Europe’s Suicide via Islam

Here’s a brilliant essay by Bat Ye’or on the Islamization of Europe, a self-inflicted wound growing out of Europe’s willfull ignorance of imperialist Islamic theology, the abandonment of Christianity, and a craven dhimmitude to petro-rich genocidal-yearning Islamist fascists.

Originally published by the New English Review, I’m posting the entire article because it’s that important.

In January 1981 the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) Summit meeting in Mecca declared that, “Palestine should be viewed as the paramount issue of Muslim nations.” Since then Europe hastened to adopt this path as well and has provided for the Palestinization of the cultural, social and above all political life of Europe.

For three decades, Europe obeyed the OIC in a servile manner. The EU has effectively created a major problem for itself that is eating away and destroying it. The EU made Palestine the hub of its international policy, transforming it into a symbol of peace and universal harmony, in a world that would not know “justice” until its coming. The only obstacle to this paradise is the Machiavellian Israel, the oppressor and usurper of Palestine, whose purity as a peaceful victim is the harbinger of global justice.

Europe does not yet dare use armed force against Israel, whose existence it claims to defend, while advising it to commit suicide. Europe fights Israel with the infamous Nazi weapons by delegitimizing its existence, robbing it of its history, defaming it by propaganda, hatred and attempts to destroy its economy through boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS). Toward this goal it encourages an international campaign of incitement to hatred by financing anti-Israel NGOs and lobbies. Europe claims that Jewish existence in its ancestral homeland, Judea and Samaria, is an “occupation” – a colonization. In this way, Israel has become a state that is occupying its own historical homeland. In Orwellian language propagandists speak of “the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land” that is called Judea, and not of the ethnic and religious cleansing of Jews from their homeland through wars, expulsions, dispossession and the dehumanizing apartheid rule of dhimmitude. Euro-jihadists invoke “Palestinian resistance” rather than the reality of their terrorism that has spread throughout the planet. The EU has used every stratagem to force Israel to self-destruct in the name of Palestine. That destruction would lead to an era of “justice and peace” in the world in the same way the charnel houses of Auschwitz were meant to purify humanity from Jews.

What does Palestinization mean? Firstly, it means creating a people as a substitute for Israel, which takes over its history and therefore its legitimacy. From Palestinization (like the Nazification of Europe two decades before) comes the delegitimization of Israel, an intruder state in the region and in history, even in humanity. The Palestinization of history denies Israel’s identity, culture, historic and human rights within its homeland, including Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem. For the OIC this process is part and parcel of Islamic theology, which regards the Bible as simply a falsified version of the Koran. According to Islam, biblical history is Islamic history, and the biblical characters we see represented in churches are all Muslim prophets who have virtually no connection with the facts reported in the Bible.

This context explains the Islamization of the Jewish and Christian religious heritage, an approach that involves denying the identity of these two religions, since Christianity views itself as emerging from Judaism, whose Scriptures it adopted. If the Bible is an Islamic account, Christianity too, and not just Judaism, are both falsifications of Islam. The negation of biblical history, with which Europe has assiduously linked itself by claiming that Israel is a colonizing intruder in its own homeland thereby challenges the historic rights of the Jews to their own homeland. This also negates Christian history and confirms the Koranic interpretation refuting the historicity of both the Torah and the Gospels.

Hence, if there was never a history of Israel or of the Gospels, but only the history of Ibrahim, Ishmael, Issa (the Koranic Jesus), if all the biblical kings and prophets were Muslim, in what is the West rooted? Would it not be in the Koran? That is the logical conclusion of Europe’s choice, when, furious at the return of the Jews to Jerusalem in 1967, it deliberately decided to deny them their ancient capital. It attributed their heritage to those who, by a war of invasion, had illegitimately occupied it since 1948, expelling and dispossessing all its Jewish inhabitants. In a nutshell, if the Israelis are foreign colonialists, occupiers of their own country, it means they have no past, no history, and if Judaism is just a tissue of lies, the same applies to Christianity. If Israel never existed in the past, then its modern restoration is just a colonial deception to conquer territory to which it has no historical, religious or cultural claims, and so its destruction is justified. If history testifies to the contrary, then Europe becomes willingly responsible for the abominable crime of genocide – wiping out the past existence of a people in order to remove its current legitimacy and its human, religious, cultural and historical rights. This reflects the participation, organization and financing by European nations and the European Commission of an international campaign of incitement to hatred for the dismembering of Israel.

The Palestinization of Europe is not just its theological Islamization through Palestinianism, this being the ideology for Israel’s demise by disclaiming a people’s territorial sovereignty, history and culture, in conformity with the jihadist worldview. Palestinianism is also a paranoid obsession to hound Israel while claiming it is for its own good. By proclaiming that the Palestinian cause is the cause of peace and justice, Europe invests enormous energy, billions of euros and every effort to send Israel back behind the 1948 lines which it knows are indefensible. Hundreds of thousands of books, accusations and speeches subvert the facts and impose this policy.

The Palestinian grounding in Nazism: The de-Judaizing of Christianity

Within this context, the Kairos Palestine declaration of 2010 brands Israel with terms like occupier of Arab lands, colonizer, promoter of apartheid; while conversely Palestinians are innocent victims resisting the occupation and aspiring only to security, justice and peace. The Kairos declaration, hardly surprisingly, condemns all Christian theology that is based upon the Bible or on biblical faith or history that would legitimize Israel. Understand if you can; what would remain of Christian theology, faith or history if you get rid of Israel and the Bible? Could Christian Palestinianism be the camouflage of Nazism, which had planned to de-Judaize Christianity? The document ends with a call to people, businesses and countries to take part in the BDS campaign against Israel. This request is in line with the demands of the OIC and similar to the understanding of the European former leaders, who are the same ones responsible for the current Eurabian situation.

What are the consequences of the choice of al-Quds – that is a Muslim Jerusalem – by Europe for its identity, the criteria for assessing its own history, and its immigration policy? The Europe that chose al-Quds and rejected Jerusalem is rejecting its own basic identity. It is denying the Bible, which is not merely a religious text that states various universal values, but also, for Christians, a chronicle of the coming of Jesus and Christianity, which is its culmination. If there had not been a Jewish people, nor biblical history or geography, there would not be Christianity either. Accordingly, Judaism and Christianity are just a huge aberration, and what remains are the Koran and the Muslim Jesus, whose eschatological mission is the destruction of Christianity.

The choice of al-Quds replaces the Bible with the Koran. Europe knows that the OIC has decided to move its head office from Jeddah to al-Quds. The OIC is deemed the most suitable institution to represent the world Caliphate, with its mission to anchor the universal Ummah in the Koran and Sunna. What church could remain in al-Quds? By seeking to destroy Israel, the Church is destroying its own very existence.

With such a disavowal of its own roots and identity, should we still be surprised that Europe has sold its citizens off cheaply on its own territory? In the same way that the European Union has not ceased to harass Israel and to challenge its roots and rights, it has dragged to court those courageous Europeans who have asserted their own identity, rights and freedoms. This political link between the OIC and the European Union did not only appear in the context of the Israeli-Arab conflict but also in internal European politics concerning the massive Muslim immigration into Europe, which started in the years 1974-75. It was then that a joint Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation (PAEAC) was set up with the task of passing on the political demands from the Arab League countries to the European Community and to monitor their implementation within Europe.

Transposing its anti-Israeli policy to Europe, the EU wants to create a tabula rasa of historical nationalisms and of the privileges of sovereign states, to transfer to the UN – dominated by the OIC – the world governance of human rights. The basic rights of Europeans to security, to their history and freedom of expression are disproved, rebutted, dismissed by the OIC under the guise of Islamophobia and its vehement request for European multiculturalism. Rooted in the civilization of jihad and dhimmitude, it imposes its own criteria through its European and UN go-betweens in its new Western empire. So while Europe prides itself on creating universal, humanitarian governance, on the international scene the OIC is implementing a Koranic order of Islamic human rights.

With the repudiation of Israel, the EU is repudiating itself. It is putting the emphasis on the Greco-Roman heritage and eliminating that of Judeo-Christianity to please the OIC and Muslim migrants. When the EU does this it eliminates its biblical and therefore Jewish basis, as if Christianity had arisen in the world out of nowhere. This repression of identity is just one more concession to Islam and its culture that is hostile to Jews and Christians, an issue that has been neither recognized nor repudiated. To throw Judaism (Israel) and Christianity (the West) into the dustbin of history is to remove human, historical, religious, cultural and national rights from Jews and Christians. It means adopting dhimmitude.

Eurabia and Palestinianism come from the same rejection and the same policy applied to the destruction of the nation-state, the manifestation of the spirit and culture of peoples, condemned to extinction in a globalized, humanitarian utopia. Their points in common are (1) the war against Israel; (2) the de-Judaization of Christianity; (3) the de-Christianization of Europe; and (4) the joint EU-OIC policy to strengthen the UN’s global governance that the OIC aims to monopolize. This suicidal approach is specific to Europe; it does not exist in China or in India, or even in Muslim countries.

With the anarchic uprisings of the “Arab Spring” (March 2011), the United States and most European countries led by France and its Foreign Minister, Alain Juppé, have become involved in Arab and African tribal conflicts, invoking the “right of interference” and the “right of protection”. These rights, however, are applied selectively, because they are never invoked to protect Christians against persecution in Egypt, Iraq, Turkey, Algeria, Sudan, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Indonesia or Pakistan. They are also not used to protect sailors arbitrarily taken hostage by the Somalis. Europe would find it grotesque and indecent to invoke these rights against the spread of anti-Israeli hatred calling for the extermination of the Jews, against the deluge of rockets launched from Gaza into Israel, or against the hideous crimes perpetrated by its Palestinian allies and “protégés” against Israeli civilians. Nor has it reacted to the Islamization of the biblical holy places in Hebron, both Jewish and Christian, by UNESCO, acting on orders of the OIC. Yet this approach is a serious breach of the religious and historical rights of Jews and Christians, and contradicts the western definition of human rights. The recognition of Palestine by UNESCO is a harbinger to the Islamization on a world level of the historical and spiritual roots of Judaism and Christianity and conforms to the Koranic assertion that Islam precedes and dominates these two religions.

This entry was posted in Behind the Scenes, Islamic Terror, Israel and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Comment Rules


Seraphic Secret is private property, that's right, it's an extension of our home, and as such, Karen and I have instituted two Seraphic Rules and we ask commentors to act respectfully.

  1. No profanity.
  2. No Israel bashing. We debate, we discuss, we are respectful. You know what Israel bashing is. The world is full of it. Seraphic Secret is one of the few places in the world that will not tolerate this form of anti-Semitism.

That's it. Break either of these rules and you will be banned.


9 Comments

  1. antoineclarke
    Posted November 16, 2011 at 5:17 am | Permalink

    I think the essay overstates its case in some areas.

    The author does not, in my view, understand Christian theology and makes a number of assertions about the European willingness to accommodate Palestinian demands as some sort of submission to Islam. That is simply not the case.

    For a start, in France the removal of Christianity from symbols of the state was the work of the French Revolution, which was completely absent any Islamic influences whatsoever. I could add that one of the anti-Semitic claims made in France was that Jews supported the secularisation of France from 1789 onwards. In fact, the extent to which the Front National is anti-Semitic today is almost entirely due to the belief that Jews sided with the secular revolutionaries.

    Second, it would surely be a mistake today but in the 1960s the PLO was seen as a socialist, secular revolutionary organisation. To leftist anti-colonial 1968-student-riot types the PLO would have seemed an obvious partner (in the same way as they would previously have sided WITH Zionist terrorists who were fighting the British). Where the EU has been caught out is the failure to recognise the Islamic nature of the Palestinian movements that has increased, I would say, since 1979 and the Iranian Revolution.

    Third, what about the veil ban? We can surely argue about it’s effectiveness. We can debate it’s morality. But there is no way one can claim that the bans that have been introduced or are in the pipeline are symptoms of dhimmitude. Two specific issues are lines in the sand for European secularists: female genital mutilation and the persecution of homosexuals. For a long time, leftists have argued that the former is not an essential or even a majority practise among Muslims (I think that’s true). But the intolerance of gays is too overt for leftists to ignore. A growing number of them think Islam has to give in on this point or be resisted. I think conservatives underestimate this point, perhaps because they tend not to frequent gay liberals.

    It might not be the argument most supporters of Israel feel comfortable with, but a map of the world showing those countries where homosexual persecution is both illegal and not unofficially condoned would show Israel as an island of freedom surrounded by intolerance. East of Cyprus, I can think of very few gay-friendly countries and even fewer where the trend is getting more tolerant.

    Appealing to Christian heritage won’t work in Europe: in England it’s a joke, in France it sounds like one is an anti-Dreyfusard. I’ve yet to meet a French Jew who doesn’t prefer the Palestinian Authority to the Catholic Church. The Christian/Zionist alliance that unites many American conservatives doesn’t exist in France and never has. More’s the pity.

    The political position of the EU is to hope that secularist leftists can regain control of the Palestinians. There is also the problem of managing relations with millions of European citizens who are culturally (if not always practising) Moslems. I think they’re naive, but what other choices do they have?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Johnny
    Posted November 14, 2011 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

    Europe is concerned about palestinians.  Isn’t that nice.  Meanwhile over at Volokh David Bernstein documented how European nations are funding Israeli NGOs that are opposed to Europe’s putative position supporting Israel.  Methinks European countries likes to talk out of both sides of their mouths.
     
    When Europe starts bemoaning the disappearing Jews and Coptic Christians from across the ME they might have some moral standing.  But of course it is a lot easier to denigrate Americans and GWB for such immoral acts as waterboarding or deposing Saddam.
     
    Of course, per Mark Steyn, the demographics are favorable to the islamization of Europe and we are unlikely to recognize it in 50 years. 

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Robert J. Avrech
      Posted November 15, 2011 at 9:45 am | Permalink

      Johnny:

      Of course, the irony of Europe’s slide into dhimmitude is that their (imploding) welfare economies have made these states an attractive home for welfare-witch-Islamists who have multiple wives, many children and no loyalty to the governments that support them. The Jews of Europe, in contrast, are loyal citizens who work hard and contibute to the EU that is in the process of throwing them to the jackals of Islam.

      The result: England and France will be Judenrein within 25 years.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Johnny
    Posted November 14, 2011 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

    How stupid do you have to be to hold that sign?
     
    I think anyone following the ME for any amount of time understands that these people are hardly MENSA candidates.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Posted November 15, 2011 at 6:42 am | Permalink

      Maybe I’m the problem, Johnny — you see, I happen to be a former member of MENSA. I know there have been times in my life when I realized I “see” things differently than other people, but I always attributed the difference to my common sense and not some difference in my cerebral cortex!

      I see someone holding a sign that reads “Kill Jews for Peace” as being analogous to someone holding a sign that reads “rape women for gender equality!” 

      On a totally unrelated note: Robert, do you have any interesting stories about William Powell in that vast knowledge-base of yours? I watched part of “After the Thin Man” last night (you know my affection for Myrna Loy) and found myself more and more impresssed with his sublte comedic timing. I did a little research on him and found that he had quite the romantic life — married to Carole Lombard and deeply involved with Jean Harlow. He ultimately married Diana (Mousie) Lewis and retired to a quiet life. He lived about 30 years after his final film. He just seems like an oxymoron in Hollywood. The cad who flirts from starlet to starlet who finally settled down?

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Robert J. Avrech
        Posted November 15, 2011 at 9:52 am | Permalink

        Prophet Joe:

        William Powell was a true gentleman and a man who valued his privacy. His relationship with Harlow is quite interesting and tragic. She very much wanted to marry him, but he was wary of Harlow’s overbearing mother and her gigolo boyfriend. In fact, Powell hired accountants to trace Harlow’s earnings. He discovered that mother and gigolo were stealing her blind. He brought the proof to Harlow but she was so attached to her mother that she didn’t want to face facts. Powell understood that marriage to Harlow would not work. He pulled away, which hurt her terribly. When she was dying Powell spent time at her side. He was so shaken by her agonized death that he was never quite the same. Indeed, he stayed away from glamorous Hollywood women—no more damaged sex symbols—and married “mouse.” Her nickname tells you everything about his state of mind.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. GW
    Posted November 14, 2011 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    An exceptional essay.  I agree with every point.  Thanks for posting this.

    I would call attention to one point.  The author is quite correct that the West has heretofore not involved itself in any way in the proteciton of Christians or Jews in Muslim countries.  I was heartened, listening to the Republican debate on foreign policy the other night, to hear at least one candidate, Gingrich, raise this as an issue.  Indeed, it should be a cornerstone of our foreign policy – and it is one that would put us where we should be, at open and fundamental odds with the OIC.    

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Robert J. Avrech
      Posted November 15, 2011 at 9:55 am | Permalink

      GW:

      I was hoping you’d drop by and read Bat Ye’or’s essay.

      Indeed, Newt has been exceptionally eloquent lately in domestic and foreign policy matters. I too was greatly heartened when he raised this issue.

      So heartened that I’ve seriously thought of sending $ to Newt’s campaign.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Posted November 14, 2011 at 8:33 am | Permalink

    WOW! The sad irony of someone holding up a sign that actually says “Kill Jews for Peace”  How stupid do you have to be to hold that sign?
     
    Whenever I read one of your posts dealing with the Nazis and the Palestinians, I often ask myself — what happened in the Middle East after World War II? The obvious answer is the creation of the modern state of Israel (and the Arabs declining to accept Transjordan as the Palestinians state). There were wars to follow the Independence of Israel, but that’s not what I’m talking about.
     
    After Germany fell, the Nazi collaborators in Europe (the Vichy French, the Quislings of Norway, Mussolini in Italy, etc.) all paid the price and were removed from power (generally by force). In the Pacific Rim and Asia, the enemy capitulated and the rebuilding process began under US (Alllied) domination. What happened in the Middle East. The Jews were allowed to return to their homeland, but what punishment did the pro-Nazi Arabs pay? I realize my history of the region does not focus on the Nazi-Arabs, but I can’t think of a single leader who was made an example for supporting Hitler. Did they just integrate back into Islamic society — because the radical Islamic leaders of today sure do sound like the pro-Nazi sympathizers of the 1940’s. For 60+ years the pro-Nazis have flourished in the Middle East. Spreading their hate and promising that there will be peace in the region… if only we can kill all of the Jews.
     
     

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

  • How I Married Karen

    The new book
    by Robert J. Avrech


    Available in All Major Book Stores

    Buy this e-book for your Kindle from Amazon!
    Buy this e-book in the iBookStore!
    Buy this e-book in the iBookStore!

    Adobe Digital Edition's version is available through the Lulu store!

    Support independent publishing: Buy this e-book on Lulu.

  • Follow Me on Pinterest
  • Subscribe to Seraphic Press via Email

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.



  •  

    Annual Ariel Avrech
    Memorial Lectures

    Young Israel of Century City

    Fourteenth: June 11, 2016
    Daniel Greenfield: “Fighting Anti-Semitism and Defending Israel in the Age of BDS.”

    Blog Post
    MP3 Audio Stereo (100 MB)
    Thirteenth: May 22, 2016
    Ben Shapiro: “How You Can Save Israel”

    Blog Post
    MP3 Audio Stereo (70 MB)
    Twelfth: June 7, 2015
    Larry Elder: “The New Black Anti-Semitism”

    Blog Post
    MP3 Audio Mono (50 MB) | Stereo (100 MB)
    Eleventh: June 8, 2014
    Michael Medved: “Shifting Alliances: Why Liberals No Longer Reliably Support Israel — And Conservatives Do.”

    Blog Post | Audio (mp3 97MB)
    Tenth: June 9, 2013
    David Horowitz: “The War Against Judaism on the University Campus.”

    Blog Post | Audio (mp3 16MB)
    Ninth: June 3, 2012
    Joel B. Pollak: “The Mainstream Media’s Betrayal of Israel.”

    Blog Post | Audio (mp3 15MB)
    Eighth: June 5, 2011
    Yossi Klein Halevi: “What is Expected of a Survivor People: Lessons My Father Taught Me.”

    Blog Post | Audio (mp3 18MB)
    Seventh: June 13, 2010
    Dennis Prager: “Happiness is a Mitzvah, Not an Emotion.”

    Blog Post | Audio (mp3 80MB)
    Sixth: June 21, 2009
    Rabbi Steven Pruzansky: “Conformity in Jewish Life: Vice, Virtue or Affectation?”

    Blog Post | Audio (mp3 64MB)
    Fifth: June 15, 2008
    Rabbi Dr. Gil S. Perl: “What Was the Rosh Yeshiva Reading: Intellectual Openness in 19th Century Lithuania.”

    Blog Post | Audio (mp3 70MB)
  • Tags

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Friends

    Hollywood

    Politics, Bloggers & News

  • Hitmap