al Qaeda Archives - Israel Rising

June 5, 2017

RUN, HIDE AND DENY IN LONDON

Islamic terrorism has no religion even when it’s shouting, “This is for Islam.”

As Muslim terrorists rampaged around London, Met police debuted the new “Run, Hide and Tell” program. But instead some Londoners chose to stand and fight. They fought with pint glasses and barstools as the Muslim killers shouting, “This is for Allah” stabbed women in trendy eateries.

Some drivers tried to ram the killers. An unarmed police officer attacked the terrorists with a baton. An off-duty police officer tackled one of the Muslim terrorists. Both men were severely wounded.

Other unarmed police officers ran away.

Met counter-terrorism chief Mark Rowley sympathetically noted that, “If someone acts on instinct and perhaps decides to fight because they have no choice, we would never criticise them for that.”

It was kind of him not to criticize those Londoners who reacted with their base instincts and tried to fight the Muslim killers instead of running, hiding and telling, then reemerging for a vigil or a concert.

After the Manchester Arena attack, Rowley had urged, “Enjoy yourselves. We can’t let the terrorists win by dissuading us from going about our normal business.”

Going about our normal business has become the highest form of courage. Run, Hide and Deny.

Ariana Grande’s manager described her upcoming Manchester concert as representing, “courage, bravery and defiance in the face of fear”. “We’re going to go shopping’ – How defiant Londoners refused to bow to terrorists,” an article at The Independent boasts. Courage, bravery and defiance used to be found on the beaches of Normandy. Now they come from attending a concert or trying on a new blouse.

Londoners took Rowley’s advice. And then they found themselves running and hiding from Muslim killers. Video shows cringing diners lying on the floor of “London’s Coolest Bierkeller” as frantic Met police scream, “Get down”. In the Black & Blue Restaurant, the first “modern American steakhouse” in the city, some hid under the tables. Four friends jammed inside a toilet stall while the screams went on outside. A woman barricaded the door while other diners fled through the back.

At Elliot’s, an eatery “based in the inspiring environment that is Borough Market”, a Muslim terrorist stabbed a waitress hiding behind a partition. At El Pastor, where the tacos are “made from scratch in house every day”, a woman was stabbed before diners drove the terrorist away by throwing chairs at him and then barricaded themselves inside. Diners on lobster risotto at Applebee’s huddled in terror.

Pictures show courageous and defiant revelers trooping out with their hands behind their heads.

Bravely and courageously having butterfly prawns in crispy breadcrumbs or listening to a pop star trying to lip sync only works until grim men shouting about Allah come through the door. And then it’s time to try out the Met’s advice. “Hide: Turn your phone to silent. Barricade yourself in if you can.”

It is at these moments where the real courage of resisting Islamic terrorism is divided from the false courage of going out for a night on the town in “defiance” of terror.

There is no bravery or courage in denying reality. It’s just another form of cowardice.

The champions of nightlife courage mock those who warn of Islamic terrorism for “giving in to fear”. President Trump has been accused of “stoking fear” for calling for common sense migration reform in response to the attacks. Only fools and idiots aren’t afraid of a serious threat. The hollow courage of holding up candles at a vigil or heading to a trendy nightlife spot is no match for the reality of terror.

Denial is always cowardice.

When the UK PM claims that, Islamic terrorism “is a perversion of Islam”, that’s cowardice after an attack in which the Islamic killers made a point of proclaiming, “This is for Islam” and “This is for Allah”.

While the latest wave of Islamic terror swept across the UK, the University of London hosted the Muslim World League’s conference on “Tolerance in Islam”. The League is a Saudi group that has been linked to Al Qaeda whose employees included Osama bin Laden’s son-in-law and one of the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists. The Secretary General of the League has insisted that “terrorism has no religion”.

Indeed.

Meanwhile a friend of one of the attackers claimed that the terrorist had been influenced by the Islamic teachings of Sheikh Ahmad Musa Jibril: a Palestinian Muslim cleric in Dearborn who is popular with Al Qaeda and ISIS Jihadists. He has a degree in Sharia law from the Islamic University in Saudi Arabia.

Jibril was inspired by Salman Al-Awdah, a Saudi sheikh associated with the monarchy. Also inspired by Al-Awdah was a devout Muslim by the name of Osama bin Laden. Jibril’s site urged Muslims that their “heart must contain nothing but HATE to all kafers [non-Muslims]… Not just plain hate it must be the peak of hate”. And “Give them a knife and a bulletful of gun.”

And so the Muslim terrorists in London, inspired by Saudi Sharia scholarship, with hearts containing nothing but hatred for the non-Muslims dining out at trendy nightspots, gave them the knife.

But Islamic terrorism has no religion. Even when it’s stabbing you while shouting, “This is for Islam.”

Courage means running for cover when an attack happens and then denying the obvious. It means believing that what the terrorists really want is to prevent us from enjoying our dinner rather than forcing us to submit to Islamic law.

“We ran into the restaurant and tried to find a safe place but there wasn’t one,” an eyewitness to the attack said.

Run, Hide and Tell. We’ve been running away for generations. The Jewish and Christian populations of the Middle East have mostly fled to America, Europe and Israel. Now there are no more places to hide.

We’re swiftly running out of safe places. There are thousands of soldiers in the streets of London and Paris. German cities on New Year’s Eve are no-go zones. There are thousands of potential terrorists under investigation in every state in the United States. Thousands more in the UK and Europe.

We can stand up to Islamic terror migration. Or hide under the tables and hope they don’t notice us.

The Islamic terrorists are no longer just in Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan. They’re here. They’re outside the room. They’re coming in with knives, guns and bombs. We’re running out of places to hide. And there’s nothing left to deny when the killers shout that they are murdering us for Islam and Allah.

Opposition to Islamic migration reform is support for Islamic terror. We can build walls and border controls. Or we can build barricades of tables in bloodied eateries and throw chairs at the attackers.

We can defend our countries at the border or desperately try to survive a night on the town.

We can acknowledge that the problem is Islam. Or we can courageously eat out while trying not to wonder if that grimacing man with his hand under his coat muttering about Allah is here to kill us now.

Originally Published in FrontPageMag.

November 6, 2016November 6, 2016

What Will Replace ISIS?

Originally published on Sultan Knish.

Before long the same administration that declared the fighting in Iraq over several times will claim victory over ISIS. The timetable for its push against the Islamic State appears to have less do with the victimized Christians and Yazidis who have been prevented from coming here as refugees in favor of Syrian Muslims than with the Clinton presidential campaign. Like Obama’s declarations that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were over, the announcement that ISIS has been defeated will be premature.

It is based on a profound misunderstanding and misreading of Islamic terrorism.

Long before its current string of defeats, ISIS had begun evolving into another Al Qaeda; a multinational alliance of Jihadists scattered around the world. Bombing Mosul isn’t hard, but try bombing Marseille, Brussels or London. There is no doubt that the ability of ISIS to temporarily establish a caliphate allowed it to build a network that could carry out terror attacks from New York to Miami to Nice to Munich. But it would be dangerous to assume that losing Iraq and Syria will stop ISIS.

ISIS doesn’t matter. The idea of ISIS does. And the idea of ISIS is Islamic supremacism.

The organization we think of ISIS has transformed and rebranded countless times. Even now our leaders vacillate between calling it ISIS, ISIL or, more childishly, Daesh, while it dubs itself the Islamic State. We have been fighting it in one form or another for over a decade. It would be unrealistically optimistic to assume that the war will end just as this old enemy has shown its ability to strike deep in our own cities.

The bigger error though is to think that we are fighting an organization. We are fighting an idea. That is not to contend, as Obama does, that we can debate it to death. It is not the sort of idea that argues with words, but with bullets, bombs and swords. But neither does it just go away if you seize a city.

Al Qaeda in Iraq not only survived the death of Zarqawi, but it became even more dangerous under Baghdadi. It would be risky to assume that ISIS will die with him. Instead it may very well grow into a new phase of Al Qaeda, one that ties together some of the world’s deadliest Islamic terror groups into a network that is decentralized enough that it will not suffer from Al Qaeda’s leadership fatigue.

The rise of Islamic terrorism has been an incremental process in which new groups learn from the mistakes of the old and supersede them. If ISIS does recede into a localized oblivion, reemerging only on occasion to suicide bomb something or someone in Baghdad, then a deadlier and even more effective group is likely to take its place. Each group will move one step closer to realizing the caliphate.

To break the cycle, we must confront the idea of the caliphate at the heart of Islamic terrorism.

ISIS is not un-Islamic. It is ruthlessly and uncompromisingly Islamic in that, unlike its predecessors in the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda, it makes the fewest compromises to civilizational sensibilities. Its goals are the same as those of every Islamic political organization, including those dubbed moderate. It seeks to restore and enforce an Islamic system in every part of the Muslim world before moving on to conquer and subjugate the non-Muslim world. If this were merely some fringe belief held by a tiny minority of extremists, then it could be bombed to pieces in some Syrian or Iraqi backwater.

But it’s the driving force of Islam. That’s why it won’t go away. No amount of appeasement will banish it.

Taking in more Muslim settlers, pressuring Israel and letting the Muslim Brotherhood colonize our foreign policy won’t do it. We’ve tried it and it actually makes Islamic terrorism much worse.

When the announcement is made, the usual suspects will pat themselves on the back for having defeated ISIS by mobilizing a Muslim coalition. But it wasn’t Obama who mobilized a Muslim coalition. The coalition, such as it was, mobilized them. Obama provided useful support to Islamic state sponsors of terror, such as Iran and Turkey, assorted Islamic Jihadists on the ground, some blatantly associated with Sunni and Shiite terror groups in their internal Jihadist conflict with ISIS over who will fight us.

The “allies” we are aiding today will be the ones bombing us tomorrow.

And that is why claiming credit for beating ISIS accomplishes nothing. ISIS is an expression of an Islamic impulse encoded in the Koran. Islamic groups differ in the tactical expression of that impulse. ISIS was nastier and uglier than most of the Islamic terror groups we had dealt with before this. Though even it found its Boko Haram affiliate in Nigeria occasionally a little too much to stomach.

If ISIS vanishes from the world stage, Islamic terrorism will be easier to dismiss. Or so the thinking goes. The Islamic State was better at viral videos than the media that tried to whitewash Islamic terror. It was hard to ignore. But a scattering of Islamic terror groups around the world will be forgotten by the public.

History suggests that’s wishful thinking.

Islamic terrorism has shown no signs of receding. Growing Muslim populations, both at home and in Muslim settlements in the West, and the increase in travel and communications, the infrastructure of globalism, spread it from the most backward to the most advanced parts of the world. Wealthy and unstable Muslim countries, rich in oil but poor in power, finance its spread through mosques and guns.

These are the ingredients that give us ISIS or any other combination or letters that stands for Islamic terror. To do anything meaningful about it, we would have to reverse the decline of the West.

Islam originally spread into a vacuum created by civilizational decline. Civilizational decline is why it is rising once again. An obscure local terror group eventually turned into ISIS by filling a power vacuum. Even as Obama performs another touchdown dance, some other group will be making that same journey. Its mission will be the familiar one of replacing our civilization with its own.

Until we come to terms with this civilizational struggle, we will go on fighting endless wars in the sand and coping with endless terror attacks in our own cities because we have failed to recognize the nature of the enemy. We are not fighting an acronym, whether it’s ISIS or ISIL; we are fighting an Islamic State.

This is a war to determine whether the future will belong to the West or to Islam.

[huge_it_share]

July 24, 2016

Brexit, Sadiq Khan, and Lessons from the Igbo on Radical Islam

Dogs at play

The Igbo believe that there is a standard rule of play which dogs observe when two of them are at play: When one dog falls on its back the other dog knows without any other prompting that the next time is his turn to fall too. In this way, the play does not turn into a fight and will last longer. The lesson here is that when I fall for you and you in turn fall for me, the world goes around and becomes a more peaceful place where we all work, play and prosper in the spirit of give and take.

A Muslim becomes the Mayor of London

On May 9, 2016 the new Mayor of London Sadiq Khan was heralded into office with a fanfare and much jubilation. By any stretch of the imagination the election of Khan, a Muslim whose parents were recent Pakistani immigrants to Britain was historic. For the next 4 years Khan will preside over the affairs of one of the greatest cities of Christendom and Western civilization – London England. London, a Christian English city is only 60 miles from the famous cathedral in Canterbury where the revered Archbishop of Canterbury who is the global head of the Church of England lives. So, as well as being an important Western civilization’s cultural center, to many members of the Anglican Communion, Wesleyan Methodists and many other Christians, London can also serve as a holy city comparable with any other religions’ “holy” cities anywhere else.

For some people, especially the liberal politicians, the result of the London mayoral election was just the way it’s supposed to be. Such liberal thinkers argue that this is 2016 after all, and the world has come a long way in its journey towards tolerance and the integration of world’s diverse cultures and peoples. That notwithstanding, and given the prevailing realities of Islamic terrorism and violent jihad being unleashed by radical Muslims throughout the world, there are a large number of conservatives, including some moderates, who were shocked at Khan’s election as the new Mayor of London. Nevertheless, many have compared his election in London in some ways, to the 2008 election of Barack Obama into the White House as the President of the United States of America.

But, as some people have observed; in Obama’s case, he had to make an extra effort to assert and defend his Christian faith. While in Khan’s case, the people of London went a step further than the Americans; Sadiq Khan did not have to disguise his Islamic faith in his bid to become the Mayor of one of the most important Christian and Western cities in the world. In this regard therefore, Khan’s election became both a personal as well as a collective victory. The collective which won alongside Khan are all those who have campaigned to see a world where the populations of societies everywhere are more plural and diversified than closeted and mono-cultural. In this regard, the Western culture and education as represented by the city of London leads the way and has become the epitome of tolerance and liberty of the 21^st century. London is now a city on the hill to which any other elsewhere that is eager to exhibit tolerance and integration will aspire to copy

The dangers of Muslims resisting assimilation

However, and unfortunately so, judging from current events and experiences in Europe and other Western societies, it shows that it is not enough to create multi-cultural societies through open liberal immigration policies. What is even more important is that recent immigrants should be encouraged to integrate with the native populations to which they emigrate. It is of primary importance that new immigrants should accept the ways and practices of their host communities. Sadly and very troubling too, most Muslim immigrants to Western societies have continued to resist assimilation into their host Western societies. This resistance therefore has continued to breed unnecessary social tensions and cultural clashes. Apparently and very absurd also, the Muslim immigrants are fighting to destroy the very cultural foundations and social practices that sustained the host societies and made them attractive to the newcomers to want to emigrate to them.

Since the last few decades collective human civilization and progress have come under severe attack and threatened with real danger by unholy heat from radical Islam. And very disturbingly, this heat is fueled by these Muslims’ deep-rooted hatred and intolerance of other people’s views and cultures. Going by the Biafran experience, the danger of such antisocial behaviors as being displayed by these radical Muslims can be terrible and far reaching. When these excesses go unchecked for too long, they end up producing very serious crimes like complete social breakdown, genocide and other forms of crimes against humanity and civilization.

Radical Islam was responsible for the Biafran Genocide

As some readers may recall, it was the same intolerance and hate that led the Muslim dominated government of Nigeria, between 1966 and 1970, to commit the genocide of the Igbo in which more than 3.1 million Igbo perished. This heinous crime of genocide against the Igbo has so far gone largely unnoticed and unpunished, and as a result fifty years after, the world is witnessing an increased widespread impunity where the same group of people is committing the same atrocities against other populations. This world belongs equally to all the people here and no single group should lay claim to an exclusive right to control it and dictate for all others how they should live their lives.

The people of the world should come together to save the world

In 2016, fifty years after Biafra or Igbo Genocide, Muslim extremists have continued to pose real danger to not only Igbo people in Nigeria, Western civilization and its peoples, but also to all humanity, its civilizations, peoples and every progress that the collective humanity has ever made. And rather than continue to live in denial, human beings everywhere should now assume the responsibility by coming together to stop this bent by radical Muslims to destroy the world civilization as we know it. The international community must come together to fight this Islamic monster to a halt. The international community, led by the United Nations must declare a global state of emergency against intolerance, hate, violent Islam, sharia and jihad. Honest, sincere and practical steps must be taken collectively by the international community now to stop this madness or everything the world had ever held dear and all progress made by human beings will be doomed. The continued survival of the human race and their civilization is the collective responsibility of all people everywhere and the people must come together to save themselves.

Extending London-example to Islamic societies

Apart from the immigrants accepting, and in some cases willingly adopting the ways and cultures of their host communities, to accelerate the rate of integration of world’s cultures and populations, other cities and societies around the world need to follow in the path which the city of London has gone. In this regard it is necessary to particularly call out the traditional Muslim cities and societies. Tolerating and integrating with other cultures and peoples cannot be a unidirectional river that flows only from the West and other free societies toward the Muslims. Going back to the dogs’ rule of play with which we started this discussion; all Islamic countries and other societies which hitherto had been bent on remaining exclusive and intolerant of other cultures and worldviews must look up to London’s example and update their societies to the 21^st century London-standards.

In this same spirit of tolerance, it will be proper to see in no distant time, probably within the next decade, a Christian or Jewish man or woman become the mayor, emir or its equivalent of Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia. Within the next ten years there should be a Christian or Jewish man or woman born by recent Christian or Jewish immigrant parents elected to become the mayor or emir of Tehran. Also, as the West has shown through the election of a Muslim into the mayoral office in London, such Islamic terrorist groups like al Qaeda, Islamic State, Boko Haram among others which are bent on destroying everybody, all cultures and views that are different from theirs must reconsider their unholy barbarous campaigns and start working toward tolerating and accepting other people and cultures. They must accept and practically demonstrate that 21^st century world and civilization have moved far away from the 7^th century intolerant Arab barbarism on which Islamic sharia and jihad are based.