The Mohammedan Obsession With da Jooozzz….

Egyptian Islamic cleric: “The Jews are behind the misery, the hardship, the usury, the whorehouses, and any form of corruption that is spread in the land”

“Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews…” — Qur’an 5:82

“Egyptian Cleric Ahmad ‘Eid Mihna: The Jews Are Behind Misery, Hardship, Usury, and Whorehouses,” from MEMRITV,

Surely you heard about this guy:

Renowned Egyptologist Dr. Zahi Hawass, like every Mohammedan, becomes  a loon when it comes to Jews, Israel: ‘The Jews Went to America and Took Control of its Economy… They Have a Plan… They Control the Entire World’-MEMRI

Hugh Fitzgerald comments:

Are there any Jews left in any of the “Arab” lands? Is the corruption in Egypt, a corruption that one sees in almost all the Arab lands, where the rulers help themselves to a large chunk of the nation’s wealth (no one, of course, can outdo the Al-Saud in that competition, and there is not a single Jew living in Saudi Arabia), the result of non-existent Jews? Is the poverty of ordinary Egyptians, a poverty that is also experienced by a great many people in the Arab-populated and Arab-dominated lands, to be attributed to Jews who do not live in those countries? Is the Arab mistreatment of all non-Arabs — Kurds, Berbers, black Africans in the Sudan, Copts, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Maronites, and others — to be attributed to the non-existent Jews? Is the despotism of Arab lands attributable to Jews, or to an ideology, Islam, that insists on blind obedience, to Islam, to the example of Muhammad, to the clerics who issue the fatwas, to the rulers as long as the rulers are Muslims? Is the economic underdevelopment that even the thirteen trillion dollars received by the Arab and Muslim states as oil (and gas) revenues, since 1973 alone, due to the hatred of bid’a, the inshallah-fatalism, and the despotic control of all economic activity by the governments of the region (itself a reflection of that Islam-promoted despotism) the responsibility of non-existent Jews, or of Islam, Islam, Islam?

I could, you could, anyone could go on. There’s no need. When a sufficient number of non-Muslims grasp all the ways that Islam explains the impoverishment and wretchedness of Arab (and many non-Arab Muslim states, and the more they wish to mimic the Arabs, the more likely the people of those states will have to endure similarly wretched polities), and cease to think that they owe the Arabs and Muslims anything, and when the Arabs and Muslims themselves become aware of what we understand, and they show themselves completely unable to rebut what we have concluded, and some of them indeed echo what we say, embarrassedly no doubt but also unavoidably, then the Camp of Islam will be on the defensive, as it should be, so we, especially in the advanced West, can reduce the threat from Muslims and Islam to manageable proportions, and stop squandering so much time, so much money, so much weaponry, so much everything, on a matter that reallly can be handled, if the foolish in our governments are ignored, and the well-informed and cunning brought in.

Answering "Islamophobia"

Islamophobe (is-slahm-o-fohb) – A non-Muslim who knows too much about Islam


Hugh Fitzgerald:

The word “Islamophobia” must be held up for inspection, its users constantly asked precisely how they would define that word, and they should be put on the defensive for waving about what is clearly meant to be a scare-word that will silence criticism.
So let us ask them which of the following criticisms of Islam is to be considered “Islamophobia”:

1) Muhammad is a role-model for all time. Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 and had sexual intercourse with her when she was 9. I find appalling that Muslims consider this act of Muhammad to be that of the man who is in every way a role model, and hence to be emulated. In particular, I am appalled that virtually the first act of the Ayatollah Khomeini, a very orthodox and learned Shi’a theologian, was to lower the marriageable age of girls in Iran to 9 — because, of course, it was Aisha’s age when Muhammad had sexual relations with her.

2) I find appalling that Islam provides a kind of Total Regulation of the Universe, so that its adherents are constantly asking for advise as to whether or not, for example, they can have wear their hair in a certain way, grow their beards in a certain way, wish an Infidel a Merry Christmas (absolutely not!).

Continue reading Answering "Islamophobia"

Why We Fight: The Advance of Islam

A lengthy essay on the 1400-years of jihad warfare and conquests against the world. 

But first, an exchange between a poster named ROB and Hugh Fitzgerald:


Christianity may be the religion of love, freedom and reason but it will need to depend on force to defeat Islam. As soon as Islam is militarily strong enough it will engage America militarily. The west survived because of Charles Martel, the Hungarians at Vienna and the Jesuits and Capuchins who fought, yes fought, in the rigging of the ships at Lepanto. I have no hope for Europe and its an even money bet (at best) for America.

Hugh Fitzgerald 

“Christianity may be the religion of love, freedom and reason but it will need to depend on force to defeat Islam.”– from ROB’s comment

Yes. I like to remind people of what Vladimir Nabokov said, addressing a rally at Wellesley College in the middle of World War II — a “Why We Fight” rally. This is what he said: 

“Morally, democracy is invincible. Physically, that side will win which has the better guns.”

That’s what counts: who is more powerful, militarily powerful. Moral superiority can only get you so far. You need to have better guns, tanks, planes, missiles,, and the hard-headed willingness to use them, as a supplement to otherwise dividing and demoralizing the Camp of Islam. There are so many things to be done, but it requires superior strength, including superior military strength.

barbarians                            Saracens attack…

Continue reading Why We Fight: The Advance of Islam