The Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) massacre of Jews on Simchat Torah, 7 October 2023, is routinely interpreted in the context of the Holocaust. This is correct, but I would advance that the Simchat Torah massacre might be more fully understood in the context of an ummah without a caliphate for 100 years. In March 2024, civilisation will celebrate the centenary of the demise of the Ottoman Caliphate (Khilafat) and reflect on the efforts of a riven, ruthless and rudderless ummah to restore it, efforts in which hundreds of thousands have been murdered. So far...
Restoring the caliphate began even before it was abolished. Indian Muslims formed the Khilafat Movement to stop the abolition in the first place. Since the end of the caliphate became a fait accompli, Muslims have been attempting to restore “the deen of Allah” by: imposing piety on lapsed Muslims; eagerly adopting every technology and learning every skill that can be applied in the cause of Allah, such as flying passenger jets; mass hijra to the West to undermine its values, institutions and peoples by terrorism, infiltration and deceit that would subjugate them to Islam; and while they are about it, bleed Western coffers dry.
The approaching closure of the first post-caliphal century is marked by jihad’s most spectacular mass-slaughter since some people did something on 9/11. No doubt, all their slaughtering and laying waste will continue into the second post-caliphal century, and for Muslims, anniversaries are everything.
The death of the caliphate is final, not because the Defender of the Faithful, the caliph of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was hunted down and cornered by a black dog that watched as he blew himself and his children to smithereens, not for that reason. The death of the caliphate is final because the ISIS caliphate could draw only 30,000 of the 1.6 billion strong ummah, despite Muslims saying they want their caliphate back and their being obligated to swear allegiance to it, should it again arise.
It has been a remarkable trajectory of events, denials and transformation for both non-Muslims and Muslims. From the establishment, four years after the end of the caliphate, of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928, to the founding of modern Israel in 1948, to the manufacture of the “Palestinians” in the 1960s, to the oil embargo in 1973, to the Iranian Revolution in 1979, to “the fatwa” in 1988, to 9/11 in 2001, to huge Western “anti-war” demonstrations in support of the world’s most brutal war-mongering dictator, Saddam Hussein, in 2003, to Barack Hussein Obama in 2008, to the Arab Spring from 2010, to ISIS in 2014, to the “refugee” hijra invasions of the West from especially 2015, to the “holes in the narrative” in 2020, to the Simchat Torah massacre in 2023, the snake was back from the hole it seemed to retreat to at the end of World War I.
We have seen, on the one hand, deceit, betrayal and cowardice take the place of statesmanship, the steady substitution of mediaevalism for the gains of the Enlightenment, the emboldening of the uncivilised, the empowering of the ignorant, the inversion of language, the making and breaking of friendships and familial relationships with the rapidity of Windows updates, and on the other, meteoric learning curves. No one was left untouched.
While one might bemoan how long the West has tolerated the intolerant, it also speaks to the resilience of the Western generosity of spirit that no stone has been left unturned in the determination to not condemn all Muslims out of hand. The tenacious belief in the inherent goodness of all human beings is finally dead, a turn of events to be welcomed, for the inherently evil have been indulged to a fault. Muslims complain about discrimination, intolerance, racism and even genocide, and we took them seriously, the perversity of it all escaping us. We tolerate the most morally bankrupt becoming the arbiters of morality.
One would not have become persona non grata for criticising the Nazis in the 1920s and 30s, even though their true evil had yet to come to light. Muslim evil, however, has been known to Western scholars for more than a century, and more widely since 9/11, a kind of marker from which all sorts of tallying proceed. For instance, according to the website The Religion of Peace, Muslims have murdered at least 290,910 people, and unsuccessfully attempted to murder a further 363,763 since 11 September 2001.
These are grassroots killings, meaning any Muslim could do it. They are, by common understanding, not state-orchestrated industrial mass-murder, as distinct from, say, pogroms or massacres, even if operational control is exercised through a state-like institution of “scholars”, clergy, Islamic centres, mosques and madrassas. Yet, within a few short years of 9/11, it became a secular blasphemy, i.e., a transgression of permitted thought, to say anything that cast Muslims in a negative light, whatever the reason, rendering Muslims immune and untouchable, regardless of what they do. The thought control, “Islamophobia,” was wrapped up along with other forms of “hate speech” to become the scourge that destroys individual lives and keeps entire societies in line.
To differentiate “hate speech” as a special category of speech is to admit the concept of forbidden and permitted speech. So-called “hate speech” is nothing but forbidden speech given a sentimental veneer. To control speech is to control thought, whether the sin is labelled “hate speech”, blasphemy, “colonial” knowledge, “false statements”, “untrue facts”, “false truths”, “not politically correct” or bluntly “incorrect thought.”
Control of any thought, speech, or knowledge is control of all thought, speech and knowledge. Corrosion of freedom becomes unstoppable. In the beginning, people will still check whether they are permitted to say this, that or the other, but such caution quickly becomes too burdensome and people soon end up rather saying nothing at all, just to be on the safe side. Silencing a population can be dramatically speeded up with the judicious application of a dash of mob violence, or its more civilised variant, a threat to livelihood.
But, as we know from all totalitarianisms, even saying nothing at all is soon taken for dissent. Forbidden speech begets permitted speech begets obligatory speech. In Hong Kong and St Petersburg, protesters have been arrested for holding up blank sheets of paper. Avoidance is taken for insolence and insolence for insurrection, in classic totalitarian scope creep.
Up until 7 October, those claiming the moral high ground had no trouble in making sure we all understood that we never criticise Muslims, “never, never, never,” to quote Maryam Namazie. They criticised “Islam as a set of ideas, never Muslims as people.” They criticised “Islamists", never Muslims. They criticised “Islamism”, never Islam. As is the nature of capitulation, never criticising Muslims begets always making excuses for Muslims begets advocating for Muslims begets emulating Muslims.
Many Germans and Austrians paid dearly for not saluting “Heil Hitler!” In Pakistan, anything less than enthusiastic approval of blasphemy is itself blasphemy. Since it is in some Western democracies already illegal to insult the Islamic prophet, Muhammad, expectation to praise him will not be far behind, followed by obligation to do so. What could make someone raised in the tradition of the Enlightenment say, "Peace be upon him," when referring to the brutal, sociopathic prophet of Islam? Yet, we have heard exactly that.
Like those brave Germans and Austrians who refused to say, “Heil Hitler!” many will suffer for refusing to say “Peace be upon him” on hearing the Islamic prophet's name, unless the Islamisation of the West is reversed. Just how close we are to that day can be seen from one disturbing event in the United States. “Beheadings should not be used to target Muslims and excuse racism”, tweeted an American university professor, Isaac Bailey, on 6 December 2020, in a Twitter thread responding to a suggestion trivialising the Muslim beheadings that have traumatised France. When academics demonstrate their love for Muslims by excusing their propensity for beheadings, then we are not far from non-Muslims cheering wildly at public beheadings as the best way to avoid the dreaded inference of “Islamophobia.” Oh yes, mind-reading becomes a highly-prized skill in any thought-police force.
When the Nazi death camps were finally exposed to the world, everyone asked, how did it come to this? Future historians will again ask this question, and the answer will be, by using “Islamophobia” to target all who opposed Islam and exposed Muslims. The hyper-racialised culture of the United States has been an open door for any totalitarian to walk through.
Devout Christian Isaac Bailey, like most Muslims responding to the beheadings, is unmoved by such barbarism, but deeply concerned that the response to Muslim barbarism might negatively impact Muslims. This is the kind of person who will one day round up his fellow infidels to go and pay their jizya. Bailey’s high moral tone, “Beheadings should not be used to…,” recalls the ISIS fatwa on how a sex-slaves should not be raped, or the “moderate Muslim” advice on how a wife should not be beaten. Non-Muslim academics at top American universities expressed their “thrill” and “exhilaration” at the 7 October Simchat Torah massacre, while the last thing that non-Muslim University Presidents wanted to be seen doing is condemning anti-Semitism on their campuses.
As for Muslims, after their century of humiliation, nothing will ever top the affirmative power of the Simchat Torah massacre. An illustration of this is British Muslim propagandist Latifa Abouchakra, who takes to the media to incessantly whine about the mistreatment of Muslims in the UK. Asked on national television for her response to the murder of 1200 Israelis by Hamas on 7 October, she glowed with ecstasy, gushing:
Nothing will ever be able to take back this moment. This moment of triumph. This moment of resistance. This moment of surprise. This moment of humiliation on behalf of the Zionist entity. Nothing. Ever!
That the Palestinians are savages is now declared openly, their having shown themselves to be so not only in Israel, Gaza and the Palestinian Authority, but in major cities around the globe. Whereas many Muslims in the West tried to distance themselves from ISIS, claiming the terrorists to be “not real Muslims” and that what they practised was "not Islam," while Arab Muslims in Israel were at best publicly ambivalent about them, Muslims around the world this time stand full-square behind Hamas, while Israeli Arab Muslims claim that the Islamic Resistance Movement in not Islamic.
In the immediate aftermath of Muslims breaking into Israel on 7 October and massacring over a thousand Israelis, the appalling Muslim display of genocidal hatred of Jews at the Sydney Opera House drew the following response from British journalist and social critic Douglas Murray:
Muslims do not love other Muslims. They have no love for them. They have no love for the Palestinian people, none. If they had any, the Jordanians would have taken in the West Bank Palestinians. Egyptians would have taken in the territory they used to [own and run], the Gaza Strip, and they would have taken in the Palestinians from the Gaza Strip. Why have the Egyptians made sure that not one Palestinian is allowed to leave Gaza? Why do they make sure that their border wall is tough as anything?
[But] what do they mind? One thing: Jews living. Jews living and Jews winning. It hits them deep in their soul, in their psyche. It’s an ancient, ancient hatred, perhaps the most ancient among the monotheisms and the deepest and the ugliest, the nastiest and the one that has been least addressed.
The problem is not, as “the narrative” would have it, that Israel exists in place of Palestine, for no one, except deluded Western liberals and Israeli peaceniks, care about the Palestinians. The problem is that Israel exists in place of the Caliphate. The Jews have a state while the Muslims have no caliphate. Leaving myths aside, there never was such a thing as a unified ummah. Not only did rival caliphates wage war on one another, rarely did a caliph depart this earth from natural causes. Fratricide and patricide were how things were done. The Qur'an implores Muslims:
Do not be like those who became divided and fell into disputes after the clear signs had come to them. Those are the ones for whom there is a grave punishment. (Qur'an 3:105)
The reality is more like:
Me against my brother, my brother and I against my cousin, my cousin and I against the stranger.
Muslims fall into disputes at the drop of a turban. The slightest disagreement can descend into a yelling contest within seconds, and no yelling contest is ever very far from bloodletting. Much as they complain about colonialism, Muslims are well aware that had the colonial powers not fractured the Muslim world into around fifty states, each bequeathed some modicum of civilisation and global exposure, and borders that prevent the assembling of huge armies to settle disputes and slights, the caliphs being murdered one after the other would have been much more prominent news than a coup here and an assassination there, each time humiliating the whole ummah further before the bemused kufaar. In other words, much as Muslims might resent the nation-state, the nation-state helps conceal the murderous and dysfunctional nature of the ummah.
The Jews have something around which they can rally, organise themselves and find unity. The Muslims have nothing, except a barbaric religion that once again stands exposed for the barbaric construct that it is, a religion they can never give up until they become a completely different kind of people, modern people, autonomous individuals able and inclined to think for themselves. And according to them, the Jews are uniquely responsible for the Muslims' condition. Modern Israel with its non-dhimmi Jews are an exact rerun of the negation that the Muslim founding myth lays at the hands of the Jews: they rejected Islam and they poisoned the Muslims’ prophet. It is indeed, as Douglas Murray describes, “an ancient, ancient hatred.”
- Including, and I will say this out straight, the disgraceful banishing of science from the study and treatment of gender dysphoria on the pretext of trans activists’ abuse of a tragic and deeply distressing condition. Righteous condemnation and mockery of gender dysphoria sufferers is one of the last bastions of mediaeval bigotry masquerading as opposition to bigotry, and indulged in with all the savage glee and spite that characterised the freak shows of times past.
- This latter statistic is universally mischaracterised as “injuries,” but is, in fact, unsuccessful murder attempts, since that is exactly what these victims survived. A jihad attack that does not result in death is a failed attack. In Allah's book, it does not meet the criteria for fast-track to Heaven.
Internet Archive Book Images - https://www.flickr.com/photos/internetarchivebookimages/14596551060/Source book page: https://archive.org/stream/storyofgreatestn01elli/storyofgreatestn01elli#page/n448/mode/1up, No restrictions, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=42033841
Screen grab, Mahyar Tousi TV, 6 January 2024 https://youtu.be/znLnkGt3MXM
Andrew Shiva / Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=30066572
On 7 January 2024 at 13:16, Ben Dor A. wrote:
Thank you Anjuli for this essay.
The murderous character of Arabs/Muslims in Israel is no different than in any other place on the planet.
244 Arabs were murdered in the Arab society in 2023 in Israel by other Arabs, only 10% of the cases were solved.
The year that just ended claimed the highest number of victims in Arab society in Israel. Among the murdered are quite a few innocent people, and the families cry out: "The murderers are freed - and we are in hiding."
The police: "We continue the uncompromising fight against the phenomenon"
And this is after living 75 years in a Democratic State. 🤔
Ben Dor A.