This blog initially set out to focus primarily on Islam and the Islamisation of the UK. However, since that time the subjects covered have broadened. They now include (amongst other things): IQ tests, Jean Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Marxism, Trotskyism, David Cameron, Foucault, Nazism, Ralph Miliband, economics, statistics and so on. - Paul Austin Murphy
I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here.)

Friday, 13 June 2014

Islamic jihadists (the Iraqi ISIS) take Mosul & Tikrit

Islamic jihadists
Mosul, 10th June, 2014\PHOTOCREDIT: Wiki Commons


As many people already believe, the violence in Iraq will not subside any time soon. In fact it will only get worse. And in recent days it has.


This most recent stage in the 1,400 war to spread Islam (as well as of the war between Sunni and Shia Muslims) is occurring in the Iraqi cities of Mosul and Tikrit. These two major cities has just been taken over by Islamic jihadists.


Up to 500,000 people have fled Mosul.


And just to get a scale of the violence in Iraq, up to 800 people (including 603 civilians) were killed in May alone. (That’s more than the civilians who’ve been killed by US “drone attacks” – in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia – in the entire period of 2002 to 2014.)


One escapee from the Islamic jihadists told Reuters:
 “They told us not to be scared and that they came to liberate and free us from oppression. We are frightened because we don’t know who they are.”
So the Islamic jihadists, of the fighting force called the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), are fighting against “oppression”. In other words, they are fighting against the oppression that is not being allowed to live in an full Islamic state with complete sharia law. (It must also be strange to be liberated by people when you “don’t know who they are”.)


These Islamic jihadists (ISIS) don’t have much Islamic brotherly love for their fellow Muslims either. They’ve already taken 50 Turkish hostages – all workers at the Turkish Consulate in Mosul. Indeed Turkey’s foreign minister has warned that there will be “harsh retaliation” if any Turkish citizens are harmed in any way.


ISIS explained its actions on Twitter (is Twitter halal?) when it said that it would “not stop this series of blessed invasions” until a (Sunni) Islamic state is created.
The Shia Iraq Prime Minister, Nouri Maliki, has vowed to fight back against the Sunni jihadists.


ISIS’s main grievance (apart from the fact that Iraq is not a full – Sunni - Islamic state with complete sharia law) is that the PM, Nouri Maliki, is monopolising power. That is probably the case. After all, the Shia population of Iraq were denied political power by the Sunni Muslim Saddam Hussein for over 24 years years. (He ruled that country from 1979 to 2003; though he had considerable power since the early 1970s.)
Islamic jihadists
The flag of al-Qaeda in Iraq\PHOTOCREDIT: Wiki Commons


ISIS itself (also known as ISIL) is an offshoot of al-Qaeda: an organisation which is also very active in Syria at present. The north-west of Iraq joins the south-east of Syria. (Mosul itself is close to the Syrian border; though Tikrit is more central.) This shows us how dangerous this situation is.


ISIS is actually a relatively small fighting-force. It has between 3,000 and 5,000 fighters.


“Islamist militants”, as they’re often called, are of course also doing their stuff in Nigeria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Sudan, Algeria, Egypt, southern Thailand, the Philippines, parts of China, Syria… Basically, wherever there are large numbers of Muslims - and sometimes even when there are small numbers - there is jihadist violence.

SaddamLatuff
Saddam Hussein/PHOTOCREDIT: Wiki Commons


Interestingly enough, Tikrit (which was taken on Tuesday) was Saddam Hussein’s hometown. And since we are on the subject of Saddam Hussein, many Western Leftists and Muslims of course blame the West for all the violence in Iraq. That’s despite the fact that the last American troops pulled out three years ago – in 2011. (Most US troops had actually pulled out in 2009.) What they don’t tell is that this religious or Islamic violence was only kept in check precisely because of Saddam’s dictatorial regime – a regime which annihilated up to one million (that is, outside war) of its own people between 1979 and 2003. That’s why there wasn’t the religious and ethnic strife we see today; as well as what we’ve seen since Saddam was deposed and killed in 2003.


In fact even during Saddam’s regime there was low-level violence; as well as the subjugation of the Kurds and Shia (mainly in the south). Nonetheless, Saddam dealt with these internal conflicts with massive violence.


Many Muslims blame the West for “splitting up” either the “Muslim world” or the “Arab world” into what they call “artificial states”; which were, they say, tailor-made to “suit Western interests”. What these Muslims would have preferred is the Wahhabi plan of the 1920s (as well as before) to unite of all Arabia and the surrounding Arab states (or at least Transjordan, Iraq and Kuwait) into a single Islamic ummah under a single caliphate. The alternative to that would have been a recreation of the Ottoman (Turkish) Empire after World War One (despite the Turkish defeat in that war). Yet the designs of the Arabs in Arabia and in other Arab areas were always at odds with that of the Ottoman “hegemony”. (Hizb ut-Tahrir, an international Islamic group, supports what the Ottoman Empire did and stood for and even wants to resurrect it – though not necessarily under Turkish control.) Indeed the Ottoman/Turkish hegemony was the main reason why, for example, the Sharif of Mecca (Hussein bin Ali) wanted to create his own larger Arab ummah and caliphate.


But neither an Arabian/Arab nor an Ottoman caliphate or ummah would have worked. That supposed artificial splitting of Arab areas was the best that could have been done at the time because there was – and never has been – a hidden or repressed Arab or Middle-Eastern unity (as Iraq today shows). For example, in Iraq, Sunnis are fighting Shia, Kurds are fighting Sunnis, and both Sunnis and Shia have effectively ethnically cleansed the whole of Iraq of all Jews and nearly all Christians.


Outside Iraq, this Sunni-Shia war is replicated in Syria; as well as in Oman, Bahrain, Yemen and the eastern borders of Iran (which border both Pakistan and Afghanistan).
The dream of a united Arab Middle East, and even less feasibly, of  a united Islamic Middle East, is just a stick to beat the West. The idea is either fantastically na├»ve or a deliberate deceit. Interestingly enough, that deceit is mainly upheld by Western Muslims; rather than by the majority of Muslims who actually live in the Middle East.

Thursday, 12 June 2014

UK Charity Commission exposes extreme Islamic charity

 





A leading British Islamic charity is currently being investigated for its Jew-hatred and for proselytising for adulterers to be stoned to death.


More specifically, the UK Charity Commission has begun an inquiry into the Islamic Education and Research Academy (iERA), which is based in London.


The Charity Commission has designated the problems as “regulatory issues”.


For example, the founder of the Islamic Education and Research Academy (iERA), a convert (or should I say ‘revert’?) by the name of Abdur Raheem Green, was caught on camera (at London’s well-known Hyde Park Corner) calling for a Jewish man to be removed from his sight. At the time, Abdur Raheem Green said:


“Why don’t you take the Yahoudi [Jew] over there far away so his stench doesn’t disturb us?”

The iERA has also said that female (not male) adulterers should be punished with a “slow and painful death by stoning”.


IERA claims to have links with non-Islamic British charities, including Age UK. One of its advisers is also the controversial Dr Zakir Naik, who was once banned from entering the UK by the British Home Secretary, Theresa May. (Dr Naik has said that “all Muslims should become terrorists” and defended stoning, Jew-hatred, etc.)


The Charity Commission itself explained its investigation in the following way:


“The inquiry is examining the decision making of the trustee body, specifically its due diligence and monitoring of speakers, various payments to trustees and a former trustee, and its relationship with the connected company, Islamic Education and Research Academy Limited.”

Maryam Namazie, who’s a well-known activist against Muslim extremism and leader of the Council of ex-Muslims (CEMB), told a British newspaper that


“the Islamist far-right should not be granted charitable status, but instead classified as a hate group perpetrating hate against gay people, ex-Muslims, women, Jews, non-Muslims and the majority of Muslims who do not subscribe to their values”.


The lesson to be learned here is that we should be careful when hearing Muslims use the word “charity”; just as we should be when Muslims use the words “peace”, “rights”, “freedom”, “justice”, etc. They tend to mean something which most Americans and Westerners certainly don’t mean.

In the case of charity, anything which contributes to Islam and its advance is designated as “charity” by many Muslims. That can include raising money for Islamic terrorist groups (or “freedom fighters”, as Muslims sometimes call them), funding Islamist political parties and so on.


Here is the UK, for example, an Islamic group (Muslim Aid) was prosecuted for raising £13,500 (in 2012) from mainly non-Muslim shoppers in the city-center streets of Birmingham. The money they raised ended up in the hands of al-Qaeda. And in the US, CAIR has a history (or at least some of its leaders have) of raising money for Hamas and other such groups.


In other words, Islamic/Muslim charities have hardly anything to do with alleviating hardship or helping the disadvantaged. The other thing to remember is that Muslims only ever collect money for other Muslims or for Islamic causes. (Even charities designated as“Christian charities” don’t help only Christians.) That’s why you never see Muslim charities involved with “infidel” disasters but always see them when, say, Muslim Pakistanis are flooded or when, as today, (Sunni) Muslims in Syria need help.


Not only that: Islamic scholars have frequently argued that Muslim charities should fund, at least in part, various Islamic terrorist groups.


The message here, I suppose, is to never give anything to any Muslim charity – no matter what it says the money is for. Your money could end up funding al-Qaeda or Hamas.


What has been said about Muslim charities can also be said about ‘Islamic centers’, which the Birmingham Muslims mentioned above were planning to set up as a front for terrorist recruitment. So beware Islamic centers too!


Actually, beware mosques, which are often the places where collections for terrorists are made; probably also in the guise of ‘charity’. They are also the places in which many Muslims are first instilled with the Islamic virtue of violent jihad.

Wednesday, 11 June 2014

The Guardian is Pro-Islamist!







Of course The Guardian will say that this is part of the "Comment is Free" section (see image above); which "allows diverse points of view". No it doesn't! It allows Islamists, as well as hard-core Trotskyists..., etc., to state things which even The Guardian daren't claim for itself.

If "Comment is Free" were genuinely free, they would have published articles by the BNP, UKIP, the EDL, Gert Wilders, etc; which, of course, it never has. Alternatively, what The Guardian has repeatedly done over the years is equivalent to The Telegraph or the Daily Mail allowing their own “Comment is Free” sections to be written by the English/American Nazi Party or by the National Front. And, of course, if these newspapers ever did such a thing, The Guardian would be on their backs in no time. (The Guardian has recently made much of a Daily Mail article which praised Mosley's Black Shirts some 90 years ago.)

Over the last ten years or so, The Guardian has published articles by at least 40 or more Muslims: most of whom - though not all - have been outright Islamists (e.g. members of Hamas, Hezbollah, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, MCB, MAB, Salma Yaqoob, etc.).