Espanol / English

Middle East Near You

A pro-Daesh film from an anti-Islam ideologue

Image of Daesh militants [Hisapntv/Twitter]
Image of Daesh militants [Hisapntv/Twitter]

Last night’s Channel 4 polemic, “The Origins of Violence”, had the potential to be a fascinating dive into a deeply important topic; how Islamic is the Islamic State (Daesh)?

That had been the title of an essay by the well-regarded Muslim commentator Mehdi Hasan in the New Statesman in March 2015.

Hasan pointed out that those who spent time living with Daesh hadn’t found them very religious at all, indeed copies of the Qur’an were curiously absent and political discussion dominated.

Hasan’s conclusion was that to understand Daesh as particularly Islamic was “dangerous and self-defeating, as it provides [its leader] Baghdadi and his minions with the propaganda prize and recruiting tool that they most crave.”

Read: Are we asking the wrong questions about Daesh?

This should not have been a particularly objectionable take – anyone with a Wikipedia-level knowledge of Islam agreed that setting people on fire or drowning them in cages hasn’t much to do with a religion which is avowedly peaceful. Indeed, anyone who wanted to make the opposite case more had to explain why so few Muslims were violent – if Islam itself was the problem.

Tom Holland, a historian of the Greek and Roman era, objected to Hasan.

He was generously allowed a response in the following edition, called “We must not deny the religious roots of Islamic State”. He has since written a film version of his argument, which aired in the UK last night.

To research his own take, he travelled to the ruins of Sinjar, and a Christian monastery in northern Iraq, visited a hardline Salafist in Jordan, and interviewed a survivor of life inside Daesh. He went to Paris and visited the site of the Bataclan attacks.

His conclusion – Daesh can only be truly understood if you admit that its reading of the Qur’an is somewhat valid.

Read: The end of Iraqi and Syrian woes and the disappearance of Daesh

If Samuel Huntington’s thesis on “The Clash of Civilisations” had a 21st century disciple – it was clearly Holland.

He flits within minutes from mediaeval struggles over Constantinople to the rise of Ataturk to the personal beliefs of Osama Bin Laden.

Might his next documentary be about how Brexit was really caused by the Norman invasion of England in 1066, or the rise of Donald Trump can only really be understood by understanding New York planning laws?

Holland’s response, which mixes a simplistic populism with wild irrelevancies, speaks to the fundamental inability of so many Western intellectuals to view the world in nothing less than stark apocalyptic terms, in clashes of civilisations and religions, in centuries-long sweeps of superficial but ultimately unsatisfying analyses.

This brand of political analysis – often made by the more well-heeled of the Western intelligentsia, ritually ignores the material impact and immense frustrations that inequality, under-employment, public corruption and lack of security can have on life in Muslim countries.

It isn’t all about Islam – sometimes, it’s about issues so mundane as housing, petrol prices, schooling or universities. In fact, it’s far more often about that. One can focus on their extreme ideology, which is interesting in a parlour room sense – or you can focus on stopping the bombs going off, and the genocides Holland rightly seems concerned about – by addressing legitimate grievances first and draining the extremists of their recruitment pools.

Read: When Daesh is defeated, who will fill the intellectual vacuum in the Arab World?

A white Christian man denigrating well over a billion Muslims is not going to do that. Holland should know – the last time he made a film about his views on Islam, called “Islam: The Untold Story”, it drew a staggering 1,200 very justified complaints.

Image of Historian Tom Holland [OPEN magazine India/Facebook]

Image of Historian Tom Holland [OPEN magazine India/Facebook]

Holland, no doubt with the best of intentions, is helping Daesh get what they want. His grandiose take – which positioned the Christian West versus the Muslim Orient, ended with supremely chilling films of the 2005 Paris riots.

The footage itself was old hat; it was Holland’s take on it that was troubling – these rioters were “Muslim”, his voice-over alleged, not French, or Algerian, or North African, or Arab, or perhaps just poor, unemployed and fed-up. All Holland wanted his viewers to know was that they were “Muslim”.

Holland then rightly points out that Daesh was calling the Muslims of these banlieues the “grey zone”. The Daesh propagandists wanted a black and white, West versus East, Christian versus Muslim world. Sound familiar? Holland could have written their manifesto himself.

His implication was also clear – the Christian French should watch out for your Muslim neighbours, any of them could be an Islamic State operative, and of course this being a British documentary – perhaps we should watch out too.

Fostering of mistrust between communities is exactly what Daesh want, and that is exactly what Holland’s documentary did. He described violent verses in the Qur’an as “improvised explosive devices”, laid out in the Prophet’s era as time bombs for today. This is incendiary talk, no pun intended, of the most serious nature. It betrays a deep ignorance of Islamic scripture. He even played on the far right trope of the Prophet Muhammad [peace be upon him] being a paedophile. What then, is to distinguish him from the far right activists he would surely ordinarily distance himself from?

Channel 4 is more often on the right side of history when it comes to the Middle East. Jon Snow’s glorious diatribe against the barbarous excess of the Israeli state during the 2014 conflict was admirable.

They should be ashamed however they ever let an anti-Islam ideologue make a documentary that so clearly does the work of Daesh for them.

Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi could not wish for a better pro-Daesh propagandist, though that surely was not Holland’s intention. Or was it?

Categories
ArticleAsia & AmericasEurope & RussiaFranceIraqIsraelMiddle EastOpinionPalestineSyriaUKUS
  • Syed Bushra

    I just watched it and I’m complete repulsed by Holland’s views that are essentially no different than Daesh. If this is what passes off as Western intellectualism then no wonder the West feels it is in decline. Bad does not even begin to describe this.

    • Troy Bison

      >Holland’s views that are essentially no different than Daesh
      How ridiculous can you get? He’s explaining their views & condemning their actions. You may disagree, but to most people, the pretence that jihadist terrorists aren’t motivated by their ultra-literal interpretation of the Qur’an & Hadiths is unsustainable.
      That you ignore the disgusting Yazidi genocide that the documentary was highlighting & instead choose to be outraged by the obvious link of ISIS to Salafist islam shows just how skewed your own values are.

      • Syed Bushra

        ISIS: The Origin of Violence

        Bush and Blair waged this “crusade” against Iraq based on complete lies and fabrications. The result is a human catastrophe that has resulted in the deaths of millions of Muslim and Iraqi minorities which includes the Yazidis. The fact that Western intellectuals, like Tom Holland, choose to ignore their own role, instead opting to blame Islam as a bogeyman, is not a sustainable argument. Its clearly a deflection. The fact that you embrace this deflection shows “how skewed your own values are”.

        • Troy Bison

          The Iraq war didn’t cause the Salafi-Jihadist extremist islam that ISIS and al Qaeda (also al Shabaab in Somalia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, Jemaah Islamiyah in Indonesia etc etc) follow. Obviously the 9/11 attacks pre-date the Iraq war. Yes, Zarqawi exploited the instability in post-war Iraq with AQI which became ISIS. The Syrian civil war (do you try to blame the West for that too?) & the inadequacy of Iraq’s new army allowed ISIS to capture territory & declare a Caliphate. It’s wrong to blame the West for Islamic State’s sickening violence though, look at the Kurds who’ve suffered more, particularly under Saddam & they aren’t committing genocide (and they’re mostly Muslim).
          It’s you who’s deflecting by not facing up to what is transparently obvious: that ISIS, alQaeda etc are motivated by their literal Salafi-Jihadist interpretation of islam as laid out in Holland’s documentary. Clearly some Muslims like you find this painful to admit & seek to blame the West for everything because it’s easier for you than to admit islam has a problem with certain sects. That just allows the extremists to continue – eg the West was very slow to take action against extremist islamic preachers such as Anjem Choudhary – linked to a lot of jihadist recruits. The unwillingness to face up to this threat is in no small part due to the attitudes of denial epitomised by Alistair Sloan.

          • Helen4Yemen

            It was already set in motion way before the holocaust, it was only a matter of time … with or without the holocaust, Europe was not going to miss out on the golden opportunity that Zionism provided to remove its Jews and let someone else be burdened with them,

            _______________________________–

            Russia was very excited at the prospect of cleansing Russia of its Jewry. Here is from Herzl Diary entry of AuG 10, 1903

            Yacheslav, Plehve

            1888-1902 assistant minister of the interior of the Russian Government

            1902-1904 Minister of the interior

            Here is Thodor Herzl diary entry for his his meeting with Plehve

            10-Aug-03

            Day before yesterday, in the morning, with Plehve only a brief wait, a man of sixty, rather stout, steps quickly forward, greets me, bids me be seated and begins to talk. He has a shallow, grave countenance, grey hair, white mustache, and remarkably youthful, energetic brown eyes. He spoke in French, not brilliant but not bad, he begun by clearing the ground

            “I have accorded you this interview, at your request in order to come to an understanding with you in respect to the Zionist movement, of which you are the leader. The relations which shall prevail between the Imperial government and Zionism-and which could become -I will not say friendly but in the nature of an agreement -will depend upon you’

            I interjected: if it depends on me, Your Excellency, they will be excellent.”””

            He nodded and continued: “the Jewish question is not vital to us, but still it is fairly important. And we are trying to settle it in the most amicable way possible. I have grated you this discussion of it before your Congress meets at Basel, as you requested.”

            That was it, I believe, the first critical move in this ‘immortal game’ of chess. For I understood all along that he attached much importance to the forthcoming Zionist congress, obviously because he saw that the Kishinev business was bound to come up there for a frank airing. When that happens I could be in the position of doing him a service by cutting the thing short.

            Plehve: “What sort of help then do you ask of us?”

            I developed the three points, which I have written down in the abstract of our conversation:
            1.Russian intervention with the Sultan, in order to secure a charter for colonization of Palestine.
            2.Russian financial aid for emigration, with money raised from Jewish funds and taxes
            3.Government facilitation of Russian Zionist organizational work

            He agreed to all the three points without hesitation.

            In regard to financing the emigration, he explained,

            I concede that the government should carry it out, but we can take the funds only from Jewish pockets. The rich must pay the poor.

            It is an excellent idea, I said.

            In the end, we agreed that I should draw up a summary and also outline what I intended to say at the Zionist Congress.

            When I felt that we had nothing more to say to each other and he had ordered me to prepare the summary, I rose and asked him to grant me another audience after he had examined the document. He promised to do so. I turned to go, he pressed my hand, saying, “I am very happy to have met you in person”.

            And I too, your Excellency, I am happy to have seen the M. de Plehve about whom Europe talks so much about.

            He smiled and said: “and speaks so much evil.”

            The next day he said to dear old Mme orvin-Piarovska the he wished he could have at his departments a type of executive such as myself

            Theodor Herzl continues:

            I forgot:

            In the course of our talk when I explained to him the need for Russian intervention with the sultan, because Palestine was the only place that attracted us, I added some remarks on the difficulties of being admitted into other countries, even England and America. If emigration were to be subventioned with gov’t funds-as bruited about in St. Petersburg these days, and indeed published in the “Novoye Vremya” – it would be tanamount to putting an export premium on Jews; and the reluctance to receive them, which I knew of first hand in England, would be strengthened. A people would certainly be considered ‘undesirable’ for whose departure their own government is willing to pay a bonus.

            Plehve thought, to be sure, that England was out of the question when it came to a sizable emigration. America, though, was something else. It still had large territories available for settlement; and if the banker Seligman would approach his friend Roosevelt in the matter, something might be done. I said I didn’t regard this as possible; I couldn’t say anything positive about it, for I had never sounded out the American gov’t on the subject. Palestine, moreover, seemed to offer the one genuine opportunity.

          • Syed Bushra

            More deflections.

            First it was about ISIS which has its origins in Camp Bucca, a detention facility maintained by the United States military during the occupation of Iraq. Get it?? Occupation of Iraq?! based on lies and fabrications by United States. Tagging on whatever random name comes to your mind is the definition of deflection which is exactly what Tom Holland is indulging in. I guess when facts become too uncomfortable for Western intellectuals, they resort to deflections.

            Oh and going by Tom Holland’s narrative, we should be talking about Vietnam war which resulted in the deaths of over 4 million people and where United States used more chemical weapons than Hitler in World War 2.

          • Troy Bison

            Your argument that because some jihadis, including Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, were detained at Camp Bucca so the USA caused ISIS is ridiculous. Blaming the Iraq war is like blaming Britain & France for the rise of Hitler after WWI. The Salafi-Jihadist phenomenon goes way beyond ISIS (though they’re obviously the most extreme in their bloodthirsty violence) as I explained. You can’t blame Salafi-Jihadism in Indonesia or Somalia or Nigeria or the Philippines on the Iraq war. The tired excuses that blame the West for all the problems of the Muslim world is long past.
            I suggest you read Shiraz Maher’s book (he featured briefly in the documentary confirming that ISIS supporters genuinely believe islam will conquer the world) on the islamic basis of Salafi-Jihadist ideology. He’s a Muslim who experienced it 1st hand as he was a jihadist sympathiser in the UK up to the 7/7 tube bombings. Unlike you, he knows what he’s talking about.

          • Helen4Yemen

            You seem to lack simple ordinary common sense.

            a) Without Iraq reduced to ruins, there would never have been ISIS.

            b) Without the West inserting the Jews it did not want on Arab, there would not have been the Iraq war
            or 911,

            c) Muslims and Christians have lived in perfect harmony and brotherhood around the globe. Take Ethiopia as an example where the two groups lived for 1,400 years with no incidence of conflict. How do you think the 200,000,000 Muslims in India live just as ordinary citizens. Your knowledge of Islam is so shallow that I suggest you are better off commenting on something else that you have some knowledge about.

          • Troy Bison

            a. Establishing an Islamic Caliphate is the goal of all jihadist islamist movements. eg al Qaeda want to reclaim Spain because it was conquered by the Umayyad Caliphate in C8th. Without the Iraq war, it’s highly likely that the ISIS jihadists would have done the same in Syria with the opportunity from the chaos of war there. Even when ISIS is defeated, al Qaeda in Syria (JFS) have the goal of creating their version of a Caliphate.
            The ideas of Salfi-Jihadism & their religious basis have to be faced up to & challenged by moderate Muslims, not denied, otherwise we’ll be facing the same threat for decades into the future. That’s why the documentary is important

            b. Neither the Iraq war nor al Qaeda have much relation to Israel’s existence. Read Islamic States published reasons for “Why we hate you & why we fight you” – it starts like this:
            “We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers; you reject the oneness of Allah –
            whether you realize it or not – by making partners for Him in worship, you blaspheme against Him,
            claiming that He has a son, you fabricate lies against His prophets and messengers, and you indulge in all
            manner of devilish practices. It is for this reason that we were commanded to openly declare our hatred for
            you and our enmity towards you.”
            They don’t consider Israel a big motivation. It’s all about *religion* for them.

            c. In Ethiopia, extreme forms of islam haven’t taken hold. Neither I nor the documentary claim that moderate forms of islam are not possible – the documentary stressed that most Muslims are appalled by ISIS.
            Having said that there are many Muslim countries (as I’ve already outlined) today with a rising & very worrying rise of these extreme jihadist ideologies. What is the common thread? It’s not anger at the Iraq war that motivates Boko Haram or al Shabaab, it’s Salafi-Jihadist islamic ideology.
            As for “shallow knowledge” – India is hardly a good example of Muslims living peacefully alongside Hindus! And look at Pakistan with its religious intolerance, blasphemy laws, Taleban on the Afghan border etc etc. You’re naive at best.

          • Syed Bushra

            Your argument that because some jihadis, including Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, were detained at Camp Bucca so the USA caused ISIS is ridiculous.

            Truth hurts, I guess.

            Blaming the Iraq war is like blaming Britain & France for the rise of Hitler after WWI.

            Hitler wasn’t a product of Camp Bucca while France, or Iraq, was under the occupation of United States. False equivalence.

            I suggest you read Shiraz Maher’s book

            Conformation bias.

            Shiraz is not the ONLY anti-terrorism expert and his opinion are his own. I suggest you read Ali Soufan, among others, who has been saying, for more than a decade, that al-Qaeda or any of its off shoots have nothing to do with Islam.

          • Troy Bison

            It’s a great shame that instead of discussing the spread of an extreme religiously-motivated ideology that is leading to the genocide of a peaceful people (whose only crime is to have a religion considered “polytheistic”), leading to young men shooting dead croeds at a concert, or driving lorries into Christmas shoppers, or cutting the throat of an elderly priest in his own church, we instead get side-tracked by the hurt religious sensibilities of some Muslims who are too blinded by their sense of religious superiority to face up to the ugly side of what is happening within their religion.

          • Syed Bushra

            too blinded by their sense of religious superiority to face up to the ugly side

            You are clearly projecting yourself since we have never met so your pop-psychology represents your own state of mind, not mine. Though it does explain Tom Holland’s narrative since he is essentially doing the same the thing.

          • Helen4Yemen

            WITHOUT 911 – NO IRAQ WAR! ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE ODED YINON PLAN TO BREAK UP THE ARAB COUNTRIES FOR THE SAKE OF THE EUROPEANS NOW IN PALESTINE?
            _____

            Please do a find on “Shi’ite or Sunni” on this post. I have recreated the ODED-YINON PLAN here by selecting the parts that are relevant to current events such as Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, and giving them headings to make them more interesting to read and grasp. The essence of the document is how to break up the Arab armies and countries so that the Jews now in Palestine will never have to face having to go back home like the French, the British, the Italians or the Crusaders. These colonists want to do all in their power so that they never would have to face a day where they may have to pack up and leave the area just like all the previous European colonial settlers like them had to vacate the area. All the turmoil we now see in the region has its roots due to the presence of these European Ashkenazi colonial settlers in Palestine. I provide the link for the document in its entirety at the bottom of the page, but reading what is posted here is sufficient. The document was written in 1982

            1- The Arab world is too fractured to pose a threat to the Jews in Palestine
            The Arab Moslem world, therefore, is not the major strategic problem which we shall face in the Eighties, despite the fact that it carries the main threat against Israel, due to its growing military might. This world, with its ethnic minorities, its factions and internal crises, which is astonishingly self-destructive, as we can see in Lebanon, in non-Arab Iran and now also in Syria, is unable to deal successfully with its fundamental problems and does not therefore constitute a real threat against the State of Israel in the long run, but only in the short run where its immediate military power has great import. In the long run, this world will be unable to exist within its present framework in the areas around us without having to go through genuine revolutionary changes.

            2- The Arab world is made up of ethnic groups hostile to one another
            The Moslem Arab World is built like a temporary house of cards put together by foreigners (France and Britain in the Nineteen Twenties), without the wishes and desires of the inhabitants having been taken into account. It was arbitrarily divided into 19 states, all made of combinations of minorities and ethnic groups which are hostile to one another, so that every Arab Moslem state nowadays faces ethnic social destruction from within, and in some a civil war is already raging.

            3- Algeria, Morocco,Tunisia are made up of Arabs and non-Arab Berbers
            Apart from Egypt, all the Maghreb states are made up of a mixture of Arabs and non-Arab Berbers. In Algeria there is already a civil war raging in the Kabile mountains between the two nations in the country. Morocco and Algeria are at war with each other over Spanish Sahara, in addition to the internal struggle in each of them. Militant Islam endangers the integrity of Tunisia and Qaddafi organizes wars which are destructive from the Arab point of view, from a country which is sparsely populated and which cannot become a powerful nation. That is why he has been attempting unifications in the past with states that are more genuine, like Egypt and Syria.

            4- Sudan is made up of four groups hostile to one another
            Sudan, the most torn apart state in the Arab Moslem world today is built upon four groups hostile to each other, an Arab Moslem Sunni minority which rules over a majority of non-Arab Africans, Pagans, and Christians.

            5- Egypt: Christian minority may want a state of their own
            In Egypt there is a Sunni Moslem majority facing a large minority of Christians which is dominant in upper Egypt: some 7 million of them, so that even Sadat, in his speech on May 8, expressed the fear that they will want a state of their own, something like a “second” Christian Lebanon in Egypt.

            6- Syria: Shia minority ruling over majority Sunni
            Syria is fundamentally no different from Lebanon except in the strong military regime which rules it. But the real civil war taking place nowadays between the Sunni majority and the Shi’ite Alawi ruling minority (a mere 12% of the population) testifies to the severity of the domestic trouble.

            7- Iraq: Sunni minority ruling over Shia majority – Kurdish minority will make it easy to break it up
            Iraq is, once again, no different in essence from its neighbors, although its majority is Shi’ite and the ruling minority Sunni. Sixty-five percent of the population has no say in politics, in which an elite of 20 percent holds the power. In addition there is a large Kurdish minority in the north, and if it weren’t for the strength of the ruling regime, the army and the oil revenues, Iraq’s future state would be no different than that of Lebanon in the past or of Syria today. The seeds of inner conflict and civil war are apparent today already, especially after the rise of Khomeini to power in Iran, a leader whom the Shi’ites in Iraq view as their natural leader.

            8- Bahrain, UAE, Oman: Sunni minority rules over Shia majority, Kuwait: 75% foreign, Saudi Arabia: 50% foreign
            All the Gulf principalities and Saudi Arabia are built upon a delicate house of sand in which there is only oil. In Kuwait, the Kuwaitis constitute only a quarter of the population. In Bahrain, the Shi’ites are the majority but are deprived of power. In the UAE, Shi’ites are once again the majority but the Sunnis are in power. The same is true of Oman and North Yemen. Even in the Marxist South Yemen there is a sizable Shi’ite minority. In Saudi Arabia half the population is foreign, Egyptian and Yemenite, but a Saudi minority holds power.

            9- Jordan: Palestinian majority ruled by Bedouin minority
            Jordan is in reality Palestinian, ruled by a Trans-Jordanian Bedouin minority, but most of the army and certainly the bureaucracy is now Palestinian. As a matter of fact Amman is as Palestinian as Nablus.

            10- Syrian army is Sunni, commander Shia; Iraqi army is Shia ruled by Sunni
            All of these countries have powerful armies, relatively speaking. But there is a problem there too. The Syrian army today is mostly Sunni with an Alawi officer corps, the Iraqi army Shi’ite with Sunni commanders. This has great significance in the long run, and that is why it will not be possible to retain the loyalty of the army for a long time except where it comes to the only common denominator: The hostility towards Israel, and today even that is insufficient.

            11- Iran is composed of Sunni, Shia Alawis, Sunni Kurds, it faces Ethnic and religious tension,
            Half of Iran’s population is comprised of a Persian speaking group and the other half of an ethnically Turkish group. Turkey’s population comprises a Turkish Sunni Moslem majority, some 50%, and two large minorities, 12 million Shi’ite Alawis and 6 million Sunni Kurds.

            12- Afghanistan: 33% Shia, 67% Sunni
            In Afghanistan there are 5 million Shi’ites who constitute one third of the population.

            13- Pakistan: 15 million Shia (1982 figures)
            In Sunni Pakistan there are 15 million Shi’ites who endanger the existence of that state.

            14- The Muslim world made up of ethnic minorities is like a house of cards
            This national ethnic minority picture extending from Morocco to India and from Somalia to Turkey points to the absence of stability and a rapid degeneration in the entire region. When this picture is added to the economic one, we see how the entire region is built like a house of cards, unable to withstand its severe problems.

            15- Jews should have given Jordan to Palestinians and removed them from Palestine
            We could have saved ourselves all the bitter and dangerous conflict since then if we had given Jordan to the Palestinians who live west of the Jordan river. By doing that we would have neutralized the Palestinian problem which we nowadays face, and to which we have found solutions that are really no solutions at all, such as territorial compromise or autonomy which amount, in fact, to the same thing. Today, we suddenly face immense opportunities for transforming the situation thoroughly and this we must do in the coming decade, otherwise we shall not survive as a state.

            16- Jews should never have lost the Sinai peninsula
            The loss of the Suez Canal oil fields, of the immense potential of the oil, gas and other natural resources in the Sinai peninsula which is geomorphologically identical to the rich oil-producing countries in the region, will result in an energy drain in the near future and will destroy our domestic economy: one quarter of our present GNP as well as one third of the budget is used for the purchase of oil. The search for raw materials in the Negev and on the coast will not, in the near future, serve to alter that state of affairs. (Regaining) the Sinai peninsula with its present and potential resources is therefore a political priority which is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements. The fault for that lies of course with the present Israeli government and the governments which paved the road to the policy of territorial compromise, the Alignment governments since 1967.

            17- Hoping for Egypt to give Israel the excuse to start a war and take back Sinai.
            Israel has two major routes through which to realize this purpose, one direct and the other indirect. The direct option is the less realistic one because of the nature of the regime and government in Israel as well as the wisdom of Sadat who obtained our withdrawal from Sinai, which was, next to the war of 1973, his major achievement since he took power. Israel will not unilaterally break the treaty, neither today, nor in 1982, unless it is very hard pressed economically and politically and Egypt provides Israel with the excuse to take the Sinai back into our hands for the fourth time in our short history. What is left therefore, is the indirect option. The economic situation in Egypt, the nature of the regime and its pan-Arab policy, will bring about a situation after April 1982 in which Israel will be forced to act directly or indirectly in order to regain control over Sinai as a strategic, economic and energy reserve for the long run. Egypt does not constitute a military strategic problem due to its internal conflicts and it could be driven back to the post 1967 war situation in no more than one day.

            18- How to break up Egypt
            Breaking Egypt down territorially into distinct geographical regions is the political aim of Israel in the Nineteen Eighties on its Western front. Egypt is divided and torn apart into many foci of authority. If Egypt falls apart, countries like Libya, Sudan or even the more distant states will not continue to exist in their present form and will join the downfall and dissolution of Egypt. The vision of a Christian Coptic State in Upper Egypt alongside a number of weak states with very localized power and without a centralized government as to date, is the key to a historical development which was only set back by the peace agreement but which seems inevitable in the long run.

            19- Break up Lebanon into five provinces
            Lebanon’s total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precendent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track.

            20- How to break up Syria and Iraq into ethnic and religious components
            The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi’ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan. This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach today.

            21- How to break up Iraq along ethnic/religious lines
            Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. An Iraqi-Iranian war will tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall at home even before it is able to organize a struggle on a wide front against us. Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi’ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization.

            22- How to break up Saudi Arabia
            The entire Arabian peninsula is a natural candidate for dissolution due to internal and external pressures, and the matter is inevitable especially in Saudi Arabia. Regardless of whether its economic might based on oil remains intact or whether it is diminished in the long run, the internal rifts and breakdowns are a clear and natural development in light of the present political structure.

            23- Transfer power in Jordan from the King to Palestinians
            Jordan constitutes an immediate strategic target in the short run but not in the long run, for it does not constitute a real threat in the long run after its dissolution, the termination of the lengthy rule of King Hussein and the transfer of power to the Palestinians in the short run. There is no chance that Jordan will continue to exist in its present structure for a long time, and Israel’s policy, both in war and in peace, ought to be directed at the liquidation of Jordan under the present regime and the transfer of power to the Palestinian majority.

            24- Change the regime in Jordan and expel Palestinians from Palestine to Jordan
            Changing the regime east of the river will also cause the termination of the problem of the territories densely populated with Arabs west of the Jordan. Whether in war or under conditions of peace, emigration from the territories and economic demographic freeze in them, are the guarantees for the coming change on both banks of the river, and we ought to be active in order to accelerate this process in the nearest future.

            25- Jews must remove all Palestinians and send them to Jordan
            The autonomy plan ought also to be rejected, as well as any compromise or division of the territories for, given the plans of the PLO and those of the Israeli Arabs themselves, the Shefa’amr plan of September 1980, it is not possible to go on living in this country in the present situation without separating the two nations, the Arabs to Jordan and the Jews to the areas west of the river.

            26- Palestinians must understand that Jews must rule over all Palestine-and they need to move to Jordan
            Genuine coexistence and peace will reign over the land only when the Arabs understand that without Jewish rule between the Jordan and the sea they will have neither existence nor security. A nation of their own and security will be theirs only in Jordan.

            27- Palestinians consider all of Palestine stolen irrespective of 1948 or 1967 and Jews consider all of Palestine theirs – even beyond Jordan River
            Within Israel the distinction between the areas of ’67 and the territories beyond them, those of ’48, has always been meaningless for Arabs and nowadays no longer has any significance for us. The problem should be seen in its entirety without any divisions as of ’67. It should be clear, under any future political situation or military constellation, that the solution of the problem of the indigenous Arabs will come only when they recognize the existence of Israel in secure borders up to the Jordan river and beyond it, as our existential need in this difficult epoch, the nuclear epoch which we shall soon enter.

            28- The West Bank must be populated with Jews or else Jews will be defeated like crusaders.
            Dispersal of the population is therefore a domestic strategic aim of the highest order; otherwise, we shall cease to exist within any borders. Judea, Samaria and the Galilee are our sole guarantee for national existence, and if we do not become the majority in the mountain areas, we shall not rule in the country and we shall be like the Crusaders, who lost this country which was not theirs anyhow, and in which they were foreigners to begin with. Rebalancing the country demographically, strategically and economically is the highest and most central aim today. Taking hold of the mountain watershed from Beersheba to the Upper Galilee is the national aim generated by the major strategic consideration which is settling the mountainous part of the country that is empty of Jews today.

            29- No force can remove the Jews from Palestine
            Our existence in this country itself is certain, and there is no force that could remove us from here either forcefully or by treachery (Sadat’s method). Despite the difficulties of the mistaken “peace” policy and the problem of the Israeli Arabs and those of the territories, we can effectively deal with these problems in the foreseeable future.

          • Helen4Yemen

            From the PBS interview of Osama Bin Laden – May 1998

            1 These are the reasons behind the singling out of America as a target. And not exempt of responsibility are those Western regimes whose presence in the region offers support to the American troops there. We know at least one reason behind the symbolic participation of the Western forces and that is to support the Jewish and Zionist plans for expansion of what is called the Great Israel. Surely, their presence is not out of concern over their interests in the region. … Their presence has no meaning save one and that is to offer support to the Jews in Palestine who are in need of their Christian brothers to achieve full control over the Arab Peninsula which they intend to make an important part of the so called Greater Israel.
            2 The leaders in America and in other countries as well have fallen victim to Jewish Zionist blackmail. They have mobilized their people against Islam and against Muslims. These are portrayed in such a manner as to drive people to rally against them. The truth is that the whole Muslim world is the victim of international terrorism, engineered by America at the United Nations. We are a nation whose sacred symbols have been looted and whose wealth and resources have been plundered. It is normal for us to react against the forces that invade our land and occupy it
            3 We believe that this administration represents Israel inside America. Take the sensitive ministries such as the Ministry of Exterior and the Ministry of Defense and the CIA, you will find that the Jews have the upper hand in them. They make use of America to further their plans for the world, especially the Islamic world. American presence in the Gulf provides support to the Jews and protects their rear. And while millions of Americans are homeless and destitute and live in abject poverty, their government is busy occupying our land and building new settlements and helping Israel build new settlements in the point of departure for our Prophet’s midnight journey to the seven heavens. America throws her own sons in the land of the two Holy Mosques for the sake of protecting Jewish interests.
            4 The American government is leading the country towards disaster … We say to the Americans as people and to American mothers, if they cherish their lives and if they cherish their sons, they must elect an American patriotic government that caters to their interests not the interests of the Jews. If the present injustice continues with the wave of national consciousness, it will inevitably move the battle to American soil

        • Helen4Yemen

          The Iraq war and ‘Greater Israel

          Here is from Ari Shavit – Haaretz – March 4, 2003

          “In the course of the past year, a new belief has emerged in the town: the belief in war against Iraq. That ardent faith was disseminated by a small group of 25 or 30 neoconservatives, almost all of them JEWISH, almost all of them intellectuals people who are mutual friends and cultivate one another and are convinced that political ideas are a major driving force of history
          a partial list:

          Richard Perle,
          Paul Wolfowitz,
          Douglas Feith,
          William Kristol,
          Eliot Abrams,
          Charles Krauthammer “

          • Troy Bison

            It’s only a matter of time in these discussions before someone tries to shift the blame onto the Jews.

          • Helen4Yemen

            GOOGLE:

            1982 “Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East
            1998 PNAC letters sent to President Bill Clinton
            2003 Enthusiastic IDF Awaits War in Iraq
            2003 IRAQ: War Launched to Protect Israel – Bush Adviser
            2003 Israeli-Palestinian Peace – What’s Iraq got to do with it?
            2003 Whose War? A neoconservative clique seeks to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interest.
            2003 For Israel Lobby Group, War Is Topic A
            2003 The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish
            2003 Israel seeks pipeline for Iraqi oil
            2003 The U.S. War on Iraq: Yet Another Battle To Protect Israeli Interests?
            2003 Israeli intelligence overplayed the threat posed by Iraq
            2004 Clean Break with the Road Mapby WILLIAM JAMES MARTIN
            2004 Ex-Mideast Envoy Zinni Charges Neocons Pushed Iraq War To Benefit Israel
            2004 Senator Hollings Is Right about Israel
            2004 Avi Shlaim: The neocons had an ambitious agenda for the Middle East
            2006 THE ISRAEL LOBBY AND U.S. FOREIGN POLICY John J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt
            2009 From Jerusalem to Baghdad? Israel and the War in Iraq
            2010 What role did Israel play in the run-up to the Iraq war
            2011 AIPAC’s Iran Strategy On Sanctions Mirrors Run-Up To Iraq War Tactics
            2015 Kerry accuses Netanyahu of cheerleading 2003 Iraq war

          • Helen4Yemen

            I could care less if one is a Jew, a Hidu or a Zulu. But those snow white folks who came form Europe are the primary reasons tor the conflicts in the Middle East. By the way, blaming Jews, expelling Jews, murdering Jews is the expertise of the Christian West.

          • Troy Bison

            Nazis weren’t Christian, nor claimed their ideology derived from Christian teachings, but the Christian church in the West faced up to its antisemitic side & managed to change. There seems little sign of the same thing happening within islam at present.

            But you’re clearly attempting to hijack a discussion of criticism of Holland’s documentary onto your pet conspiracy theories – please find a more appropriate forum for them!

          • Helen4Yemen

            Carl Bernstein

            “We went to war against a guy who has absolutely nothing

            to do with 911. It was a total pretext. It is inexplicable. And

            there you go to Cheney, there you go to Bush, there you

            go to the Jewish neocons who wanted to remake the world

            – maybe I can say that because I am Jewish …”

            https://www*youtube*com/watch?v=EAX59-tYWeA

            Replace * with dot

  • James Henry

    “a religion which is avowedly peaceful.”
    With the emphasis on “avowedly”. Like Christianity, the actual message of peace is “Just do what we say and no-one will get hurt.”

    • IceGorilla

      Of course, the atheist are so much more peaceful. Take USSR or other communist regimes, for an example, only 50-70 million died. Atheist truly win the cake in savagery.

      • James Henry

        When did the USSR say it was peaceful?

    • bargogx1

      Currently, that message is coming much more from Islam than Christianity, or any other religion for that matter.

      • Matt Henderson

        Not true. The church still goes by, “Do as we say and no one will be hurt.” The devout Christian regions of the world, parts of Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, it is open season on LGBTQQ. Heck, in Philippines, women can’t even get divorce because of the Catholic Church.

        • bargogx1

          Islam’s ascendance as the current most violent and repressive religion on the planet is quite observably true.

          • Matt Henderson

            I’m sure that tidbit makes it easier for Catholic women to get a divorce in Philippines and makes the Church free of pedophiles.

          • Helen4Yemen

            Guess where ISIS came from? The ruins of Iraq, a well-functioning country reduced to ruins for no reason at all except to make the Europeans now in Palestine not to feel threatened.

            The Iraq war was all about Greater Israel
            Source: Haaretz – March 4, 2003

            “In the course of the past year, a new belief has emerged in the town: the belief in war against Iraq. That ardent faith was disseminated by a small group of 25 or 30 neoconservatives, almost all of them JEWISH, almost all of them intellectuals people who are mutual friends and cultivate one another and are convinced that political ideas are a major driving force of history a partial list:

            Richard Perle,
            Paul Wolfowitz,
            Douglas Feith,
            William Kristol,
            Eliot Abrams,
            Charles Krauthammer”

          • James Henry

            If you believe Iraq under Ba’athist rule was “a well-functioning country” you’re even more gullible than you look.

      • James Henry

        There’s also Modi’s India, where there are regular murders of muslims. At the moment, not many killed in any one incident, but not many killed in a lot of incidents is a lot of people killed.

        • bargogx1

          Regular murders by whom?

          • James Henry

            Supporters of superhuman rights for cattle, among others. I should have mentioned hindus taste for killing other hindus supposedly with the wrong ancestors.

      • Matt Henderson

        Perhaps in your TV or monitor. In the real world, Christians are just as intolerant, violent and hateful.

        • bargogx1

          You would have to be willfully blind not to see that Islam is the current leader in that respect.

  • Bruce Clark

    I would be interested as to what your take is on why Islamic extremism is so prevalent in France … (425 arrests in 2015, 2nd 187 in Spain as well as figures of 35% French Muslims in support of Isis) Also is his interpretation as to the atrocious treatment of the innocent Yazidis incorrect? My take is that the Koran as he said does have “passages which are like un-exploded bombs ready to be triggered” and if one would want to find an authority to vent one’s hatred it is there ready to be used and what better backing than a god. Indeed this could be the same for any authoritative religious text but manifestly prevalent in Muslim’s interpretation of the Koran. The western far right should not impose such a literalist view of Mohammed that could provoke separation and hatred but we cannot put the blame there. Only Muslims can sort this problem out …

    • LevHorovitz

      “35% French Muslims in support of Isis”……What a vicious lie – one designed to do nothing except spread hatred. One of the saddest aspects of the modern “people’s” media is that unpleasant, deeply dishonest, ill-educated, inarticulate bigots can come on to threads like this and post their vicious prejudice “as fact”. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    • Helen4Yemen

      Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones
      http://archive*boston*com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/03/08/dark_passages/?page=full
      2010 Is The Bible More Violent Than The Quran? http://www*npr*org/templates/story/story*php?storyId=124494788
      2016 Old Testament is Most Violent, New Testament Highest in ‘Love’, Quran Highest in ‘Mercy’ http://odintext*com/blog/text-analysis-quran-bible-3of3/
      2016 Violence more common’ in Bible than Quran, text analysis reveals http://www*independent*co*uk/arts-entertainment/books/violence-more-common-in-bible-than-quran-text-analysis-reveals-a6863381*html
      2016 Study found the Old Testament is the most violent at 5.3% of the text referring to violcnece, New Testament 2.8% and the Quran 2.1% https://www*yahoo*com/news/heres-happens-compare-violence-quran-210900952*html

      (replace * with dot)

    • Helen4Yemen

      THOSE WHO LIVE IN GLASS HOUSES SHOULD NOT THROW STONES

      1) If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)
      2) A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)
      3) A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)
      4) “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)
      5) Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)
      6) They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)
      7) Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. “The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him.” (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)
      8) 1) If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)
      9) 2) Suppose a man or woman among you, in one of your towns that the LORD your God is giving you, has done evil in the sight of the LORD your God and has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden. When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2-5 NLT)
      10) However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)
      11) If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.’ If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)
      12) When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
      13) When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
      14) Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)
      15) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)
      16) The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)
      17) Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)
      18) 1) If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)
      19) 2) All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)
      20) One day a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father got into a fight with one of the Israelite men. During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the LORD’s name. So the man was brought to Moses for judgment. His mother’s name was Shelomith. She was the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan. They put the man in custody until the LORD’s will in the matter should become clear. Then the LORD said to Moses, “Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD’s name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD’s name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)
      21) But if this charge is true (that she wasn’t a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father’s house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)

  • You haven’t rebutted a single one of his points. There’s no rebuttal of his claim (entirely backed up by scripture) that Mohammed had a wife who was canonically 6 years old, but he waited til she was 9 or 10 to consummate it? Is that our tedious western liberal reading of paedophilia? I mean, he was only 53.

    Also, it’s hard to see all Daesh’s problems of those of “the poor, the unemployed and the fed up” when their brand of Wahhabist Islam is funded so successfully by the collosally rich House Of Saud.

    Oh, and understanding Brexit through the Norman invasion or Trump through planning laws would both be legitimate, interesting ideas. That’s what historians do.

    • comment

      Thomas Jefferson, American founding father, repeatedly ṙaṗed a 13yr old Black slave girl, Sally Hemings. This ṗedophile fathered 5 children with the poor black slave girl. Guess what you Americans did? You named children’s school across the country after this ṗedophile!

      • bargogx1

        Sorry, but as revered as Thomas Jefferson may be, It doesn’t quite equate to the status Mohammed has among his followers. I mean, you’re allowed to draw a picture of Thomas Jefferson for one thing.

        • Helen4Yemen

          How do you know that it was not a perfectly accepted custom at that time? Are you aware that they used to bury alive when little girls were born and it was a perfectly accepted tradition and the prophet stopped that practice. Does he get credit for it?

          • bargogx1

            I’m sure his followers give him a lot of credit for a lot of things.

          • Helen4Yemen

            Don’t Christians give credit to Jesus for a lot of things?

        • Typical apologist.

          The fact is Thomas Jefferson is a pedophile and a rapist. Yet, Americans see it fit to name children’s schools after this sicko. Not to mention, this pedophile is portrayed positively in American history books. No wonder then the Church has a paedophilia problem.

          • bargogx1

            Not near as positively as Mohammed is by his followers.

      • You Americans? Try again.

    • Only in 1875, England raised age of consent to 13 years. During the same period U.S. age of consent ranged from 10 to 12 years of age depending on State. For reference, The Queen of France, Isabella married Baldwin when she was 10. Margaret of Denmark married King Haakon when was 10 years old. The wife of Philip II of France was 11 when she got married. All of this “paedophilia” was going on in Europe not too long ago.

      • bargogx1

        Is anyone claiming any of them are perfect, as they do Mohammed?

        • Helen4Yemen

          How do you know that it was not that the custom at that time?
          Do you need to go back 1,400 years? You are going to blame the Prophet for what other Europeans also engaged in much more recent times? Is your Islam hatred that severe?

          • bargogx1

            Nobody is claiming those Europeans are the divine messenger of God, oops, I mean Allah. My hatred of any and all totalitarian ideologies is indeed quite severe.

          • Helen4Yemen

            You just showed your ignorance thinking that ‘Allah’ means the the Muslim God? It is like saying , ” oops, I mean Dios”. Arab Christians and Arab Jews do refer to God as “Allah”, it is just an Arabic word meaning ‘God’. Arab Jews and Arab Christians have what are mostly thought to be Muslim names like ‘Muhammad, Hassan, Abdullah’. Rabbi Ovadia Yousef’s real name was ABDULLAH Youssouf. The word ‘Allah’ is in Abdullah, meaning servant of god. Google:

            Rabbi Abdullah Youssef
            Rabbi Hassan
            Rabbi Hussein

          • bargogx1

            My point remains, whatever the name, and whatever whoever calls whoever.

    • Helen4Yemen

      Ken O’Keefe: ISIS = Israeli Intelligence Security Service

      Partial transcript of the video – Ken O’keef speaking

      If you really want to know what is happening with the Middle Eastern policy you must read Oded Yinon’s Strategy for Israel in the 1980’s”. In that document, which is pretty much being played out to a T right now and has been for many years. There were serious objectives for Israel and Israel’s main objectives were to expand and grow in line with the Greater-Israel project and in order for it to do that there would need to be an excuse to justify the expansion of Israel and in order to do that we would have to sow the seeds of sectarian hatred and violence in the region. The number one target of this plan was Iraq. We have achieved that, that is not a failure, that is actually a success. Iraq is a failed state, it is an absolute basket case, sectarian hatred is absolutely insane. It is all part of the plan to break up Iraq into three different states. When we look at Syria, we also find that the goal is once again the same thing: sow the seeds of sectarian hatred and basically turn that nation into a basket case. This is happening according to plan as well.

      ISIS could stand for the Israeli Secret Intelligence Service. Many people are seeing big benefits to the “State of Israel”, the so-called “Jewish State of Israel” by the break up and the balkanization of the surrounding states,

      Why has ISIS or Al-Nusra -Front or Al-Quaeda not once have they eve attacked Israel? In fact, ISIS militants are getting medical attention in the Golan Heights and in Israel itself. What does that tell you?”

      https://www . youtube. com/watch?v=ReOSGFyGWJI

    • Helen4Yemen

      ISIS attacked and murdered thousands of Muslims ]

      and Christians but have not attacked a single Jews

      during all those years – never! Is 2 + 2 still = 4?

    • Matt Henderson

      Oh, and understanding Brexit through the Norman invasion or Trump through planning laws would both be legitimate, interesting ideas. That’s what historians do.

      Interesting? No. Rubbish? Yes!

      This is actually an apt comparison of Tom Holland’s views which is what the article is about.

      Also, it’s hard to see all Daesh’s problems of those of “the poor, the unemployed and the fed up” when their brand of Wahhabist Islam is funded so successfully by the collosally rich House Of Saud.

      And Wahhabism is followed by… not even 0.5% of the Muslim world.

      Source: Estimates of the number of adherents to Wahhabism vary, with one source (Mehrdad Izady) giving a figure of fewer than 5 million Wahhabis.

      • There was a map recently of the French vote in the presidential election, before the run off. One of the candidates won areas that correlated with the English possessions under the Norman kings of the Angevin empire in the 13th century.

        The north south divide in England, which affects so much funding and policy, is still roughly what the Danelaw was from the settlement with the viking invaders in the 9th century.

        Donald Trump got rich and powerful because Fred Trump was a big man in new York real estate. He was given projects because of his Dad was either bankrolling him (legally or illegally) or through his connections.

        So yes, you can TOTALLY make those points the central thesis of your documentary.

        Oh, and the fact that Wahhabism is 0.5% of Islam practiced but has such a massive weight on Islam as a whole is precisely because of the House of Saud. It’s a niche cult that’s global because they fund it with trillions of dollars.

  • Helen4Yemen

    All World and Middle East conflicts and terrorism happened after 1948,
    i.e. after the arrival of European Jews to Arab Palestine.
    There were:
    — no radical Islam
    — no ISIS
    — no Al Qaeda
    — no Taliban
    — no El Shabab
    — no Hezbullah
    — no Hamas
    DECOLONIZE PALESTINE FOR THE SAKE OF WORLD PEACE

  • Helen4Yemen

    From the PBS interview of Osama Bin Laden – May 1998

    1 These are the reasons behind the singling out of America as a target. And not exempt of responsibility are those Western regimes whose presence in the region offers support to the American troops there. We know at least one reason behind the symbolic participation of the Western forces and that is to support the Jewish and Zionist plans for expansion of what is called the Great Israel. Surely, their presence is not out of concern over their interests in the region. … Their presence has no meaning save one and that is to offer support to the Jews in Palestine who are in need of their Christian brothers to achieve full control over the Arab Peninsula which they intend to make an important part of the so called Greater Israel.
    2 The leaders in America and in other countries as well have fallen victim to Jewish Zionist blackmail. They have mobilized their people against Islam and against Muslims. These are portrayed in such a manner as to drive people to rally against them. The truth is that the whole Muslim world is the victim of international terrorism, engineered by America at the United Nations. We are a nation whose sacred symbols have been looted and whose wealth and resources have been plundered. It is normal for us to react against the forces that invade our land and occupy it
    3 We believe that this administration represents Israel inside America. Take the sensitive ministries such as the Ministry of Exterior and the Ministry of Defense and the CIA, you will find that the Jews have the upper hand in them. They make use of America to further their plans for the world, especially the Islamic world. American presence in the Gulf provides support to the Jews and protects their rear. And while millions of Americans are homeless and destitute and live in abject poverty, their government is busy occupying our land and building new settlements and helping Israel build new settlements in the point of departure for our Prophet’s midnight journey to the seven heavens. America throws her own sons in the land of the two Holy Mosques for the sake of protecting Jewish interests.
    4 The American government is leading the country towards disaster … We say to the Americans as people and to American mothers, if they cherish their lives and if they cherish their sons, they must elect an American patriotic government that caters to their interests not the interests of the Jews. If the present injustice continues with the wave of national consciousness, it will inevitably move the battle to American soil

  • Schwartzy

    Nice try. You might want to examine why there are systemic issues of poverty and unemployment and under education in Islamic countries. The poor and unequal treatment of women, honor killings, all such things that can in fact be traced back to religion. To claim Daesh is not connected to Islam is wishful thinking and a con job. It is certainly what has attracted all the emigres. So, while it is true, violence is not committed by a majority of Muslims, there is nevertheless disturbing agreement by majorities in many countries that others’ committing violence in the name of Islam is all quite halal.

  • Bruce Clark

    Troy I put up a response with sources but they have refused to post it ..