Friday, February 3, 2012

Why Obama dose not want Israel to attack Iran - How Israel keeps us safe.

February 3, 2012


By Karin McQuillan

We have a president who has a problem with Israel.  According to a New York Times column, "Don't Do It, Bibi," Obama called Bibi Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, in mid-January to demand a promise that Israel would not bomb Iran in the next few months.  Obama doesn't want a spike in oil prices before our presidential election.  The threat of unhappy voters is more important to Obama than a nuclear Iran.  He is more concerned about his re-election than he is about a dirty bomb in the hands of a terrorist that could waste one of our cities, a destabilized Middle East, or a nuclear attack on Israel.
(Note: Re-read first paragraph again - this is why Obama and Panetta are "concerned" that Israel may have to strike Iran!)
Obama's indifference to Israel's safety is a moral problem, but it is more than that.  It poses a grave threat to our national security.
Israel's blessings don't stop with the gifts of individual Jews advancing high tech and medical care Israeli inventiveness in those fields is of the greatest military importance to us.  As a country, Israel does more than any other country in the world to keep the U.S. safe -- literally.  This would be part of the foreign policy equation of our White House and State Department, if they didn't suffer from Arabism.
What has Israel done for us?  The two most important areas of 21st-century warfare are electronics and cyberspace.  Israel is the world leader in both those areas.  Because we are mutual allies, Israel shares its knowledge and equipment with us.  We would not be as far ahead in military technology, security, intelligence, or counter-terrorism without this crucial strategic alliance.
Compare the benefits of our alliance with Israel to the things we get from our allies in Europe.  Europe has chosen to take advantage of us, depending on our taxpayers to protect theirs.  They use us for a free ride.  Britain supports us, but has no great military budget anymore.  Their modern weapons systems depend on us.  There is no broad two-way street.
Our alliance with Israel is not only broad and mutual, but it is essential.
Drones?  Israel is the world leader in the development of unmanned aerial systems, including drones (invented by an Israeli) for intelligence collection and combat, and has shared with the U.S. military technology, doctrine, and vital experience.   
Think of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  We use an Israeli-produced tactical radar system to enhance force protection.  Israel is "a global pacesetter in active measures for armored vehicle protection," which we use to save our soldiers' lives.  Israel invented the short-range rocket defense we use in both wars.  Israel has shared its advanced military robotics with us.  The lifesaving armor installed in thousands of MRAP armored vehicles used in Iraq and Afghanistan is known as the "Israeli bandage."  Groundbreaking innovations including sensors, unmanned aerial vehicle technology, surveillance equipment, and detection devices to seek out IEDs -- all from Israel.  American and Israeli companies are working together to jointly produce the world's first combat-proven counter-rocket system.
State-of-the-art missile defense?  Israel is America's "most sophisticated and experienced partner in missile defense," helping us from invention to deployment to joint training exercises.  The U.S. has deployed an advanced X-band radar system in Israel with more than 100 American military personnel stationed there, as part of our missile defense architecture to protect U.S. forces and our allies in Europe, the Eastern Mediterranean, and the Persian Gulf.
Our Navy and Air Force?  Israel provides us with a revolutionary helmet-mounted sight that is standard in nearly all frontline Air Force and Navy fighter aircraft.  Israel provides us with a gun system for close-in defense of naval vessels against terrorist dinghies and small-boat swarms.  Israel provides a port of call for the Sixth Fleet.  Israel provides the targeting pods we use on hundreds of Air Force, Navy, and Marine strike aircraft.
Nuclear threats?  It was very helpful that Israel prevented Iraq from developing nuclear capability by bombing Osirik in 1981.  In 2007, Israel prevented Syria from developing nuclear capability by bombing Syria's secret nuclear facility at al-Kibar.  Washington didn't know about the North Korean-built reactor "until Meir Dagan, then the head of the Mossad, Israel's intelligence service, visited President George W. Bush's national security adviser" and told us.  And we're evidently relying on Israel to stop Iran from going nuclear -- a difficult and dangerous job we need done but aren't willing to do ourselves.
The war on terror?  Israel provides homeland security training for U.S. airport security and police departments across the country.  They've worked to help us with national resilience planning to save lives and preserve national security during natural disasters and terror attacks.  Israel helps us with counter-terrorism intelligence and cooperation in defeating the terrorist operations of Hamas, Hezb'allah, and al-Qaeda.  We have joint Special Forces training and exercises, collaboration on shared targets, and close cooperation among the relevant U.S. and Israeli security for preventive actions and deterrence.  We rely on Israeli advances to enhance our capabilities to defend our cyberspace from sabotage.  Israeli advances protect our banking, communications, utilities, transportation, and internet infrastructure.
Israel is not a charity case.  U.S. presidents are sworn to protect and defend America, not Israel.  Sixty years of close cooperation has been maintained because it is to our benefit.  It was President Eisenhower who first recognized that Israel was a key strategic asset in the Cold War, a policy Kissinger and Nixon implemented.  Post-9/11, this is truer than ever with regards to the new threats facing our citizens.
The U.S.-Israeli relationship makes it easier for our military to do their job.  In superficial ways, it makes it harder for the State to do their job.  Our State Department is unwilling to confront Arab lies about Israel being the cause of Islamic violence.  There is no actual cost to our alliance with Israel, and immeasurable benefits.  Unfortunately, our State Department has few Kissingers who can see past Arab propaganda to the realities of national interest.
Israel is a highly effective ally in our fight to defend and protect America.  The Israelis do more than any other country in the world to oppose the imposition of the jihadi vision.  Europe is succumbing.  Obama would follow.  The rest of us know that our alliance with Israel helps keep us safe.

Read more:


Posted on February 3, 2012 at 1:46pm by 

Andrew McCarthys The Grand Jihad Videos Gives Muslim Brotherhood History
A new animated video created to accompany Andrew McCarthy’s new book “The Grand Jihad” highlights the dangers of Islamism, while explaining the history and overarching goals of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East. Additionally, it alleges that the Obama administration has not adequately addressed — and has continued to ignore — the horrific potential associated with the group’s power siege.
“President Obama does not seem to see the problem,” the short film’s voice-over proclaims. ”The Obama policy of courting the Muslim Brotherhood has not changed the Brothers. It has empowered them to advance their anti-American program.”
Andrew McCarthys The Grand Jihad Videos Gives Muslim Brotherhood History
The video then goes on to explain the radical group’s history, while exploring the breakdown of the Ottoman Empire and Sheikh Hasan Al Banna’s (an Egyptian) subsequent founding of the Brotherhood in 1928.
Al Banna, the video proclaims, hated the West, was anti-colonial, embraced Shariah law and was intent on seeing Islam dominate across national lines.
Watch the clip, below:
The description accompanying the video provides more information on McCarthy and on the Brotherhood:
Andrew McCarthys The Grand Jihad Videos Gives Muslim Brotherhood HistoryThe real threat to the United States is not terrorism. The real threat is the sophisticated forces of Islamism, which have collaborated with the American Left not only to undermine U.S. national security but to shred the fabric of American constitutional democracy.
In The Grand Jihad, bestselling author Andrew C. McCarthy provides a harrowing account of how the global Islamist movement’s jihad involves far more than terrorist attacks, and how it has found the ideal partner in President Barack Obama, whose Islamist sympathies run deep.

McCarthy is the former federal prosecutor who convicted the notorious “Blind Sheikh” and other jihadists for waging a terrorist war that included the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. In his national bestseller, Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad (Encounter 2008), he explored government’s conscious avoidance of the terrorist threat, which made the nation vulnerable to mass-murder attacks. In The Grand Jihad he exposes a more insidious peril: government’s active concealment of the Islamist ideology that unabashedly vows to “conquer America.” With the help of witting and unwitting accomplices in and out of government, Islamism doesn’t merely fuel terrorism but spawns America-hating Islamic enclaves in our midst and gradually foists Islam’s repressive law, sharia, on American life. The revolutionary doctrine has made common cause with an ascendant Left that also seeks radical transformation of our constitutional order. The prognosis for liberty could not be more dire.
For more information about “The Grand Jihad” go here.



by Paul Eidelberg
Let us transcend our present era — an era trapped in the trivia and transience of the media, which know nothing of wisdom and courage and of national pride and purpose.


What I propose is a Jewish Peace Plan.
Ever since the futile and fatal Israel-PLO Agreement of 1993, I have advocated a Peace Plan to overcome the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It is a Jewish peace plan, the only kind based on a realistic assessment of Israel's enemy.
Genuine realism requires a theological understanding of the enemy. Genuine realists know that territorial compromise with Muslims only whets their appetite for further aggression. Genuine realists know there are no empirical grounds to expect Muslims to renounce Jihadism — the precondition of peace — unless they are so devastated as to expunge their desire to wage war for a hundred years — as the Allied powers did to Nazi Germany.
Israel's leadership must first act on the recognition that if Iran develops nuclear weapons, Israel will cease to be a viable state as I have shown in previous articles. Hence, Israel will have to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons development program.
Israel's leaders must understand that Jerusalem is the focus of Islam's war against the West. The West is steeped in denial. Israel must awaken the West by going on the offensive. After eliminating the genocidal threat issuing from Iran, Israel must pursue a phased strategy for destroying the entire Fatah-Hamas terrorist network west of the River Jordan.
Since the goal of the Palestinian Authority, depicted in its maps, is to conquer all of Palestine, a rational government of Israel should adopt the following course of action:
  • Abrogate the Oslo Agreement and emasculate the leaders of the PA. This will demoralize the Arabs. No Arab leadership will speedily arise and command the loyalty of the artificial collection of rival clans called the "Palestinians."
  • With the PA destroyed, Israel's Government should declare Jewish sovereignty over Judea and Samaria. (The Arabs in these areas will retain the personal, religious, and economic rights they enjoyed under Israeli law, but they will not vote in Israeli elections.)
  • The Government should establish unequivocal jurisdiction over the Temple Mount.
  • It should move certain cabinet ministries to Judea and Samaria. (This will convince Arabs that the Jews intend to remain in these areas permanently.)
  • The Government should pass a Homestead Act and sell small plots of land in Judea and Samaria at low prices to Jews in Israel and abroad with the proviso that they settle on the land, say for a period of seven years. This would diminish the dangerous population density of Israel's large cities and encourage Jewish immigration to Israel.
  • Develop model cities in Judea and Samaria by attracting foreign capital investment on terms favorable to the investors. Based on experience, and given Israel's present Gross Domestic Product of $200 billion, at least 150,000 Jews could be settled in Judea and Samaria within a few years. Their presence will prompt many more Arabs to leave, as tens of thousands have done in the past, and in greater number if offered generous incentives.
  • . Adopt a Constitution that stipulates that Israel is a Jewish Republic whose Jewish character is the Republic's paramount principle to which all other principles are subordinate.
  • The Constitution should empower the people by making members of the Knesset.
  • The Knesset should be empowered to override decisions of the Supreme Court affecting the Jewish character of the Republic.
  • Amend the "grandfather clause" of the Law of Return to diminish the number of gentile immigrants, and devote the vast funds thereby saved to assimilate gentiles now residing in Israel.
  • Enforce Basic Law: The Knesset, which prohibits any party that negates the Jewish character of the Republic.
  • Enforce the 1952 Citizenship Law, which empowers the Government to nullify the citizenship of any Israel national that commits "an act of disloyalty to the Republic." (The term "act" should be amended to protect freedom of speech and press.)
  • Put an end to the notorious tax evasion of Arab citizens and their countless violations of building and zoning laws.
  • Terminate subsidies to, or expel, Arab university students who call for Israel's destruction, and require Arab schools to include Jewish studies in their curriculum.
  • Phase out U.S. military aid to Israel (now only 1.5% of the country's GDP), as well as American participation in Israel-Arab affairs. Both undermine Israel's strategic interests as well as Jewish national pride. Of course, this is a grandiose project. It's not designed for "men without chests." But the God-inspired Jewish people, though few in number, revolutionized humanity. Thus inspired, the Jews can do it again, but with one caveat. They must go on the offensive with the understanding that in a world steeped in barbarism, it's better to be feared than loved.


To win: "We should not negotiate with warriors until they surrender. Until then we must kill them."
To the contrary, Israel's government has been wedded to the timid and castrated policy of "land for peace."
I therefore propose a bold and ultimately life-enhancing policy of "Kill for Peace" — a policy seemingly cruel, but not one of indiscriminate killing, but one that would actually reduce Jewish as well as Arab death and destruction. The rationality and effectiveness of such a policy is substantiated not only by Ralph Peters but also by the greatest military theorists in history, Carl von Clausewitz and Sun Tzu.
Moreover, the thinking of these military geniuses is supported by principles of statecraft enunciated by the great nineteenth-century Austrian scholar-statesman Prince Metternich. Accordingly, I shall now enumerate ten principles of statecraft and rules of warfare required for the policy "Kill for Peace" vis-à-vis Israel's Janus-faced enemies: but with this challenge, let us be bold enough to escape the dungeon of political correctness.
Let us transcend our present era — an era trapped in the trivia and transience of the media, which know nothing of wisdom and courage and of national pride and purpose.
First Principle: A wise and courageous statesman must set forth a clear military goal. For Israel, this goal, justified by the historical mission and territorial prerequisite of the Jewish People, is the destruction of the Arab terrorist network in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. The statesman must tackle this goal vigorously.
For this to happen it is necessary that the goal should not only be clear in the eyes of the cabinet, but it should also be made clear in the eyes of the public and even clearer in the eyes of the enemy. Israel's enemies must recognize that they are facing a spiritually dedicated and implacable force that will break them.
Second Principle: In this age of publicity the first concern of government is not only to be right, but more important, to see that everything is called by its right name. Israel's political leaders must stop deluding themselves and others by using such Orwellian language as the "peace process" or about "peaceful coexistence" with the "Palestinians."
Indeed, they should remove the word "Palestian" from their vocabulary, for this mendacious word represents the anti-thesis of Israel's sacred and immemorial right to the Land of Israel. The constant use of this Orwellian language by friends and foes alike signifies that Israel is in a war for its survival. In this war, linguistic and moral clarity will decide the outcome.
Third Principle: There is no compromising with an uncompromising enemy — an enemy that regards compromise as weakness. Israel is confronted by the most evil of enemies — warriors contemptuous of human life who lust especially for Jewish blood.
Fourth Principle: Eliminate this evil at its source by eliminating the enemy's Jihad-inspired leadership. Disarming the enemy must be the immediate object of hostilities, for as long as the enemy remains armed, he will wait for a more favorable moment for action.
Fifth Principle: Know that any strategy conceived in moderate terms will fail because the circumstances confronting Israel are extreme — its very existence is at stake. Therefore, where each of the possible lines of action involves difficulty, the strongest line is the best.
Sixth Principle: Tell the people of Israel that there will be casualties to Arab non-combatants or civilians. But let's not be stupid: most of these civilians are not innocents. They allow terrorists to use them as human shields. Indeed, under the guise of democracy, they knowingly vote tyranny, for tyrants who vow to "wipe Israel off the map".
Seventh Principle: for a change, and in the name of sanity and morality, impose rules of engagement that favor one's own soldiers. Alas, Israel's political elites are so insecure that to prove Israel's moral superiority and thereby avoid hostility from abroad, these elites place greater value on the lives of the enemy than on the lives of their own people.
Accordingly, bomb terrorist havens from the air, rather than endanger Jewish soldiers by house-to-house combat.
Poet-Statesman King David writes: "I pursued my enemies and overtook them, and returned not until they were destroyed. I crushed them so that they are not able to rise ..." (Psalm 18:38-43)
Eighth Principle: Operate offensively, never passively or defensively, and operate continuously. Give the enemy no rest. Hence, no ceasefires. They allow the enemy to regroup, obtain more weapons, and prepare for deadlier attacks. At the same time, they short-circuit the fighting spirit required in military combat, the spirit which Israel especially requires vis-à-vis her fanatical, Jihadic enemies.
Ninth Principle: Sun Tzu, who actually hated war, warns that "to kill the enemy, men must be roused to anger." This leads to a tenth principle, for which we should consult Israel's poet-statesman, the psalmist King David.
Tenth Principle: The statesman must exhibit hatred of his country's enemies. King David said, "I hate them, O God, that hate you" (Psalm 139:21). In this context, to hate God means to hate God's laws as well as the chosen bearer of those laws, the Jewish people. Hatred, however, is futile if it does not issue in action. Therefore King David writes: "I pursued my enemies and overtook them, and returned not until they were destroyed. I crushed them so that they are not able to rise ..." (Psalm 18:38-43)
This is what must be done to Israel's implacable enemies, whose fourteen-century bellicose theology is at war with the ethical and rational foundations of Western Civilization.
We therefore propose a high-minded policy of "Kill for Peace," one that a civilized nation will pursue when attacked by a foe that scorns man's natural rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
This tough but high-minded policy must replace the soft and self-effacing policy of "land for peace." Obviously, this may be beyond the ability of a government led a chance coalition of paltry political parties. Israel therefore needs a very different kind of government, one whose elected leader represents the grandeur and purpose of the nation, something more than its transient parts and passions.
Israel also needs different generals. When bogged down in war, Lincoln discovered Grant and Sherman; Roosevelt had Bradley and Patton; and G. W. Bush found David Petraeus. As we learn from the statecraft of Metternich and of Machiavelli, in the protracted war between Israel and the disciples of Muhammad, better for Israel to err on the side of boldness than on the side of caution. This practical wisdom underlies the proposed policy, "Kill for Peace." No other policy is worthy of a people that cherishes life and human dignity.
Paul Eidelberg is an internationally known political scientist, author and lecturer. He is founder and president of the Israel-America Renaissance Institute (I-ARI) with offices in Jerusalem and Philadelphia. Visit it at

Eidelberg has written several books on American and on Jewish Statesmanship. His magnum opus "The Judeo-Scientific Foundations of American Exceptionalism: Today's Choice for the "Almost Chosen People" is in process of publication. Prof. Eidelberg lives in Jerusalem. â–º More from this writer

These article was published as two separate articles. Part 1 was submitted August 11, 2011 and was entitled, "A Jewish Peace Plan." Part II was the second part of an article that was itself in two parts. The article was called "What Must Be Done to Win an "Unwinable" War." It appeared November 14, 2011 in Arutz Sheva and is archived at Article.aspx/10837#.TxwxKD8wvWI 
The complete text of the article used in Part II can be found at The Maccabean Online 
For more by Professor Paul Eidelberg, whose basic theme is "How to make Israel more democratic by means of Jewish principles and how to make Israel more Jewish by means of democratic principles", see the Israel-America Renaissance Institute website (


Why would Obama's Defense Secretary Leon Panetta tell the uber left, anti-Israel NY Times that Israel is going to strike Iran in April, May or June -- before Iran enters a “zone of immunity” to commence building a nuclear bomb?
This is the act of a friend? An acquaintance? A neutral party? Or an enemy of freedom?
Why would anyone in his rational mind give a devout jihadist regime a heads up?
As the point of no return draws closer:
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Thursday that time was running out for action against the Iranian nuclearprogram before it became immune to physical attack, and that dealing with a nuclear Iran would be more difficult than stopping [...] its drive to build an atomic bomb. (here)
Why would the Obama administration betray our closest ally in The Middle East? Once again, Obama sides with our mortal enemies, a cornerstone of his foreign policy meticulously detailed in my book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America. This is consistent with the same anti-America, anti-freedom, pro-jihad platform we have suffered the last three years.
'Panetta believes Israel will strike Iran soon'
US defense secretary estimates Israel likely to strike Iran between April and June – before it reaches 'zone of immunity' in development of nuclear bomb, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius says
Yitzhak Benhorin
US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta believes that Israel is likely to strike Iran in the coming months, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius said Thursday.
"Panetta believes there is strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June – before Iran enters what Israelis described as a “zone of immunity” to commence building a nuclear bomb," Ignatius wrote.
Asked by journalists whether he disputes the report, Panetta said, "No, I'm just not commenting."
He added, "What I think and what I view, I consider that to be an area that belongs to me and nobody else."
He noted that Israel has stated publicly that it is considering military action against Iran, adding that US has "indicated our concerns."
Panetta, along with US President Barack Obama warned Israeli officials against opting for a military offensive in Iran, saying it would jeopardize the international sanctions program and other non-military efforts to stop Iran from crossing the nuclear "red line."
Even so, Ignatius claimed that senior officials in the Obama administration have yet to decide how to respond if an Israeli military strike materializes.
The columnist states that "Israeli leaders are said to accept, and even welcome, the prospect of going it alone and demonstrating their resolve at a time when their security is undermined by the 'Arab Spring'."

Another strike in a few years

The Israeli scenario, according to Ignatius, is a five day limited offensive, followed by a UN-brokered ceasefire. The relatively light damage that is expected to be inflicted on Iranian nuclear facilities will require Israel to stage another offensive a few years down the line.
Ignatius notes that American officials see two possible options to dissuade Israel from attacking: Serious talks with Iran – including full access and supervision over its nuclear program – or increased US covert operations that will undermine the nuclear program to the extent that Israel is convinced an attack is no longer necessary.
However, such options might be in vein because Prime Minister Netanyahu has already made a decision to attack in the next six months, Ignatius claims.
Meanwhile, Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Thursday said that if sanctions are unsuccessful in compelling Iran to abandon its nuclear program, the international community will have to examine other options.
"There is a global understanding that if the sanctions don't achieve the coveted goal of stopping the Iranian military nuclearprogram, an operation would have to be considered," he said at the Herzliya Conference.
UPDATE: Douglas Murray on Israel and Nuclear Iran:

Posted by Pamela Geller on Thursday, February 02, 2012 at 07:21 PM 

Last night on Fox News TV, Greta asked the same question Ms. Geller asks in her report (above), and she asked her guest why Penetta would reveal a potential of an Israeli time frame for attacking Iran; she noted that the USA would NOT normally and openly give the month and time of an ally striking the enemy (Iran) "on notice" as to when there would be an attack  
Can you imagine if there were "loose lips" when plans were made for D-Day?!
For the past few months, this administration and especially Penetta have constantly allowed the media to print their "concerns" about Israel attacking Iran; to the point where it is no longer news - simply keeping the possibility of Israel's intent constantly on the Front Page of the liberal newspapers.  
Why, exactly, would the administration be "worried" about an ally defending itself?  Why would the concern be whether or not Israel should attack Iran, rather then the fact that Iran is a danger to every nation on earth if it obtains nuclear capabilities.
Again, within the last 24 hours, "Khameni calls Israel a cancerous tumor and promises to remove it" ..., posted by Israel Matzav.  Shouldn't Penatta's concern be that Iran is threatening our ally Israel?  Why isn't this administration addressing these threats with Iran?  Why aren't we informing Iran that their threats are unacceptable and that the USA will not stand for any country (enemy) making threats to Israel and the USA?!  
Is it any wonder that Israel stated last week that she would give Obama a 12 hour notice when she plans to strike Iran!  This administration would have the NYT print the exact time and day of any planned attack the day BEFORE Israel sent her planes in the air!  ... Imagine if an ally forewarned Iraq and Afghanistan, after 9/11 ... imagine! 
See the latest of Panetta's announcements (below), posted by "Info wars".


Panetta Believes Israel Will Attack Iran In April, May or June

David Ignatius
Washington Post
Friday, February 3, 2012

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has a lot on his mind these days, from cutting the defense budget to managing the drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. But his biggest worry is the growing possibility that Israel will attack Iran over the next few months.

Panetta believes there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June — before Iran enters what Israelis described as a “zone of immunity” to commence building a nuclear bomb. Very soon, the Israelis fear, the Iranians will have stored enough enriched uranium in deep underground facilities to make a weapon — and only the United States could then stop them militarily.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu doesn’t want to leave the fate of Israel dependent on American action, which would be triggered by intelligence that Iran is building a bomb, which it hasn’t done yet.
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak may have signaled the prospect of an Israeli attack soon when he asked last month to postpone a planned U.S.-Israel military exercise that would culminate in a live-fire phase in May. Barak apologized that Israel couldn’t devote the resources to the annual exercise this spring.

The World’s Most Dangerous Book


The September 11th attackers based their actions in complete detail on verses from this book. Since 9/11 alone, there have been over 18,300 fatal, islamically motivated attacks. In the 1400 years of its existence, the aggression in the name of Islam has cost 270 million people their lives, according to the Shoebat Institute. Brothers use these verses when they kill their sisters who have lived “unislamically,” fathers to force their daughters into marriage. In many European cities, there are counter-societies growing that find their basis for walling themselves off from Western societies in this book: the Quran.
(By PI Munich)
The Turkish author Zafer Senocak, who has dealt in extensively with Islam, summed it up in a clear and unmistakable way in his detailed article “Terror comes from the heart of Islam” at Welt Online:
“Even when most Muslims don’t want to admit it, terror comes from the heart of Islam; it comes right out of the Quran. It is oriented against everyone who doesn’t live and behave according to the rules of the Quran, thus against democrats, Western-inspired thinkers and scholars, against agnostics and atheists. It is especially oriented against women. It is the handiwork of a male-centric Islam, one that would exert all power possible to prevent women from being equal and finding an end to their centuries-long subjugation.”
The ageless relevance of the Quran, the immense consequences of its contents and its disastrous implication for us “infidels” can’t be the subject of discussion often enough. PI Munich, therefore, has prepared an analysis about this titled “The Quran – The World’s Most Dangerous Book. Here are a few excerpts from it:

This book is grossly underestimated in the Western world. But it is not just any book: it is the Holy Book of all Muslims. For them, every word in it comes directly from the god Allah:
“The sending down of this book is doubtlessly from the lord of the worlds” (32:2)
The Quran is full of guidelines and commands. They are clearly formulated and, according to Islamic opinion, ageless as well as unalterable:
“This is with all certainty the book of Allah, that gives no reason for doubt; it is a proper guide for the devout.” (2:2)
This religion has easy to understand, simple principles: Muhammad is the last of the prophets, for Muslims the “perfect person” and their “perfect example.” He received every instruction from Allah through the angel Gabriel. Islam means submission, and thus all believers must submit themselves to Allah’s will. Any form of criticism or contradiction is uncompromisingly prohibited:
“This happens because they resist Allah and his emissary; and those who resist Allah – truly Allah is strict in punishment.” (59:4)
Muslims must recognize the teachings which Muhammad used to influence his compatriots in the Arab bedouin society as universally applicable. His god Allah intends that belief in him be enforced against all other religions. And in a militant way, to be sure:
“It is He who sent his emissary with leading and the true religion so that He will cause it to be the victor over every other religion. And Allah is witness enough.” (48:28)
Therefore, a battle follows, willed by God against Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and others, that has already caused 270 million deaths, according to estimates by the Shoebat Institute. This god Allah, in all seriousness, wants the battle to the ultimate victory against his own creatures:
“Allah has commanded it: Of a certainty, I will win, I and my emissary. Truly, Allah is strong and mighty.” (58:21)
Islam is also supposed to seize international authority, which makes a separation of state and religion impossible:
To Allah belongs the lordship over heaven and earth. Allah has the authority over all.” (3:189)
This god leaves no question about his plans. Non-believers don’t need to have illusions about supposed tolerance or peacefulness:
“Allah will prove the devout and exterminate the infidels” (3:141)
Any person that doesn’t accept this idea of a threatening and battle-thirsty god is bullied:
“This is nothing other than an admonishment and a clear Qur’an in which he warns everyone alive and fulfills the word against the infidels.” (36:69)
It has been handed down through islamic history that Muhammad had many of his critics killed. This killing is not only allowed in the Quran, rather it is explicitly instructed. The word “kill (or ‘slay’)” appears 189 times in the Quran, 27 times in the imperative:
“And kill them wherever you happen upon them, and drive them out from the place where they have driven you out; for the deception of the infidels is worse than killing. However, do not fight them at the holy mosque unless they fight against you there. Attack them, however, and slay them dead. Such is the reward of the infidels.” (2:191)
Have you not wondered about the notorious assurances by Muslim representatives since 9/11 that Islam is a “peaceful religion” and that violence has “nothing to do with Islam”? Mohammed Atta and his co-believers acted, for example, according to the following verse in their airplane attacks in the US among others:
“Allah has redeemed the life and goods from the devout for Paradise: They battle for Allah’s cause; they kill and are killed” (9:11)
Such unmistakable instructions are learned in 40,000 Quran schools worldwide. In Germany, around one hundred thousand young Muslims are indoctrinated each year with such verses. It is to be feared that the breeding ground has been cultivated for future terrorist generations.
“And when the holy months are over, then kill the idol worshippers wherever you find them, and attack them and besiege them andlure them out with any trap. However, if they repent and carry out the prayer and pay the Zakah, then make the way free for them. Truly, Allah is all forgiving, merciful” (9:5)
These clear calls for killing apply for all time, and especially when Jihad is declared. Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda, Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah and other fanatical theocratic warriors are obedient pupils of their master Muhammad:
“When you meet the infidels, then off with the head, until you havewreaked a massacre among them; then tie the bonds. After this, do not demand grace or ransom until the war takes its burden from you. It is that way. And if Allah had willed, he could have done the extermination himself, but he wanted to test one of you through the others. And those who have fallen in the way of Allah – he will never nullify it.” (47:4)
Therefore, battling and Islam quite plainly belong inextricably together:
It is commanded of you to fight, even if it is repulsive to you. However, it may be that the thing repulsive to you is that which is good for you; and it may be that the thing you like is bad for you. And Allah knows, but you do not know.” (2:216)
When infidels stand up against the warlike islamic expansion or criticize its ideology, monstrous punishment is thought out for them:
The reward of the one who feuds with Allah and his emissary and carries out corruption on the earth is that they will be killed or crucified, or that their hands and feet will be cut off in turns, or that they will be driven out of the country. It will be a disgrace for them in this world and in the afterlife a serious punishment will be meted out to them. (5:33)
Every warrior of god is instilled with the idea that in all his work he is constantly being monitored by his strict lord in heaven:
“And fight in Allah’s way and know that Allah hears all and is omniscient.” (2:244)
But not only is battle a duty in Islam, the goading of other believers into holy war is as well:
“Therefore battle for Allah’s sake – you will be held responsible for nobody but yourself – and encourage the believers to battle. Perhaps Allah will hold back the power of those who are unbelieving; and Allah’s power is much greater, and he is stricter in punishment.” (4:84)
This battle is also richly rewarded in which Muhammad plays down the meaning of terrestrial life, but emphasizes that of the afterlife:
“Therefore, let those fight for Allah’s sake, who sell the earthly life for the prize of the hereafter. And to the one who fights for Allah’s sake, whether he is killed or wins, we will give a great reward.” (4:74)
According to official islamic sources, Muhammad was involved in 89 military actions in the space of ten years. Thus, since its beginnings, Islam has been an ideology of perpetual battle to the end that there will be only Muslims in the world:
And battle against them so that no more seduction can take place, and fight until all honor is given to Allah alone. Separate yourself, however, from the infidel, for truly, Allah sees very well what you do.” (8:39)
In the face of these perpetual war campaigns, Muhammad had to motivate his followers effectively. This was accomplished with the help of Allah:
Oh prophet, stir the fires of battle within the believers. If there are only twenty among you that have patience, they shall overcome two hundred; and if there one hundred among you, they will overcome one thousand who do not believe, because they are a people who do not understand.” (8:65)
There is much of battle and killing in the Quran; talk of love, in contrast, appears only seldom – except for with brave warriors:
Truly, Allah loves those who fight for his cause, arrayed in an order of battle as though they were entrenched stonework.” (61:4)
Scruples or a bad conscience in killing is removed from the Muslims – for it is really Allah himself killing through the hands of the devout:
You did not kill them, rather Allah has killed them. And you have not thrown as you have thrown, but Allah threw, and through that he causes the devout to undergo a beautiful test from him. Surely, Allah is all hearing and all knowing.” (8:17)
The most dangerous thing about the islamic ideology of violence is the absence of the fear of death. For the god of the Muslims rewards all who die in battle:
“And truly, if you are slain or die in the way of Allah, truly, Allah’s forgiveness and mercy is better than that which you scrape together.And if you die or are slain, you will be gathered together before Allah.” (3:157)
Muhammad recognized that the fighting power of his companions was considerably greater with a contempt for death than with a fear of death:
“And do not consider those as dead who have fallen in Allah’s way. No!They live with their lord, and there they are cared for.” (3:169)
Fallen warriors also receive a remission of sins with Allah and are taken directly to Paradise. This separates them from all other Muslims who do not know for sure whether they will enter Paradise.
“And those who migrated away and were driven out of their houses and suffered in my way and fought and fell – truly, I will wipe away all their misdeeds, and truly, I will lead them into gardens where the brooks hasten by, as a reward from Allah. And with Allah is the best reward.” (3:195)
Muslims are instructed in the Quran to wage battle without compromise as soon as they find themselves in a promising position.
“Truly those who are infidels and turn away from Allah’s way, and then die as infidels – Allah will in no wise pardon them. Therefore, do not diminish the battle and do not call for a cease-fire where you have the upper hand. And Allah is with you, and he will not diminish your deeds.” (47:34)
This warlike prophet sees himself as the inexorable pioneer employed by his god Allah in the slaughter of the “infidels”:
It doesn’t befit a prophet to make prisoners until he slaughters on earth. You desire this world’s goods, but Allah desires the afterlife for you. And Allah is mighty and wise.” (8:67)
All “infidels” are dedicated to destruction according to the Quran:
But those who are unbelieving – down with them! He causes their works to fail. It is this way because they hate him whom Allah has sent; therefore he brings their works to nought.” (47:8)
Muhammad demands uncompromised battle with a contempt for death from his followers, and for this he promises them Paradise in the afterlife:
“However, the Sent One and the devout ones with him who fight with their goods and their blood are the ones on whom good will be bestowed; and they are the ones who will have success. Allah has prepared gardens for them through which brooks flow; there they are to spend eternity. That is the greatest bliss.” (9:88)
Allah cares for his warriors after the death of battle:
“And for those who migrate away for Allah’s will and then are slain or die, Allah will prepare a splendid provision. Truly, Allah – he is the best provider.” (22:58)
But in Paradise, not only worldly goods await the devout. Muhammad knew how to entice his warriors with sexual temptations:
“… and we will wed them with virgins. They will desire fruits of all kinds there and live in security. Death they will not taste there except for the first death. And he will keep them from the punishment of the Jahim as a grace from their lord. That is the greatest bliss. (44:51)
Muhammad describes these virgins in the afterlife very vividly so that he can develop the desired effect among his warriors:
“Truly, there is gain for those that fear God: Gardens and berry hedges and girls with swelling breasts, companions and cups filled to overflowing.” (78:31)
In contrast to the enticing promise of Paradise, all “infidels” are threatened with the worst hell:
“…We have prepared a fire for the evil doers so that they will be enclosed as in a tent. And when they cry for help, they will be helped with water like molten metal that burns the faces. How terrible is the drink and how wicked their place of rest!” (18:29)
Muhammad’s fantasy knew no limits where it had to do with the deterring portrayal of suffering in hell:
“For those who are now unbelieving, their clothing will be singed by fire; boiling water will be poured over their heads so that what is in their bellies and their skin will melt. And iron clubs have been determined for them. As often as they try to escape the distress, they will be driven back to it; and that means: Taste the punishment of burning.” (22:19)
The prophet also promised earthly goods, which he very easily has taken away from the “infidels.” And thus, in the Quran there is a complete Sura that bears the name “The Spoils.” For himself, he secured a 20% commission:
And know that whatever you may take as spoils, a fifth of that belongs to Allah and his emissary and the relatives and the orphans and those in need and the son of the way, if you believe in Allah and in that which we have sent down to our servant on the day of decision, the day when both hosts met together; and Allah has authority over all things.” (8:41)
So motivated, the Muslim armies were able to subdue the Arab peninsula in just a few years.
Allah has promised much booty, which you will make, and he has given this quickly over to you and has held the hands of men from you so that this will be a sign for the devout, and that he will lead you on a straight path.” (48:20)
This way, Islam expanded with lighting speed in all directions because Allah promised rich spoils throughout:
And another part of the spoils that you have failed to obtain, Allah has done so in his power. And Allah has power over all things.” (48:21)
The quickly growing armies were instructed to leave their homeland in order to carry the battle to other lands, and thus increase Islam’s dominion:
Those that believe and migrate away, and fight with their goods and their blood for Allah’s sake receive the highest rank with Allah; and they are the ones who will overcome.” (9:20)
With such godly instructions in their baggage, the Muslim armies were able, even after Muhammad’s death in 632, to plow through unprecedentedly successful campaigns all the way to France.
Move out, light and heavy, and fight with your goods and your blood for Allah’s sake! It is better for you, if you only knew it!” (9:41)
A disregard for this philosophy of expansion brings serious consequences with it:
If you do not move out, he will punish you with painful punishment, and will choose another people in your place, and you will certainly will not be able to hurt him. And Allah has the power over all things.” (9:39)
PI Munich is in the process of working on the production of a video, which is extremely time consuming, about the world’s most dangerous book. If you would like to support Michael Stürzenberger’s volunteer educational and informational work, you can do so through the bank connection listed below:
Deutsche Kreditbank
Michael Stürzenberger
Account Number: 1014947137
Bank Routing Number: 120 300 00
Posted by byzanz on PI / Translation: Anders Denken