In TheAmerican Thinker, Janet Levy reviews The Art of War on Terror: Triumphing over Political Islam and the Axis of Jihad
By Moorthy Muthuswamy. The author documents the jihad that muslims have been waging against Hindus for the two generations since the British left India. They were doing it before the British came on a scale that would have made the Nazis proud. Levy precises Muthuswamy’s central arguments in a concise statement of Islam’s aims:

In his book, Muthuswamy explains how Islamic religious beliefs and systems function to fuel and, even demand, constant efforts to annihilate all non-Muslim populations. The mosques and madrassas form the power base and central pillar of Islamic life, regulating, influencing and shaping daily Islamic existence. Total control is achieved by blocking progress and wealth creation and enforcing the dictates of the Islamic trilogy: the Koran, Hadith and the Sira. Muslim clerics renounce modern education and exclusively endorse Koranic study and the “noble” pursuit of jihad. The result is a populace kept ignorant, unworldly, impoverished and easily indoctrinated. This engenders dependence on religious leadership and Islamic organizations for subsistence services. It also makes Muslims susceptible to manipulation and fosters feelings of victimization and resentment, which are skillfully directed toward non-believers.

Islamic doctrine also plays a central role in the promulgation and advancement of a comprehensive political ideology that requires religious war and establishes the objective of achieving a worldwide Islamic caliphate under Islamic law, Muthuswamy writes. This ideology is based on the Islamic trilogy, scripture that is immutable and contains the word of Allah (Koran), the biography of Mohammed (Sira) and the rules governing life or the traditions of Mohammed (Hadith). The concept of the Golden Rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” a prominent belief in most religions, is absent in Islam, as is the notion of a “human being.” The Muslim world is simply divided into “believers” and “non-believers.” The closest parallel to the Golden Rule is a prohibition against cheating, lying or killing other Muslims. However, such behavior is permissible against non-believers because it is accepted as necessary to conquer the Dar-al-Harb, the infidel world of war, in pursuit of the Dar-al-Islam, the world of Islam.

Muthuswamy cites research on the Koran, conducted by the Center for Political Islam, which illustrates the Islamic focus on conformist behavior and beliefs. According to the Center’s analysis of the Koran, the Sira, and the Hadith, only 17% of the Islamic trilogy deals with the words of Allah. The remaining 83% refers to the words and deeds of Mohammed. Of all of the references to “hell” in the trilogy, 6% are for moral failings, while 94% are for the transgression of disagreeing with Mohammed. Statistical analysis of the trilogy revealed that 97% of references to “jihad” relate to war and a mere 3% to the concept of “inner struggle.”

Bill Roggio summarized the “State of Jihad:2007”. Besides the incredible violence that jihadists have inflicted on their fellow Muslims in Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Algeria, to name a few of the hot-spots, there is also jihad against Bhuddists in Thailand, Christians in Philippines, Christians and Animists in Sudan and Nigeria, and non-Muslims in pluralistic countries, including England, Spain and the US.

This ongoing conflict across the bloody borders of Islam is not about the struggles of a peaceful religion, but rather the expression of a violent political philosophy. USS Neverdock had a great post on Muslim attitudes and aims:

Here is what the truth is:

“We are here to bring civilization to the West. England does not belong to the English people, it belongs to God,” a regular Muslim Joe (or Mo) told the Christian Science Monitor, after the 7/7 atrocities. Or how about a sermon delivered at the Grand Mosque in Leeds, whence the British killers came: “Take up positions in the Jihad, don’t give in to sleep, and don’t give in to failure and disgrace.” In safe company, Muslims say they strive to “fly the black flag of Islam over 10 Downing Street,” in the words of Britain’s Omar Baki. Or, to paraphrase one of our own abstemious Islamists, Ibrahim Hooper of CAIR, “I want to see the U.S become an Islamic nation.”

Based on Muslims’ own say-so, then, it’s both disingenuous and stupid of Islam’s champions to claim categorically that Muslim aggression is entirely reactive, a function solely of our misguided foreign policy.

Muslim aggression is just one weapon in Islam’s struggle to conquer the world, lies are another.

A religion that wants to fly its flag over our capitals is not a religion; it is a political and military movement that needs to be crushed as surely as the Nazis were crushed. Our next President needs to be a leader that understands the political and military aims of Islam and the threat that it represents to the modern world. So far, only Giuliani and Thompson seem to measure up.

[img]”%%dir[1]%%Islamwilldominate.jpg” border=”0″ alt=”image” name=”image” width=”209″ height=”344″ /[/img]

Picture from Jihad watch.

Note again the black flag of jihad flying over the White House.