “Palestinians” want jihad, they want Israel and its filthy Jews gone, and are prepared to sacrifice everything for that, including their children, both born and still to be born. Child sacrifice is a pure barbarian virtue. The doctrine of jihad holds that there will be no peace until there are only Muslims in the world. There will be no peace until there is no Israel. It is as simple as that.
IV
At first the CoVID-19 pandemic caught Muslims by surprise. But it didn’t take long before they started making jihad capital out of it, whether it was global jihad terrorist organisations calling on Muslims to do everything they can to spread the virus amongst non-Muslims, or “Arab-Palestinians” heaping mediaeval blood libel on the Jews of Israel and vowing revenge. Thus did Hamas terror chief, Yahya Sinwar, find the opportunity to “threaten” Israel: “If ventilators are not brought into [Gaza],” he blustered, “we’ll take them by force from Israel and stop the breathing of six million Israelis.” It was an opportunity to invoke both the Holocaust and the gas chambers, never mind that Israel was already freely giving medical equipment to Gaza — and training their medical staff — anyway. An opportunity could be found and it was found. The jihad terrorist was then able to claim that Israel had complied with “the demand of the resistance.” Whether it is the Jews’ most sacred memory, or a deadly global pandemic, the Palestinians will always find an opportunity to find an opportunity. For those wondering about the creativity and resourcefulness of Muslims, do not look to science and medicine; look to jihad.
“Arab-Palestinian” Yahya Sinwar’s obscene desecration of the Jews’ most painful memory, the death of six million of their kin in the Holocaust, at the same time as eulogising the monstrous means by which this horror was accomplished, gassing (“stop the breathing”), elicited no repudiation from “Arab-Palestinians” in Israel, all of whom had understood very well what Sinwar was saying, especially those Muslim Arabs in the Knesset, who managed, on Holocaust Remembrance Day a few weeks later, from the podium of that august place to at the same time both repudiate Holocaust denial and deny that the Holocaust was of any greater significance than “the occupation.” In other words, Mansour Abbas denounced Holocaust denial by denying the Holocaust, making subtle jihad capital out of it, unlike that other “Arab-Palestinian” leader, Yahya Sinwar, who taunted the Jews with the Holocaust and made obscene jihad capital out of it.
And so we return to Mansour Abbas’ speech, that so many seemed to think was about commemorating the Holocaust when it was nothing of the kind. Indeed, since Yahya Sinwar’s grotesque Holocaust remark was not a denial of the Holocaust, it required no repudiation from Abbas, whose speech was about Holocaust denial. Some Muslims, like their Allah, are the best of deceivers.
V
It is to be put to Israel and to the Jews that to be a light unto the nations does not mean behaving and acting naively and suicidally, that the truth and the sanctity of the Shoah lie beyond the banality of denial and denial of denial. To indulge Holocaust denial with evidence and counter-denial is to enter the gutter and join anti-Semites in their game, by their rules. Islam is the only religion that holds over its votaries the condition that in order for them to finally meet their maker, they must first exterminate another people, viz., the Jews.
“The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews” (Sahih Muslim, 6985).
This is the notorious genocidal hadith, accepted by all Muslims as an authentic saying of their prophet Muhammad, and contrary to Mansour Abbas’ opening deception, the Qur’an offers no prayer for Jews, but is filled instead with prayers for Muslims to curse the Jews, subjugate the Jews, fight the Jews, ambush the Jews, vanquish the Jews and drive out the Jews.
In the very first chapter of the Qur’an, one reads: “Guide us to the straight path; Not the path of those who earned your anger, nor of those who went astray,” (1:7). In his exegesis on the Qur’an, Ibn al-Kathir explains: “These two paths are the paths of the Christians and Jews, a fact that the believer [the Muslim] should beware of so that he avoids them. The path of the believers is knowledge of the truth [i.e., Islam] and abiding by it. In comparison, the Jews abandoned practicing the religion… This is why ‘anger’ descended upon the Jews… Those who know, but avoid implementing the truth, deserve the anger…” He further adds: “Both the Christians and the Jews have earned the anger and are led astray, but the anger is one of the attributes more particular of the Jews. Allah said about the Jews, ‘Those (Jews) who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath,’ (5:60).”
These words, “Guide us to the straight path; Not the path of those who earned your anger, nor of those who went astray,” words that beg their Allah to help Muslims avoid joining the accursed Jews who have incurred their Allah’s anger, also form part of the Muslim prayer, said five time per day by every religious Muslim, such as Mansour Abbas stated himself to be. In his Holocaust Remembrance Day speech, however, Abbas declared, “I stand here to show solidarity with the Jewish people now and forever.” To contradict Allah is to apostatise from Islam, something every Muslim, let alone a religious one, is fully aware of. Does anyone familiar with Islam and Muslims seriously believe that Mansour Abbas was sincere in his pledge of solidarity with the Jewish people, the very people whom, five times a day, he begs his Allah to help him avoid because they are cursed? Yet Jews indulge this man, and extravagantly so.
Although of a vastly different order, to indulge Muslim denial of Holocaust denial is to partake in the same psychological game as to indulge those who charge “Islamophobia,” by providing proof that the accusation is false. The Holocaust is historic fact. “Islamophobia,” while not even a concept, is nothing more than a contrivance with which to intimidate those who would criticise Islam and Muslims, and to keep in line those who might stray from mindless support for Islam and slavish “virtue-signalling” towards Muslims. Instead of lowering oneself to take seriously the non-lexical monstrosity of “Islamophobia,” far better be it to all the more expose the terror that Islam has in store for all and to oppose Muslim erosion of our standards of conduct. Instead of descending to the level of the Holocaust deniers, far better be it to force Holocaust deniers to acknowledge the affinity of Islam to Nazism, and to show the contribution of Muslims to the Holocaust.
To do this would be to protect the gravitas and sanctity of the Shoah from the grubby hands of the likes of Mansour Abbas and Mustafa Cerić, who will do nothing less than abuse the Holocaust for their own jihad ends, while the people whose sacred memory they trample on are drawn into, and trapped in, a base game of denial and denial of denial.
The author appeals to the Jewish people, and especially to Israeli Jews, to undertake the difficult task of subjecting themselves to what would in all likelihood be a very unpleasant process: acknowledging that Islam has a Holocaust in store for them, and that the Nazi attempt, as far as Islam is concerned, is only unfinished business and very second-rate at that, since the hadith clearly states that “the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them,” (emphasis added). It is not a task to be outsourced. Islam arrogates to itself the exclusive right to exterminate the Jews, and insists that, ultimately, the Holocaust is the Muslims’ divine responsibility and their Allah expects them to get it right, taking care to leave no Jew alive. If Moses Maimonides’ lament was true in his day, then how much more so today:
“God has entangled us with this people, the nation of Ishmael, who treat us so prejudicially and who legislate our harm and hatred…. No nation has ever arisen more harmful than they, nor has anyone done more to humiliate us, degrade us, and consolidate hatred against us.”
Maimonides might well observe of Mansour Abbas’ speech in the Knesset, “Now the nation of Ishmael, more harmful than ever, play with our hearts in our gathering, all the more to humiliate us, degrade us, and consolidate hatred against us.”
gravenimage says
Jihading the Holocaust: Auschwitz and the Knesset (Part 2)
……………….
Sad to see how many, even in Israel, mistake this ugliness for peaceful comments.