Microcontroller Projects for Hobbyists:
» PICAXE Microcontroller
» Arduino Microcontroller
Deism versus Islam
The Muslim Mainstream and the Caliphate
by Andrew G. Bostom
Also see Islam justifies killing prisoners
Writing in 1916, C. Snouck Hurgronje, the great Dutch Orientalist,
underscored how the jihad doctrine of world conquest, and the
re-creation of a supranational Islamic Caliphate remained a potent
force among the Muslim masses:
...it would be a gross mistake to imagine that the idea of
universal conquest may be considered as obliterated...the canonists
and the vulgar still live in the illusion of the days of Islam's
The legists continue to ground their appreciation of every
actual political condition on the law of the holy war, which war ought
never be allowed to cease entirely until all mankind is reduced to the
authority of Islam -- the heathen by conversion, the adherents of
acknowledged Scripture [i.e., Jews and Christians] by submission.
Hurgronje further noted that although the Muslim rank and file
might acknowledge the improbability of that goal "at present" (circa
1916), they were,
...comforted and encouraged by the recollection of the lengthy
period of humiliation that the Prophet himself had to suffer before
Allah bestowed victory upon his arms...
Thus even at the nadir of Islam's political power, during the World
War I era final disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, Hurgronje
...the common people are willingly taught by the canonists and feed
their hope of better days upon the innumerable legends of the olden
time and the equally innumerable apocalyptic prophecies about the
future. The political blows that fall upon Islam make less
than the senseless stories about the power of the Sultan
of Stambul [Istanbul], that would instantly be revealed if he were not
surrounded by treacherous servants, and the fantastic tidings of the
miracles that Allah works in the Holy Cities of Arabia which are
inaccessible to the unfaithful. The conception of the Khalifate
[Caliphate] still exercises a fascinating influence, regarded in the
light of a central point of union against the unfaithful (i.e.,
non-Muslims). [emphasis added]
Nearly a century later, the preponderance of contemporary
mainstream Muslims from Morocco to Indonesia, apparently share with
their murderous, jihad terror waging co-religionists from al-Qaeda the
goal (if not necessarily supporting the gruesome means) of
re-establishing an Islamic Caliphate.
Polling data just released
(April 24, 2007) in a rigorously conducted face-to-face University of
Maryland/ WorldPublicOpinion.org interview survey of 4384 Muslims
conducted between December 9, 2006 and February 15, 2007-1000
Moroccans, 1000 Egyptians, 1243 Pakistanis, and 1141
Indonesians reveal that 65.2% of those interviewed -- almost 2/3, hardly
a "fringe minority" -- desired this outcome (i.e., "To unify all Islamic
countries into a single Islamic state or Caliphate"), including 49% of
"moderate" Indonesian Muslims.
The internal validity of these data
about the present longing for a Caliphate is strongly suggested by a
concordant result: 65.5% of this Muslim sample approved the
proposition "To require a strict [emphasis added] application of
Shari'a law in every Islamic country."
Notwithstanding a historical drivel from Western Muslim "advocacy"
groups such as the Muslim Association of Britain, which lionizes both
the Caliphate and the concomitant institution of Shari'a as
promulgators of "a peaceful and just society", the findings from the
University of Maryland/ WorldPublicOpinion.org poll are ominous.
The Prototypical Caliphate
Umar Ibn al-Khattab (d. 644), was the second "rightly guided"
caliph of Islam. During his reign, which lasted for a decade
(634-644), Syria, Iraq and Egypt were conquered. Umar was responsible
for organizing the early Islamic Caliphate. Alfred von Kremer, the
seminal 19th century German scholar of Islam, described the "central
idea" of Umar's regime, as being the furtherance of "...the
religious-military development of Islam at the expense of the
The predictable and historically verifiable
consequence of this guiding principle was a legacy of harsh
inequality, intolerance, and injustice towards non-Muslims observed by
von Kremer in 1868 (and still evident in Islamic societies to this
It was the basis of its severe directives regarding Christians and
those of other faiths, that they be reduced to the status of pariahs,
forbidden from having anything in common with the ruling nation; it
was even the basis for his decision to purify the Arabian Peninsula of
the unbelievers, when he presented all the inhabitants of the
peninsula who had not yet accepted Islam with the choice: to emigrate
or deny the religion of their ancestors.
The industrious and wealthy
Christians of Najran, who maintained their Christian faith, emigrated
as a result of this decision from the peninsula, to the land of the
Euphrates, and 'Umar also deported the Jews of Khaybar. In this way
'Umar based that fanatical and intolerant approach that was an
essential characteristic of Islam, now extant for over a thousand
years, until this day [i.e., written in 1868].
It was this spirit, a
severe and steely one, that incorporated scorn and contempt for the
non-Muslims, that was characteristic of 'Umar, and instilled by
'Umar into Islam; this spirit continued for many centuries, to be
Islam's driving force and vital principle.
During the jihad campaigns of Umar's Caliphate, in accord with
nascent Islamic Law, neither cities nor monasteries were spared if
they resisted. Thus, when the Greek garrison of Gaza refused to submit
and convert to Islam, all were put to death.
In the year 640, sixty
Greek soldiers who refused to apostatize became martyrs, while in the
same year (i.e., 638) that Caesarea, Tripolis and Tyre fell to the
Muslims, hundreds of thousands of Christians converted to Islam,
predominantly out of fear.
Muslim and non-Muslim sources record that Umar's soldiers were
allowed to break crosses on the heads of Christians during processions
and religious litanies, and were permitted, if not encouraged, to tear
down newly erected churches and to punish Christians for trivial
reasons. Moreover, Umar forbade the employment of Christians in public
The false claims of Islamic toleration during this prototype
"rightly guided" Caliphate cannot be substantiated even by relying on
the (apocryphal?) "pact" of Umar (Ibn al-Khattab) because this
putative decree compelled the Christians (and other non-Muslims) to
fulfill self-destructive obligations, including: the prohibition on
erecting any new churches, monasteries, or hermitages; and not being
allowed to repair any ecclesiastical institutions that fell into ruin,
nor to rebuild those that were situated in the Muslim quarters of a
Muslim traditionalists and early historians (such as al-Baladhuri)
further maintain that Umar expelled the Jews of the Khaybar oasis, and
similarly deported Christians (from Najran) who refused to apostasize
and embrace Islam, fulfilling the death bed admonition of Muhammad who
purportedly stated: "there shall not remain two religions in the land
Umar imposed limitations upon the non-Muslims aimed at their
ultimate destruction by attrition, and he introduced fanatical
elements into Islamic culture that became characteristic of the
Caliphates which succeeded his. For example, according to the
chronicle of the Muslim historian Ibn al-Atham (d. 926-27), under the
brief Caliphate of Ali b. Abi Talib (656-61), when one group of
apostates in Yemen (Sanaa) adopted Judaism after becoming Muslims, "He
[Ali] killed them and burned them with fire after the killing."
Indeed, the complete absence of freedom of conscience in these early
Islamic Caliphates -- while entirely consistent with mid-7th century
mores -- has remained a constant, ignominious legacy throughout
Islamic history, to this day.
Unto the Ages
During the long twilight of the last formal Caliphate under the
Ottoman Turks, Sir Henry Layard, the British archeologist, writer, and
diplomat (including postings in Turkey), described this abhorrent
spectacle which he witnessed in the heart of Istanbul, in the autumn
of 1843, four years after the first failed iteration of the so-called
Tanzimat reforms designed to abrogate the sacralized discrimination of
An Armenian who had embraced Islamism [i.e., common 19th century
usage for Islam] had returned to his former faith. For his apostasy he
was condemned to death according to the Mohammedan law. His execution
took place, accompanied by details of studied insult and indignity
directed against Christianity and Europeans in general. The corpse was
exposed in one of the most public and frequented places in Stamboul
[Istanbul], and the head, which had been severed from the body, was
placed upon it, covered by a European hat.
Salient examples from within the past 25 years confirm the
persistent absence of freedom of conscience in contemporary Islamic
societies, in tragic conformity with a prevailing, unchanged mindset
of the earliest Caliphates: the 1985 state-sponsored execution of
Sudanese religious reformer Mahmoud Muhammad Taha for his alleged
The infamous 1989 "Salman Rushdie Affair", which resulted
in the issuance of a fatwa by Ayatollah Khomeini condemning Rushdie to
death; the July 1994 vigilante murder of secular Egyptian writer Farag
Foda-supported by the prominent Egyptian cleric, Sheikh Muhammad
al-Ghazali, an official of Al Azhar University, who testified on
behalf of the murderer, "A secularist represents a danger to society
and the nation that must be eliminated.
It is the duty of the
government to kill him."; and the recent (March, 2006) tragic
experience of Abdul Rahman, an unassuming Afghan Muslim convert to
Christianity, forced to flee his native country to escape the
murderous wrath of Muslim clerics and the masses they incited in
"liberated", post-Taliban Afghanistan.
An even more alarming and utterly intolerable phenomenon was on
display just this week in the United States when a Johnstown (western
Pennsylvania) area imam Fouad El Bayly openly sanctioned the
punishment by death of former Dutch Parliamentarian Ayaan Hirsi
Ali-born and raised a Muslim in Somalia -- for her open avowal of
Individualism and Freedom of Conscience
Ibn Warraq has observed aptly that the most fundamental conception
of a Caliphate, "...the constant injunction to obey the Caliph -- who is
God's Shadow on Earth", is completely incompatible with the creation
of a "rights-based individualist philosophy."
Warraq illustrates the
supreme hostility to individual rights in the Islamic Caliphate, and
Islam itself, through the writings of the iconic Muslim philosopher,
jurist, and historian, Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406), and a contemporary
Muslim thinker, A.K. Brohi, former Pakistani Minister of Law and
[Ibn Khaldun] All religious laws and practices and everything that the masses are expected to do requires group feeling. Only with the help of group feeling can a claim be successfully pressed,...Group feeling is necessary to the Muslim community. Its existence enables (the community) to fulfill what God expects of it.
[A.K. Brohi] Human duties and rights have been vigorously defined
and their orderly enforcement is the duty of the whole of organized
communities and the task is specifically entrusted to the law
enforcement organs of the state. The individual if necessary has to be
sacrificed in order that that the life of the organism be saved.
Collectivity has a special sanctity attached to it in Islam.
In contrast, Warraq notes, "Liberal democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom and attaches all possible value to each man or woman." And he concludes,
Individualism is not a recognizable feature of Islam; instead the collective will of the Muslim people is constantly emphasized. There is certainly no notion of individual rights, which developed in the West, especially during the eighteenth century.
Almost six decades ago (in 1950), G.H. Bousquet, a pre-eminent modern scholar of Islamic Law, put forth this unapologetic, pellucid formulation of the twofold totalitarian impulse in Islam:
Islam first came before the world as a doubly totalitarian system.
It claimed to impose itself on the whole world and it claimed also, by
the divinely appointed Muhammadan law, by the principles of the fiqh,
to regulate down to the smallest details the whole life of the Islamic
community and of every individual believer....the study of Muhammadan
law (dry and forbidding though it may appear to those who confine
themselves to the indispensable study of the fiqh) is of great
importance to the world today.
The openly expressed desire for the restoration of a Caliphate from
two-thirds of an important Muslim sample of Arab and non-Arab Islamic
nations, representative of Muslims worldwide, should serve as a
chilling wake-up call to those still in denial about the existential
threat posed by the living, uniquely Islamic institution of jihad.
Andrew G. Bostom is the author of The Legacy of Jihad (2005), and the
forthcoming The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism (2007)
-- see http://www.andrewbostom.org/
This article was published April 27, 2007 in the American Thinker
and is archived at (www.americanthinker.com/2007/04/the_muslim_mainstream_and_the.html).
See also: Andrew G. Bostom, "Radical Islam's Goal is Global
Conquest," Front Page Magazine, July 2, 2007,
Excerpts from Will Durant's The Age of Faith Pages 162-186 Pub. 1950
Gateway Pages for this website:
» Archive 1
» Archive 2
» Archive 3
» Archive 4
» Archive 5
» Archive 6
» Challenge to Atheists
Religion and History
[ Deism ] [
Gnosticism ] [
Christianity ] [
Judaism ] [
Web site © Copyright Lewis Loflin, All rights reserved.
If using this material on another site, please provide a link back to my site.