The adherents of Islam (meaning – submission) see themselves as submitting to Allah as his slaves. However, in the past Muslims obeyed the Sharia rules which said the rest of us, the infidels, were their slaves. They called us dhimmis. From the first explosion of the Arabs from their dusty fastness in 632 until the early 20th century, the non-believer in Muslim states lived under these strictures. Those who refused would be dealt with as the Sharia requires, with execution.
Our ahistorical and cowardly leaders now like to talk of this religion as one of peace, as a wonderful element of the diversity we should all be busy embracing, and of how it has been important in our history. Well, they get the latter part right. Islam’s incursions into Europe has certainly affected us significantly and our Eastern European brethren in particular understand this best of all, with their bloody experience of hundreds of years of subjugation by the Ottomans – hence Orban’s landslide anti-Muslim immigration victory.
If wisdom is a mixture of intelligence and knowledge – based on a combination of study and personal experience – then there must be something seriously lacking in the European elites. To some extent, the lack of knowledge could have been forgiven two decades ago, but no longer. The eruption on our streets of mass slaughter and gang rapes was entirely predictable and their never-ceasing increase is guaranteed as more of the Sharia’s adherents hit our shores. And don’t forget those poor benighted ISIS guys and gals returning for us to molly-coddle for their traitorous activities, acts for which we used to hang the likes of Haw-Haw – and are rewarded with free housing and funds.
I seem to recall hearing that after 30 months in the Netherlands, the unemployment rate of the recent arrivals is still over 85%. You don’t need to speak double-Dutch to mop floors, but why would you when the dhimmis are paying you for café-blethering in your own tongues with the other males.
The author has studied many tomes on the Sharia and the history of its supporters, the Ummah. In addition, he has spent too many years in a number of their nations. The experience of life in these ‘modern’ Muslim states, with their threat to kill their apostates, the restrictions on women and their suspicion of ‘the juice’, all bode very ill for the import of their divisive ‘culture’ – if you reckon an apostate-killing society deserves such a moniker.
If some random member of the elite stumbles on this article, I would advise them to read any book by Bernard Lewis. Lewis is recognised as an aged but extremely knowledgeable historian on Islam and his views are hardly those of an ‘Islamophobe’ – he was successfully sued in France for being an Armenian genocide denialist. So, his works can be read as well-researched and authoritative histories of the Islamic world, without the whiff of Tommy Robinsonesque malodour.
A very useful start would be his The Jews Of Islam, published in 1984 – long before 9/11. So, what did the eminent academic have to say of the fate of the dhimmi, the Jews and Christians, under Islam?
“It is only very recently that some defenders of Islam have begun to assert that their society in the past accorded equal status to non-Muslims. No such claim is made by spokesmen for resurgent Islam, and historically there is no doubt that they are right.” (Page 4)
Let that sink in – “…there is no doubt…”. In other words, all claims to the contrary are false. This was prior to Bush and his economy with the verite after 9/11. Nothing to do with their oil interests, ignore the flights of the Saudis into the clear blue yonder with nary another flight in the skies for the air controllers to worry about…bit late, but, hey-ho!
Back to the Jews. After Mohammad had crushed their tribe at the oasis of Khaybar “…they were to hand over one-half of the produce to the Muslims. This agreement became a locus classicus for later legal discussions of the status of conquered non-Muslim subjects of the Muslim state.” (Page 10) In Mullafia-speak, protection money.
When it comes to apparently more benign treatment by Muslims of the Christians as compared to the Jews, under the Sharia “…Islamic law makes no such distinction between the two”. (Page 11) Go and tell that to the Jews in Malmo, and the family of the aged Holocaust survivor recently butchered in Paris.
Dhimmis, the infidels, must pay the tribute, the jizya, in “…acts of ritual humiliation…”. (Page 15) Seemed to work OK for the Ottomans for many centuries. “The fiscal differentiation between believer and unbeliever remained in force throughout the Islamic world until the 19th century and was never at any time or place allowed to lapse.” Yes, never; nor at any place. Maybe that’s why Erdogan hankers for the demographic triumph of his acolytes in Germany, as the oh-so highly educated German elite there don’t bother with babies so they can get PhDs, save the planet, or something.
As for the planet “…between the realm of Islam and the realms of unbelief there is a canonically obligatory perpetual state of war, which will continue until the whole world either accepts the message of Islam or submits to the rule of those who bring it. The name of this war is jihad…”. (Page 21)
No mention there of an inner struggle, just a canonically justified war to the finish. And Merkel the Doormat lays out the welcome rug. First, we had the cretinous Kaiser, then we had Hitler with his camp salute, now we have a childless do-gooder with a guilt complex. Bismarck would have dealt with this differently, methinks.
Let us close with Lewis quoting the alleged thoughts on the dhimmi and the jizya of the historically significant Umar I, caliph 634-644, who lifted Islam from being a backwater shadow into a world power.
“The Muslims of our day will eat [from the work of] these people as long as they live, and when we and they die, our sons will eat [from] their sons forever, as long as they remain, for they are slaves to the people of the religion of Islam as long as the religion of Islam shall prevail.” (Page 31)