Al-Qaeda: the history theory

rnw.nl ^ | 17 March 2004 | Hans de Vreij

[Destro]

Vienna, as we saw, was almost taken and only saved by the Christian army under the command of the King of Poland on a date that ought to be among the most famous in history - September 11, 1683. THE GREAT HERESIES by Hilaire Belloc

[Destro]

Sadly, Americans are bone ignorant of history...and the establishment (both parties) wants it that way - eliminating history in schools for something called "social studies".

[prion]

He believes they want to see Islam triumph over and destroy the West, thus proving its ultimate superiority.

Yes, but even this isn't the whole story. There are problems in China, Russia, Africa; places that can hardly be considered the West. Muslims just aren't playing well with others.

[dennisw]

I have the diffusion of technology theory about these Jihadist scum. If they didn't have access to modern explosives, and the technical skills to use it for mass murders, we would not have such a huge problem. Explosives are a perfect mate with the "war via assassination" doctrines of Islam. War via stealth and assassination is preferred by the cowardly Jihadists of Islam

[Destro]

The historic contrasts are laid bare: Comparing the Christian soldier's prayer to that of a Muslim soldier's prayer to God

[quidnunc]

The Battle of Vienna was fought in 1683 not 1693, but other than that I think the article makes valid points.

None other than Bernard Lewis himself has said that Islam has had a chip on its shoulder ever since the Battle of Vienna.

[truth_seeker]

Long term, islam sees itself as the chosen faith. All others should eventually fall.

Hence, yesterday's defeats leave bitter memories, to one day be revenged.

But today's battlegrounds are anywhere they want to push their boundaries, Sudan, Nigeria, Indonesia, India, Philippines, etc.

All of which have nothing to do with Israel.

If the "west" had failed to resist Hitler and Japan, on the basis each represented a valid "religion" we'd have been wrong.

We are wrong today, to not speak more openly about expansionist ACTIONS taken, in the name of islam.

Maybe during the 2nd term, it will be okay to call a spade a spade. Maybe.

[angkor]

A few months ago Memri.org translated an Islamist speech discussing the "retaking" of Rome. A bit of Googling revealed that Sicily was dominated by Islam for several hundred years, and there was at least one shortlived Muslim sacking of Rome in 846AD.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

The Ottoman Empire held out until 1918, not 1917.

[quidnunc]

truth_seeker wrote: Maybe during the 2nd term, it will be okay to call a spade a spade. Maybe.

We have to be careful not to alienate those Muslims who are either our allies or are neutral such as Jordan, the Gulf emirates, Turkey and Indonesia.

Indonesia is the most populous country in the world and it would not be a good thing for it to weigh in on the side of Iran and Syria.

[azcap]

Most American school children if pressed would guess that the Ottoman Empire is a furniture store.

[Destro]

Leading Sunni Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi and Other Sheikhs Herald the Coming Conquest of Rome

"The Hadith says that the city of Constantinople, the city of Heracles, will be conquered first. We conquered Constantinople and the second part of the prophecy remains - the conquest of Romiyya. The conquest of Romiyya means that Islam will return to Europe. In one of my previous programs, I said that I think that this conquest would not be by the sword or armies, but by preaching and ideology. Europe will see that it suffers from materialistic culture, and will seek an alternative, it will seek a way out, it will seek a lifeboat. It will find no lifesaver but the message of Islam the message of the muezzin who gives it religion but does not deny it this world, brings it to Heaven, but does not uproot it from Earth. Allah willing, Islam will return to Europe and the Europeans will convert to Islam. Then they themselves will be able to be the ones to disseminate Islam in the world, more than we ancient Muslims. This is within Allah's capabilities."[4]

Saudi Sheikh: "We Will Control the Land of the Vatican" The Saudi Sheikh Muhammad bin Abd Al-Rahman Al-'Arifi, imam of the mosque of King Fahd Defense Academy,[5] discussed this Hadith in an article posted on the Kalemat website. Under the headline "Don't be sad, Allah is with us," the article read: "… We will control the land of the Vatican; we will control Rome and introduce Islam in it. Yes, the Christians, who carve crosses on the breasts of the Muslims in Kosovo - and before then in Bosnia, and before then in many places in the world - will yet pay us the Jiziya [poll tax paid by non-Muslims under Muslim rule], in humiliation, or they will convert to Islam…"[6]

In a sermon at the Al-Nour Mosque in Khobar, Sheikh Naser Muhammad Al-Naser quoted the sage Al-Albani, who said: "The first conquest was carried out, as is known, by Muhammad the Ottoman conqueror, 800 years after the Prophet told of it, and the second conquest [that of Rome] will be carried out, Allah willing, and it is inevitable…"[7]

In another sermon, Sheikh Al-Naser said: "This Hadith predicts that the two cities will be conquered. The first was already conquered, remained under the control of the Muslims for a time, and then was again stolen [by Ataturk]. There are signs that it will again be conquered and will return to the hands of the Islamic state. Rome also will be conquered…"[8]

[Destro]

The Sulatn fell in 1917.

[wagglebee]

So now we have to make peace for what the FRENCH did almost 13 centuries ago? And when did the Muslims have a stronghold in the Americas? These people may have a grasp of their historical defeats, but their problem is that they want to live not only as Muhammed taught, but how Muhammed lived. We are not to blame for what I believe is a massive inferiority complex among the Muslims; they are confronted with the reality, though they will never admit it, that if God chose them, then why are Christian nations and especially Israel so much more advanced than say Afghanistan under the Taliban?

They can continue to try to reclaim past defeats (none of which ever occurred on American soil or against American forces), but sooner or later the logical among them must realize that a viable religion must be as applicable to the 21st century as it was to the 8th century. Christianity and Judiasm work as well today as they did at the time of Caeser, if Islam doesn't, that is not our fault.

[Destro]

The Sun May Have Set, But It Will, God Willing, Rise Again.

[Laserman]

Basically, the Lslamic religion and culture has been a historical failure. Five hundred years ago they were on a par with Western culture in science, diplomacy, warfare, social development, etc. Then they chose to be led by religous fanatics and despots, instead of democratic (or at least somewhat representative) forms of government and their evolution as a culture and society stopped in its tracks.

Now they blame those successful Western societies for their failures and, rather than advance into the 21st century, they want to drag the rest of the modern world back 500 years. If they did not have billions of oil dollars and 90% of the world's oil reserves, their entire culture and their tin pot dictatorships would be no more than a pimple on a flea's arse of importance to the world.

[Destro]

I remember now, for Muslims 1917 refers to the loss of Jerusalem by the Turks to the Crusaders.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

General Allenby, staff and attaches, entering Jerusalem through the Jaffa Gate, 11 December 1917.

[Destro]

Yes and no. Two things happened that caused the decline of Islam.

The first is that Western Europe found another way to head east via the Horn of Africa thus cutting off the Middle East from the spice-Eastern trade. The money from the silk road trade dried up. The Turks heavy taxation and hostility thus caused the Europeans to find alternatives.

Secondly, while the Arab Muslims left Christian and Jewish and Persian Zoroastrain (and even Hindu and Buddhist) communities to exist so they can pay the dhimmi tax the Central Asian Turks who came from another tadition carried out mass extinction, conversion campaigns on their non Muslim (and even Muslim) populations. At this time Turkish tribes ruled all the Muslim Empires, Ottomans in the Middle East, Africa and Eastern Europe, the Safavid Empire ruled the old Persian Empire and the Mughals ruled India.

The Turks originally kept the Arab system alive and as long as the native populations of Copts, Jews, Greeks, Persians and Hindus had sizable populations the Muslims were able to draw on these educated populations to run their empires for them.

As the decline of native non-Muslim populations continued, the wealth and expertise of the Muslims also declined.

Coupled with the European discovery of the Americas and the cutting off of the Muslims from the Eastern trade the decline set in for Islam. The decline was so extensive that most of the Muslim world was under European colonial rule by the 19th century.

WW1 and WW2 and the Cold War ended Western rule over most Muslims.

[Destro]

PS: The dhimmi system under the Arabs was bad enough - but not as bad as it became under the Turks a few centuries later.