BOOK Review: Andrew Bostom’s Indispensable Sharia vs. Freedom (A Crescent instead of a Swastika); Plus Adina Kutnicki, Shariah Law Enforcers Continue Unimpeded By Deft Westerners; MB Islamist Regime’s Game Plan for Egypt; Obama Throws Israel to the Wolves; and Read This While You Can, Rank betrayal of American principles (with media collusion)

Posted on November 27, 2012

The NSDAP with a crescent instead of a swastika: Andrew Bostom’s indispensable book

November 23, 2012 – 11:10 am – by David P. Goldman

Ten thousand demonstrators filled Tahrir Square to denounce Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi’s de facto coup — in fact, the second stage of a coup, after the dismissal of Egypt’s senior military leadership in the second week of August. This time Morsi effectively suspended the judiciary by a “constitutional decree” asserting that Egyptian courts could not challenge any ruling of the president. It didn’t take long for Egypt’s supposed Islamist democracy to turn into one-party rule by the Muslim Brotherhood. Morsi is on roughly the same timetable towards tyranny that Hitler followed in 1933. Think of it as the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP in German) with a crescent instead of a swastika.

That is not to smear the Muslim Brotherhood with the label of Nazism. On the contrary: Dr. Andrew Bostom in his superb new book Sharia vs. Freedom quotes the 20th century’s greatest theologian, Karl Barth, writing in 1939:

Participation in this life, according to it the only worthy and blessed life, is what National Socialism, as a political experiment, promises to those who will of their own accord share in the experiment. And now it becomes understandable why, at the point where it meets with resistance, it can only crush and kill — with the might and right which belongs to Divinity! Islam of old as we know proceeded in this way. It is impossible to understand National Socialism unless we see it in fact as a new Islam, its myth as a new Allah, and Hitler as this new Allah’s prophet.

I have been planning to write a proper review of Bostom’s terrific book, but feel obliged to recommend it urgently as an antidote. It’s indispensable for anyone who wants to make sense of the past week’s headlines. The preponderance of enlightened opinion, it should be recalled, was that Hitler was a reasonable man and that the legitimate aspirations of the German people had to be respected (that was the view at the New York Times, and among the German-Jewish establishment). We have been told all along that the Muslim Brotherhood is a reasonable organization and — just this week — that Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood president Mohammed Morsi is playing a positive role.

We are going to hear this so often that it is hard not to be distracted by the sheer volume of intellectual chicanery and wishful thinking that masquerades as Middle East analysis. That is why Andy Bostom’s book is so important. His encyclopedic documentation of the character of Islam and especially modern Islam should be in the hands of every conservative, and every responsible public official. Send one as a holiday present to your member of Congress (and make sure it gets read).

It would be inaccurate to call Islamism a Nazi-influenced ideology, for Islam itself was there before Nazism. Both ideologies are neo-pagan responses to Judaism and Christianity. Writing two decades before Karl Barth, the Jewish theologian Franz Rosenzweig characterized Islam as a pagan parody of revealed religion, and Allah as the whole colorful pantheon of paganism rolled up into a single deity.

If the world is in greater need of reminder than instruction, as the late Fr. Richard Neuhaus liked to say, Dr. Bostom has assembled a set of reminders that are chilling, even for those of us who are steeped in these issues. We tend to forget how open, obvious, and uncontroversial the relationship between National Socialism and the Muslim Brotherhood has been from the 1940s onward. Bostom quotes John Roy Carlson’s interviews with Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna during 1948-1950:

It became clear to me [wrote Carlson] why the average Egyptian worshiped the use of force. Terror was synonymous with power! This was one reason why most Egyptians, regardless of class or calling had admired Nazi Germany. It helped explain the sensational growth of the Ikhwan el Muslimin [Muslim Brotherhood].

Sharia vs. Freedom deserves lengthier discussion, but it requires urgent mention right now considering the rising Muslim Brotherhood threat to Western interests.


Shariah Law Enforcers Continue Unimpeded…Westerners Terrified To Counter Them…The Red/Green Alliance Assures Their (Eventual) Western Triumph IF Not Stopped

Posted on September 9, 2012 by

In order for Muslim Mafia enforcers – chief among them CAIR – to gain any headwind, a major underpinning must be implanted.

Most saliently, a conditioned populace is required. Never mind that western citizens witness Islamic barbarians – on a regular basis – exploding hither and yon. As long as westerners are taught, Muslims are an aggrieved group of victims – due to western malfeasance – the basic pillar of Islamic penetration is constructed.

Western guilt….what a wonderful windfall….for head choppers and Islamic ‘martyrs’….for westerners – not so much.

Oh me. Oh my. The poor dears. What have we all done to upset them so much, that they have no other option, but to rampage over and over again? Mea culpa. Mea culpa.

Let us give credit ( whacking them across their anti-western faces, as we limp along ) where it must rightfully be placed, that is, at the front doors of leftist apologists. Chief among them are western academia and their cheer leading media. Despite the carnage, they are unrepentant third world devotees.


As is said, once the (mind) fix is in, it is only a short leap to subliminal messaging, re-circuiting towards appeasement and self debasement. Fashioning a made up (out of whole cloth ) ‘crime’ of ‘Islamophobia’ becomes a great tool to hammer infidels with. In effect, if citizens believe they are committing a PC ‘crime’, then perhaps they should just hold their tongues. Many are doing just that. And, who says crime doesn’t pay?

Some may argue, that is a small price to pay for keeping ones head intact, instead of lobbing to the ground!

Alas, this blogger begs to differ, but she is known for her independent ( and ‘not going along to get along’ ) mind.

And, people who are predisposed to magical thinking – who claim that collective self-censorship isn’t possible – excuse me, but they haven’t read the following reports –,

And, this delightful one too –

CAIR aka Council on American Islamic Relations is their U.S. propaganda machine, quasi ‘legal’ strong-arm of Islamic American supremacists, and it has been wildly successful in dhimmifying western discourse, even beyond U.S. borders. But why quibble with a name…boundaries are hardly their strong suit. It’s not as if they don’t aspire to big dreams, and conquering the world – via their resurrected Caliphate – is a lofty goal. Let us all give them an ‘A’ for effort. How many westerners think so out-sized?

Assuring the feasibility of overall Islamic aspirations ( operating as their laser-focused backbone, contrary to attention deficit, highly addled western leadership ), the Muslim Brotherhood Mafia front groups – most notably CAIR – are regular guests at White House confabs.They are indeed the ‘go to’ mouthpieces for major media outlets, even FOX News. Saudi terror dollars put to Islamic use…despite everyone, but the dumbest of the dumb, knowing that these groups are non-indicted co-conspirators from the Holy Land Foundation trial! Remember 555 Grove Street?

How quickly westerners forget.

And, ain’t western freedoms a hoot? Label me none too bright, but once orgs become so close to the illegal terror line ( navel gazing comes to mind ), what part of shutting down their offices, plus using them as Muslim ‘experts’ doesn’t resonate?

What’s going on here, haven’t they ( the talking heads, as well as their terror pals, posing as ‘faithful’ Americans ) seen this blogger’s commentaries, exposing the entire Islamic terror-hydra – ‘six ways to Sunday’ – as the Islamic gangsters that they are? Is their western, fashionably suited American garb their entrance ticket to civilized society? Is this why yours truly is being ignored?

Guess so.

As a public service, this blogger will attempt a re-education program, offered free of charge ( thank heavens for ingenuity, and an aversion to group-think), perhaps even dissuading some western leadership, as well as disparate, albeit inter-related/tentacled/incestuous groups from their jihad ways. After all, why can’t westerners aim high too?

School’s in session –







But if the above lessons require supplementary education – sort of like continuing ed – there are other fonts of information, taking no credit for being the only credible ‘enlightened’ source. Far from it.

‘The New Islamic Vigilantes of Speech’ is very education and target worthy.

“David J. Rusin of the Middle East Forum recently published an article on Islamist Watch about the vandalizing of “anti-Islamic” ads. He reveals just how pervasive the phenomenon is worldwide.

When Cyrus McGoldrick, advocacy director for the New York office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), logged into Facebook on August 12 to hint at his desire to vandalize anti-jihad ads that may soon run on city buses, he did not simply underline CAIR’s troubling attitude toward free expression. McGoldrick’s words – and the subsequent actions of others – have illuminated an overlooked aspect of the Islamist assault on Western speech: the defacement, if not obliteration, of political and commercial messages.

“Of particular interest is the destruction of print or commercial ads of scantily clad women. I find this interesting because of the near psychotic or pathological mindset about women that Islam inculcates in Muslim men.”

This phenomenon has been especially prevalent in the UK. A Times of London article revealed in 2005 that Muslims Against Advertising (MAAD) had launched a website with instructions on how to vandalize ads and which ones to select. “There is no longer any need to cringe as you walk past a sleazy poster,” the group declared. “We’ll improve it.” Many answered the call, as ads pitching bras, beauty products, and even television programs were trashed. “Photographs of semi-dressed women are the most frequently targeted, with the offending body parts painted over or ripped off,” the Times observed. In a telling example, thugs destroyed images of scantily clad women on an East London billboard promoting the series Desperate Housewives, but fully clothed characters were untouched. Responding to the controversy, leading British Islamist Ahmed Sheikh argued that “freedom of speech should end when you offend others.”

“Cultural jihad, or the de facto imposition of Sharia law on Western non-Muslims, is insidiously accumulative. In Britain it begins with such things as complaining about images or figures of pigs that Muslims might see in a bank or a shop. They are removed so that Muslims are not offended. Next will come a complaint about halal food not being served in restaurants and schools. Non-Muslims will be served it, as well, with or without their knowledge. Next will be a complaint that one must have some place to pray five times a day, and if an employer does not provide such a space, the street outside will do just as well, and damn the traffic jam caused by hundreds of Muslims mooning non-Muslims as they express their obeisance to a rock thousands of miles away.”

“Language must also be altered to preempt potential offense. Muslim criminal suspects are called “Asians.” Polygamy is taboo among non-Muslims, but Muslim men collecting welfare and enjoying subsidized housing may have several dependent wives and a dozen dependent children. The taxes collected to pay for their special welfare is a form of jizya, or a tax levied on conquered infidels. Muslims may demonstrate en masse, displaying signs that damn freedom of speech, sneer at British culture, warn of violence if non-Muslims resist, and predict the Islamization of Britain, and not be charged with hate speech. Any other group behaving in such an obnoxious manner would see its members hauled into court.”

“Criticism of Islam is forbidden and regarded as “defamation,” “bigotry,” or “racism.” Muslim activists are aggressive in this respect, going after not only titillating ads but serious discussions of Islam. Rusin writes:”

Islamists also have adapted to the information age, recognizing that much of the Western speech they despise now exists online. Al-Azhar University scholars, representatives of the highest religious authority in the Sunni Muslim world, even crafted a fatwa in 2008 that sanctions hacking for the purposes of jihad. Therefore, those who criticize Islam or otherwise offend its followers often find that their freedom of expression is no safer on the internet than it is on a Tower Hamlets billboard.

Arab News sympathetically profiled one such hacker, a Saudi native, in 2011. “An Alkhobar woman studying in the United States is taking credit for destroying 23 Danish websites that denigrated the Prophet Muhammad,” the piece begins, relaying material originally published by an Arabic-language source. “Nouf Rashid told the Arabic newspaper she was hacking into Danish websites having references to cartoons of the Prophet along with other sites that had questionable content in her view,” including pornographic ones.

“The focus here, however, is the pseudo-ironic and psychotic symbiosis between a creed/ideology that finds bare female anatomy offensive, yet is lured to it in spite of the proscriptions against it.”

“There is a link between such vandalizing and the rape and often disfigurement of non-Muslim women in Europe by Muslims, the “sex slave” rings recently exposed in Britain, and the honor-killings of Muslim-born women and girls who break Islamic rules and “go Western.” This has everything to do with the Muslim dictum compelling women to cover themselves up as much as possible in burqas, veils or some other form of self-effacing garb, depending on the Islamic sect.”

“The phenomenon swings wildly, like bipolar dysfunction, between the vigilante censorship described by Rusin and incidents such as the rape of Lara Logan in Cairo, in which her clothes were ripped from her and even part of her hair torn out during the assault. That was not the only such incident endured by Western women in Cairo, but it is the most notorious. Her attackers wished to extinguish Logan, to wipe her out of existence.”

“This is the behavior of nihilists.”

“However, these incidents are all connected to the same criminal psychosis (or pathology) that is part and parcel of strict and even “moderate” Islamic upbringing. It is a concerted ideology that wishes to blank out women’s existence, to negate it, to obliterate it. On the surface, this “gendercidal” wish seems based on the Islamic perception of men as uncontrollable demons who lose all reason and restraint at the sight of a bare ankle or arm or coiffed or perfumed hair or inviting lips or seductive eyes. Hide these things, and the libidos of Muslim men will not be triggered to launch criminal assaults…… the whole thing.

Allergic to coercion, yours truly is not the type who will abide muzzling, at least when living in a so called free society. Nevertheless, Shariah Law enforcers mean (deadly) business, and their intimidation tactics have been VERY successful.

Now, others are free to do as they see fit, but know this – once ones voice is muted, the cost to retrieve it will be too high for many to pay. On the other hand, struggling to keep it open, from the get go, is inordinately less pricey.

Decision time is coming due.

Yes, there IS a Clash of Civilizations!

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , by adinakutnicki. Bookmark the permalink.


The Islamist Regime’s Game Plan for Egypt

by Barry Rubin

The Muslim Brotherhood’s fundamental transformation enters its next phase.

Obama Throws Israel to the Wolves

by Robert Spencer

“Accepting defeat after eight days means that the Zionist regime is becoming increasingly weak.” — Saeed Jalili, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council.


Read This While You Can

September 29, 2012 Cindy  Simpson

Read thiscolumn by Diana West while you can —  while we still have journalists brave enough to write the truth, and before the  truth is censored.  West, a syndicated columnist and author, noted an  astonishing statement within Obama’s speech to the UN General Assembly, and  dissected and explored its meaning and terrifying  implications.

West’s column,  “The Anti-Blasphemy, Anti-First-Amendment President,” highlighted this  extraordinary Obama sentence:

“The  future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of  Islam.”

West  noted:

No  Big Media outlet reported this stunning  pronouncement. It’s as if Ronald Reagan addressed the National Association of  Evangelicals in 1983 and the media failed to report that he used the phrase  “evil empire.” To make the comparison more direct, imagine if a Republican  president declared that “the future must not belong to those who slander the  messiah of Christianity” – or, for that matter, the prophet of Latter-day  Saints. We would have heard all about it, and for the rest of our  lives.

The  meaning of “slander” under Islamic law is explained by West to encompass  “anything Muslims perceive to reflect badly on Islam and its prophet, including the truth. ” (Emphasis mine.) Such a definition, as  West noted, would include any criticism of “Muhammad and, by natural extension,  Muhammad’s totalitarian religious/legal system of governance.”

In  acknowledging the qualifying sentences Obama wrapped around that extraordinary  statement, West explained:

But,  but, but … the president also said the future “must not belong” to those who  “target Coptic Christians in Egypt”… and “bully women.”

First  of all, “target” and “bully” are wan verbs to describe the terror, bloodletting  and systemic abuse that Christian populations and women suffer at the hands of  Islam. More important, though, the violence inherent to religious cleansing and  female oppression is in no way comparable to the most critical words or pictures  on a page or screen. Such an equivalence is immoral. The president should be  ashamed.

Read  West’s insightful column in its entirety.  Her conclusion is  chilling:  “I can’t think of another instance in which an American president has publicly uttered such a rank  betrayal of American principles. And the media censored it!”

The  mainstream “old  media” may be censoring the truth — but for now, anyway, we still have New  Media.  And we have word-of-mouth.  Go  tell it on the mountain.

Read more:

Posted in: Uncategorized