Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims

Hezbullah Chief Nasrullah Receives Nobel Prize

My old car works like a freelance writer; it only works when it wants to. The old engine also has a tendency of falling sleep at stop signs, which it just did. But I am used to this, so with the help of a kind gentleman I manage to push the car into a parking lot.

It’s a small office of a fortuneteller. The fortuneteller is very nice; she allows me to use her phone and I call my friend for a ride. She even offers me a tarot card reading only for five bucks.

While she is fixing her cards, I find a nice crystal ball, which must have been another tool of her trade, lying on top of the table. Being curious, I look into the ball and all I can see is a thin shaft of smoke winding around inside of the ball.

Slowly more whitish fume joins the trace of smoke and starts shaping a picture--a picture that I will never forget. The fortuneteller looks puzzled; tarot cards fall from her hand and her jaws drop. It is Hezbullah Chief Nasrullah, receiving the Nobel Prize for peace. The picture is crystal clear, showing the inscription of the medal: “Pro pace et fraternitate gentium,” meaning "For the peace and brotherhood of men."

Soon my friend shows up to give me a ride. As I am coming out of the office, I brush off the whole thing. What a ridiculous delusion! Who would believe Hezbullah Chief Nasrullah is receiving the Nobel Prize for peace? I wouldn’t. I would trust a telescope more than the horoscope.

My friend’s car is not better than mine. It has several holes in the seat, a sign of its age. He stows some old Time magazines to cover those holes. I pick up one of those magazines with a picture of Yasir Arafat, the most hated and admired person in history. Reading English is a tough job for me. I struggle and finally manage to read the thrilling life story of Arafat--his passion for terrorism and determination to kill innocent people. Yet he successfully fooled the Westerners, specifically those Norwegians, and managed to be awarded the Nobel Prize for 'preservation of peace'.

As I skim through the pages, I suddenly realize a stunning resemblance between Yasir Arafat and Hezbullah Chief Nasrullah, as both of them practiced terrorism, a copyrighted action of Islam.

Arafat’s PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization) successfully blew up a Swiss Air flight in 1970, killed 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972, and established a terrorized mini state within the state of Lebanon.

Hezbullah, which means “Allah’s Party”, never received any direct command from Allah, but they did not fail to fulfill Allah’s wish: “Kill infidels”. In 1983, the U.S. embassy in Beirut was hit by a truckload of bombs, which killed 63 people, including 17 Americans. Following the track of PLO, Hezbullah also created a stronghold in Lebanon.
Yasir Arafat had a golden opportunity to make Palestine an independent state but he deliberately ignored the potential. After all, if peace is achieved, how can Jihadi brothers kill innocent people and be killed for the promised heaven?

Arafat’s life history is full of terrorism, yet he was awarded the Nobel Prize. I had to rethink my illusion. It is, in fact, the process of careful thinking that led me to believe that within the next few years, Nasrullah will win the Nobel Prize for peace.

Hezbullah Chief Nasrullah is following the footsteps of Arafat and, after the recent conflict; his apparent innocent face is blooming with love. His party is running hospitals, clinics and schools in Lebanon, and he vowed to pay rent for a year to those who lost their homes. He also claimed he would not have kidnapped Israeli soldiers if he knew that the shock of such action would cause a massive attack from Israel.

If Nasrullah is sincere about his comments, why is he not disarming? If he has no plans for any future attack, he should cheerfully give up all arms and ammunitions, and show a peaceful gesture to the world. Evidently, he has no desire to give up the weapons; neither the U.N. peacekeepers nor the Lebanese army have any intention to disarm Hezbullah.

It surely does not matter whether Nasrullah receives the Nobel Prize or an Oscar award for his unparallel performance in real life drama. What matters is that the shortsightedness of the gullible European leaders will cause a major disaster! Pacifism is a great virtue and it works well for those who value humanism. However, a pacifist should not suck a pacifier when dealing with Islam.

When 213 members of the U.S. Congress sent a signed letter to EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana and asked him to include Hezbullah on a list of terrorist groups, the chief responded, “Given the sensitive situation, I don’t think this is something we will be acting on now.”

Why should they?

After all, they cannot disrespect a future Nobel Prize winner!

Even Russia, despite being a victim of Islamic terrorism, does not consider Hezbullah a threat. On a recent list of terrorist organizations, published by the official daily Rossiiskaya Gazeta, Hamas and Hezbullah did not get any place, although the list honored al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Pakistan-based Lashker-e-Tayyaba and the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt as successful terrorists. Forget Russia; it is always one’s wild guess what those Bolsheviks are thinking!

In all honesty, America is not doing any better. Most Americans are still beguiled with the fairy tale of peaceful Islam, but at least they acknowledge the existence of radical Islam. But what’s happening with European leaders? Are they suffering from Alzheimer's disease, which causes severe memory loss? Don’t they read history about how Islam was coming to get them in the medieval ages and the Crusaders had to fight back?

Though both the (Islamic) Jihad and the (Christian) Crusade bear a unique quality of brutality, the Crusade is often misunderstood as an offensive war from the Christians’ perspective. The truth is today’s Palestine, Syria and Egypt once were Christian countries. Right after Mohammed’s death, Muslim warlords conquered these territories and forced the people to sink in Islam. At the end of the eighth century, North Africa and Spain fell under Islam. The invasions continued and in the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor, presently known as Turkey. History witnesses that when Muslims conquer a nation, magically, most of the citizens become Muslims. Should the cause of conversion have been a powerful and peaceful message of Islam, there was no need for the warlords to conquer these territories. People would have embraced Islam and joined Islamic countries voluntarily and gleefully, without shedding any blood. Evidently, that was not the case.

When the emperor of Constantinople was threatened by repeated Islamic aggression, he cried and begged for help, and the Christians of Western Europe responded with religious fervor. Most of the crusading knights were wealthy but many joined for booty. Unsurprisingly, the Crusades are notoriously famous for plunder and barbarism. Perhaps, for the first time in history, Islam encountered an equally qualified opponent. Though except for the first, most of the Crusades were unsuccessful; their continuous encounters thwarted Muslims’ invasion into Europe at some extent.

Today’s civilized world regretfully recalls those black days of history and panics when the American president mentioned ‘Crusade’ after the 9/11attack. This is the beauty of a democratic civilized society – they don’t hesitate to acknowledge their own mistake. Even Pope John Paul II apologized for the crimes committed by the Catholics, a beautiful gesture that may include the atrocities committed by the Crusaders.

Do we hear Muslim leaders apologizing for the past, specifically for horrendous crimes committed by Mohammed and the invasion of many countries by subsequent rulers?

No, they never did and never will. Many Westerners have a delusion that supporting moderate Muslims will change the Islamic world, but they never realize moderate Muslims and radical Muslims are only two sides of the same coin called Islam. Though Muslims kill each other habitually, there is no known conflict between the moderates and the radicals. When moderates talk about peaceful Islam and vehemently vow to dump radical Islam, Jihadi radicals never go after them because they know what moderates are doing is only part of a greater plan--‘Islam will rule the world’.

So, do we really need another Crusade to combat Islam? No, thanks! The world is already tense with Islamic Jihadists and we don’t need to add insult to injury. Does it mean that we should tolerate Islamic aggression? The simple answer is, “No”. All we need to do is reject Islamic bullying that comes from Jihadi brothers and expose the lie and deception created by the Islamic propaganda machine.

Unfortunately, European leaders don’t have the courage to stand up against Islam; as a matter of fact, they spend more time appeasing Islamic demands. When Arafat is awarded the Nobel Prize and Hezbullah is accepted as a legitimate entity, we don’t need a crystal ball to see Europe’s future.

Hit Counter