Islamic Archives

The History of Jihad (cont.)

. . . and the return of Islamic terrorism!

The Pope, who had sent murdering 'Crusaders' when his cult was threatened,  sends prayers

In 1682 A.D. the Hungarians revolted against Austria, providing a golden opportunity for the Ottomans, who sent a 500,000 strong army northward. In 1683 the Ottoman army, led by Kara Mustafa, besieged Vienna. Anxious not to damage the city he intended to rule, Kara Mustafa decided to starve out the inhabitants and Leopold I of Austria fled, issuing appeals for help from all over Europe. The Pope, who had sent murdering 'Crusaders' when his cult was threatened,  sent prayers. The French promised not to attack Austria, but King John III of Poland (the same John Sobieski who defeated the Turks in four battles in four days a decade earlier) brought an army and, eventually, 3,000 Polish cavalry and 18,000 Polish and German infantry set out to meet 500,000 Turks.  Incredibly, the Ottoman encampment was lazy and ill-planned, and the Polish force routed them in a single charge. The flight home was headed by Kara Mustafa himself and he was duly strangled when he returned to Istanbul.

After this latest disaster, the Ottoman Empire began to collapse in the centre with corruption and mutinous Janissaries causing disruption as the Austrians moved steadily on and, in 1685, Francisco Morosini led a force to retake much of the Morea (Peloponnese) for the Greeks.  This was followed by an Austrian victory at Gran, taking Buda then, in 1687, the Russians besieged Azov, and an Austrian victory at Mohacs led to the capture of Croatia and Transylvania. In 1688 the Austrians took Budapest until, in 1690, the Turks re-grouped to take back Belgrade and re-enter Kosovo.  France, threatened by growing Hapsburg strength attacked the Rhineland. In 1691, Austria defeated a Muslim army in a battle at Salankeman and, in 1697, the Battle of Zenta led to Austria capturing  Sarajevo. 1699 brought the treaty of Karlowitz as the Turks sued for peace - the first time in the history of the Ottoman Empire that it had been forced to send envoys abroad to make treatise with its foes. This was the turning point and, from now on, the Turks were on the defensive.

Ottoman wars were no longer expansionist, and barely pretended to be religious, but the empire was now a major player in European power politics.  In 1715 the Ottoman navy and army headed out to attack the Hapsburgs but were defeated at Peterwardein (1716). The Austrians took Belgrade and, instead of pressing on to take Istanbul, the victorious Hapsburgs signed a peace treaty. Sultan Achmed II (ruled 1703-1730) lost a war against Persia in the Caucasuses. Under Mahmoud I the Janissaries revolted, but the empire did not fall because it was alternately supported by different European nations who were trying to maintain a balance of power. Western European nations did not want a collapsing Ottoman empire to enhance the power of the Austrians or Russians and preceded with their own petty struggles for power again as Turkey and Russia fought a war over Poland while Austria took more of the Balkans and, under Catherine the Great, Russia moved south toward the Black Sea.

In 1770 the Russian navy turned to assist a Greek rebellion against Turkey and the Greeks took the opportunity to massacre the local Turks in particularly hideous ways until the Ottomans managed to restore order with equal severity. The Ottoman navy was nearly destroyed, but most of the Russian navy force were also killed in skirmishes around the Mediterranean. Catherine the Great ordered the Russian army to the Crimea, which they took from the Tartars, and the resulting peace treaty turned Turkey into a semi-vassal of Russia. In 1783, Russia incorporated the Crimea into her empire leading to a fresh outbreak of war. The threat of Ottoman collapse again concerned the rest of Europe and the resulting peace treaty (1792) pushed the Russian border further south, but left the Ottoman empire alive.

The shock of suddenly finding themselves underdog . . . has remained with Muslims

The French occupation of Egypt commenced under Napoleon, who was unable to ally the Egyptians and this resulted, instead, in its Muslim inhabitants fiercely opposing him and calling for
jihad. The Janissaries joined the French, but the Mameluks eventually survived the temporary French presence. Napoleon's attack on Egypt was an attempt to strike against the British in India so, when the British threatened Istanbul, the French joined the Turks, bringing weapons and modern training to the fray.  The Americans also clashed with the Muslims, first over the Barbary pirates who attacked US merchants, and then after they were embarrassed by pirates capturing a frigate and holding the sailors hostage.  A variety of skirmishes took place, ending with a treaty between the US and Algeria in 1815. In 1816 the British navy bombarded Algiers over its refusal to stop the practice of enslaving Christians and, in 1830, an exchange of insults between the French and Algerians deteriorated into warfare resulting in a French victory and the beginning of the French occupation of Algeria for the next 132 years.  Then, in the 1880s, the French took Tunisia.  All this was a disorienting change for the Muslims, for whom the natural order of things for centuries had been Muslim rulers and Christian slaves.  So the shock of suddenly finding themselves underdog, as the European fighting technology outstripped that of Muslim countries, has remained with Muslims despite the situation remaining essentially unchanged for nearly 200 years.

Jihad changed its emphasis in the Muslim mind and became, primarily, a defensive concept to the Turks

Rebellions in Wallachia and Moldovia triggered a revolt in Greece and, within a few weeks, nearly the entire Turkish population of Morea had been slaughtered, and from the Peloponnese the revolt spread. Now
jihad changed its emphasis in the Muslim mind and became, primarily, a defensive concept to the Turks who fought to retain both their Ottoman nationality and Islamic religion. Furious at the deaths of their co-religionists in Greece, Turks turned on Christians throughout the rest of the empire.  Simple death was too kind to the Muslim mind, trained from its outset to follow Muhammad's lead, and they brutally tortured those they captured, triggering further atrocities by the Greeks in a downward spiral.  Philhellics from all over Europe joined the cause of Greek independence.  Sultan Mahmoud II finally managed to free himself from the tyranny of his imperial guard, secretly recruiting a gunner force that destroyed the Janissaries during one of their many revolts. Support from Muhammad Ali, pasha of Egypt (virtually independent for some time), turned the tide against Greece, until Britain, France, and Russia threatened to jointly attack Turkey if it did not sign a peace treaty with the Greeks. A short naval battle, which destroyed the Turkish fleet, persuaded the Ottomans of their sincerity and Greece was finally free.

Following the revolt of Greece the Ottoman empire plunged into a series of wars to try and regain its position of dominance:

Russo-Turkish War (1828-29)
Crimean War (1853-56)
Russo-Turkish War (1877-78)
Balkan Wars (1912-13)
World War I (1914-18)

Russia was Turkey's greatest enemy, and the Balkan states generally gained their independence because of their relationship with Russia. This growing power intimidated Britain and France enough to join the Ottomans against Russia in the Crimea. The wars were conceived almost exclusively as political struggles by the 'Christian' nations, but the rhetoric of
jihad still dominated Ottoman propaganda until the mid-19th century and, in the face of revolts in Egypt, Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Bulgaria, and the Russian advance to Edirne (~50 miles from Istanbul), belated military reforms and savage reprisals against rebels could not keep the empire together.  In India, in 1877, a gathering of Muslim clerics decided that, for their part, jihad against Britain was unnecessary, as long as she permitted the practice of Islam to her subjects.  This was very 'kind' of them but, of course, they had no intention of reciprocating throughout the Muslim world.

The only model of government for the last few centuries had been Ottoman corruption and ruthlessness

The new Balkan states created in the first few decades of the 20th century had no experience at self-government. Their only model of government for the last few centuries had been Ottoman corruption and ruthlessness. The new borders were not drawn with intelligible divisions of ethnicity or language.  In 1912 the first Balkan war commenced, between Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria, Albania, and Turkey - but with much changing of allegiance as the combatants revealed their true alliances to the Devil which would eventually seal the fate of these nations in despicably corrupt regimes run by dictators or Islam.  Rising feelings of nationalism and 'power trips' among the European countries manifested themselves as disputes between France and Germany to control the provinces of Alsace-Lorraine created some anti-German disturbances in 1913 in protest against the loss of this area to Germany in the Franco-Prussian war.  One of the key French leaders who encouraged war with Germany was the French president in 1913, Raymond Poincar‚ who had been ten when the Germans had marched through his home town in Lorraine in 1870. Many Germans on the other hand, including politicians, intellectuals and Kaiser Wilhelm II, believed their German culture and nation to be superior and dreamed of uniting all the Germans in one Pan-German state which would also include large parts of Austria-Hungary. Starting with the war in 1870, and for the next thirty years, the German nationalists expressed their wishes to have a colonial empire resembling that of England and France. As Germany led by Kaiser Wilhelm II tried constantly to expand her influence in Europe, Britain and France grew closer ties to protect their common interests.  Britain and Germany also entered a 'naval race,' sparked by Britain's construction (1905) of the battleship Dreadnought. In response to this perceived threat the Germans enlarged their naval fleet and, by 1914, she had eighteen battleships and cruisers (to Britain's twenty-eight battleships) but used the U-boat in order to gain an edge.  This naval race certainly intensified the tension and animosity in Europe.

The Pan-Germanists, those who dreamed of a new united Germanic state, were countered by Russian Pan-Slavists who wished to unite the Orthodox Slavs who lived in the Balkans (South Eastern Europe).  Russian planned to increase her influence in the Balkans during the century before World War I as the Ottoman Empire in this area weakened. Instead, the Russian nationalists suffered many disappointments and their loss of influence in Bulgaria and defeat along with Serbia when Austro-Hungary annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1908, were two of them. The latter would lead Russia to back up Serbia when the Great War broke out against Austro-Hungary. If Serbia were to be defeated in the war, Russia would lose all hope of having influence in the Balkans. When Austria annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1908, Serbia made threats and asked Russia for help. Germany promised Austria help and sent the Russians a note demanding that the Tsarist government recognize the annexation and not support Serbia. Russia agreed and Serbia had no choice but to accept the annexation. Austrian pressure also made Serbia promise to stop activities that were hostile to them. However, Serbian bitterness and nationalism would increase the crisis leading up to the war.

As the conflict of interests between the Great European Powers continued, nationalism manifested itself in one other major way, the unrest of the subject peoples of the multi-national empires in Europe. The disputes among the Balkans had resulted in two wars already: the Balkan Wars of 1912-13 were fought over the disposition of the Ottoman Empire's former Balkan territories and Serbia had already been glorified by these battles. Now the Serbian nationalists turned their attentions to liberating the South Slavs of Austro-Hungary. For the Serbians, independence from the Turkish Empire was not enough, they wanted to create a Yugoslavia (South Slavia), and this desire created an obvious problem for the German empire which wished to incorporate parts of Austro-Hungary in a united German state, for the creation of Yugoslavia would mean a limit to her empire. If Southern Slavs broke out of the Empire, other peoples such as the Czechs, Poles, Hungarians and Slovaks might follow. The head of Serbia's military intelligence was in fact also head of the secret society, 'Union or Death', under an alias, and the society pledged pursuit of the Pan-Serb ambition, encouraging ethnic Serbs in areas like Bosnia to work for the unification with Serbia. It helped to smuggle men, guns and propaganda to sympathetic people outside the Serbian borders. Believing that the Serbs' cause would be served by the death of the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the Austrian emperor Francis Joseph I, and learning that the archduke was about to visit Bosnia on a tour of military inspection, the head of 'Union or Death' plotted his assassination.  On June 28, 1914, Archduke of Austria, Franz Ferdinand sat along with his wife in the open back of a car which was travelling in the streets of Sarajevo, Bosnia. At 11:15 a.m, a nineteen year old Serbian of Bosnian nationality who was also an active Serbian nationalist, stepped into the street and fired several shots, killing the archduke and his wife. Along with his fellow 'Union or Death' members and countless citizens of Serbia, he dreamed of Bosnia breaking away from the Austro-Hungarian Empire and becoming part of a Greater Serbia. As the world watched, exactly one month later to the day, Austro-Hungary declared war on Serbia and so started one of the greatest battles in our recent history.  So the murder of the archduke was merely a small catalyst to the 'war to end all wars' which had really been in the atmosphere of Europe for some time. Nationalism had created the many divisions that would propel the need for war and the passion of the people and the greed of their leaders resulted in four years of bloody and pointless battle which left millions dead.

The remnants of Muslim power still had one last chance to reveal the legacy of Muhammad's Satanic 'gospel'

Turkey entered WW1 on the side of Germany when the sultan/caliph declared universal
jihad against the enemy nations. But in general the call failed and few Muslims in these countries rebelled. The British persuaded the Arabs in turn to declare a jihad against the Ottomans and various rival factions declared jihad on one another which further weakened the empire.  The remnants of Muslim power still had one last chance to reveal the legacy of Muhammad's Satanic 'gospel' in 1915, which saw one of the world's great atrocities which is still unrecognised by many so-called civilised nations.  The effective massacre of one million Christian Armenians, while being deported from Turkey to Syria, was caused mainly by deprivation of food, water and clothing along the way - e.g. in one group of 18,000 Armenians, only 150 survived to reach Aleppo.  This was part of an era of cruelty that was to lead to the greatest loss of life in history.

In Russia the 'great' humanist answer to religion, the cult of Communism had, in turn, embraced Darwin's evolutionary cult and this, unsurprisingly, resulted in the deification of man (Stalin and Lenin) and utter contempt for life with the resultant murder of any seen to be in opposition.  Estimates of those murdered in Russian Gulags exceed 50 million and included any claiming to follow Christ, as Christians, and the God of the Bible, as Christians or Jews, regardless of denomination or persuasion, and every other belief outside of utter worship of the 'Mother State.'  The resultant famines in Russia led to cannibalism.  If God warned His chosen people that this would happen to them (Leviticus 26:29; Deuteronomy 28:53) if she abandoned her covenant with Him, then we can be certain that other nations who turn away from Him will suffer a similar fate (Jeremiah 19:9; Lamentations 2:20 & 4:10; 2 Kings 6:24-33; Ezekiel 5:10).

Elsewhere in Europe, 100,000 Christian Greeks were massacred by Turks at Smyrna in 1922.  With the destruction of the Ottoman empire, after the last orgy of violence in Smyrna, the caliphate and the rhetoric of
jihad temporarily disappeared.  In fact, the new leader of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal (Attaturk) detested Islam but, during World War II, the first hints of the return of jihad appeared in Bosnia, unrecognised by most of the world as such until the Serbian-Bosnian atrocities of the 1990's led the media to re-visit the historical records to find the reason for the resumption of atrocities.  In the midst of inter-ethnic violence in this region, shortly before the outbreak of World War II, everybody appeared to be killing everyone else and Muslims began banding together, forming religiously defined defence groups. 

As an example of the far-reaching influences of Islamic anti-Semitism, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini (who was the uncle of another infamous anti-Semite, Yasser Arafat) travelled to Yugoslavia to preach
jihad against the Jews and other enemies of Islam, taking the  side of Nazi Germany because they promised a 'final solution to the Jewish problem.'  The Nazi S.S. leader, Heinrich Himmler, explained that 'solution': 'The Jewish race is in the process of being exterminated ... that is our program.. .a splendid page in our history.'  Himmler cabled Haj Amin the welcome news: 'The National Socialist Party has inscribed on its flag 'the extermination of world Jewry.'' Our party sympathizes with the fight of the Arabs.. .against the foreign Jew.' On Radio Berlin, March 1, 1944, the Mufti, Arafat's uncle, issued the following call: 'Arabs, rise as one man and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God [Allah] and religion [and] saves your honour. God is with you.' Similar cries, ignored by the world now, as were Hitler's then, are still being screamed by Muslim leaders in mosques everywhere! The Satanic spirit that inspired Hitler's holocaust continues to call for 'peace - and demands the same price. Yasser Arafat sees the extermination of the Jews as the sacred Islamic duty of the PLO, whose very charter calls for Israel's destruction!  The Palestine National Council's 'Phased Plan' involves four stages: '(1) The rejection of Israel's right to exist: (2) The establishment of an aggressive Palestinian state on any territory it can acquire: (3) The use of this terrorism to continue the war against Israel for the 'liberation' of more of Palestine: and (4) The employment of confrontation states to assist in the final destruction of Israel.' Arafat has declared: 'The goal of our struggle is the end of Israel and there can be no compromise.' Yet Israel is condemned for not 'negotiating' with the PLO for the establishment of a Palestinian state!

Islam itself is the major obstacle to peace in the Middle East. The reason is simple: hatred of Israel is central to Islam and is preached in every mosque. The Koran falsely claims that God promised the land of Palestine not to the Jews but to the Arabs. Thus Israel
's very existence contradicts Islam and must be dealt with in the manner which the Koran decrees for all non-Muslims ('infidels'): death! To obey Muhammad, Muslims must force all mankind to submit to Allah at the point of a gun and kill all who refuse.  World opinion and lack of sufficient military power make it impossible to follow Muhammad's commands literally these days, as was earlier attempted during the Islamic conquests that nearly subdued all of Europe. Wherever Islam is in control, other religions are suppressed and Muslims who convert to Christianity are killed!  Islam has clearly perpetuated harsh dictatorships that treat 'infidels' as second-class citizens and deny basic rights even to Muslims.

Terrorism returns to the West in the 80s

The vocabulary of
jihad returned in the 1980's, justifying terrorist actions of every type.  But, rather than uniting Islam, contemporary jihad is revealing the complete myth of umma, a doctrine invented by Muhammad, which supposedly teaches that Islam is the truth because a Muslim brother would never go to war against another Muslim.  Instead, we see it dividing Islam as Muslims war against one another. In spite of the murders that marked Saddam Hussein's rise to power and his open support of worldwide terrorism: in spite of his war against Iran and his slaughter of 5,000 Iraqi Kurds with nerve gas: in spite of his barbaric rape and plunder and wanton destruction of Kuwait and his unparalleled catastrophic devastation of the environment yet Saddam remains the hero of millions of Muslims and their leaders. That does not speak well for Islam.  How could such an inhuman monster be admired by Muslim masses? That question must haunt thinking Arabs! Saddam's hero status lies in his promise to 'destroy Israel' and to 'liberate Palestine.' Even after Kuwait's rape, Jordan's King Hussein said that 'to the majority of the Arab world [Saddam] is a patriotic man who. [treats] others on the basis of mutual respect.' Evil becomes good when dedicated to the 'just cause' of Jewish extermination!  Islam nurtures the hatred that creates a Saddam Hussein, an Arafat or Egypt's Nasser, who also used poison gas in his war against Yemen. When Kaddafi roars, 'The battle with Israel must be such that after it Israel will cease to exist,' is he displaying Islamic 'compassion'? Such Hitlerian threats pour continuously from the mouths of Muslim religious and political leaders over radios and loudspeakers and TV in every Arab country.  The Islamic world is one of constant unrest, deceptions, uprisings and wars. Arab leaders distrust one another and fight among themselves. All of this is the legacy of Muhammad and Arabic history.  Only Islam and the passion to destroy Israel occasionally unites them. Islam itself has inspired this way of life. Kuwait was the chief paymaster to the PLO and its international terrorists, who 'fight Israel' by killing civilians. After a number of diplomats, including a US Ambassador, were killed by terrorists, the Emir of Kuwait was asked whether he would continue to finance the PLO. He replied that he would indeed, 'with unlimited funds.'  The PLO repaid that kindness by giving intelligence data to Iraq for its invasion of Kuwait - after which Arafat declared, 'We say to the brother and leader Saddam Hussein, 'Go forward with God's [Allah's] blessing! '' Behold a brotherhood of murderers!

Saudi Arabia
's fulminations against Israel have been no less extreme than Saddam's or Arafat's. Typical has been the following from Saudi King Fahd: 'The media must urge the Muslims to launch jihad [holy war]. ..united in the confrontation with the Jews and those who support them.'  That Kuwait and Saudi Arabia had to turn to 'infidels' and 'Israel supporters' to rescue them from an admired Islamic leader bent upon their destruction must affect the thinking in the entire Arab world. Yet hatred for Israel will remain.

After Kuwait
's rape, Jerusalem's Catholic patriarch, Michel Sabbah, commended Saddam for 'truly carry[ing] in his heart the Palestinian cause,' and would not concede that Saddam was 'more dangerous' than President Bush (senior!). Iraq's ranking Catholic leader, Patriarch Raphael Bidawid, defended Saddam's invasion and annexation of Kuwait and its missile attacks upon Israel's civilians. 'This entire war has been planned by Israel,' said Bidawid from Rome, where he was conferring with the Pope and other Vatican officials about Middle East 'peace.' The Roman Catholic Church, which opposes Jewish control of Jerusalem, has yet to acknowledge Israel's right to exist in the 43 years since it became a state and they failed in their openly acknowledged quest to drive the Jews into the sea.  Would anyone in the West be dull enough to surrender strategic land to murderers who have proven before that they will merely use it again to bring about the destruction of those weak enough to make these concessions?

Not all Muslims (certainly in the West!) identify with violence, but it is arguable as to which side the 'peaceful' Muslims in the West would adhere if their militant brothers brought Islam to political dominance and power in Europe and the USA.  Do you really think the Muslims who join brotherhoods against 'Islamophobia' in places such as Britain would suddenly protest if regimes of the ilk of Saudi-Arabia gained the upper-hand politically and promptly outlawed all other religions - on pain of death - as they have done in their own countries?  Islam will always remain a theo-political ideology, considering its destiny to rule the world and replace the 'outdated' religions of Christianity and Judaism with religious submission demanded of all people to the Koran of Allah - the moon god!


Acknowledgements to:
Jihad in the West, 'Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries'  by Paul Fregosi, Prometheus Books, New York, 1998 (review by Sharon Morad, Leeds), Islamic Invasion, by Robert Morey, The Berean Call (Dave Hunt and Tom McMahon) - and  numerous other sources.

In 1770 the Russian navy turned to assist a Greek rebellion against Turkey and the Greeks took the opportunity to massacre the local Turks in particularly hideous ways until the Ottomans managed to restore order with equal severity.

The effective massacre of one million Christian Armenians, while being deported from Turkey to Syria, was caused mainly by deprivation of food, water and clothing along the way ...

Home Page   |   Expositor History   |   'Orthodox' Heretics   |   Other Religions   |   Cults  |   Occult   |   New Age Movement  |   Rome & Ecumenism