John Quincy Adams: on Islam
Here are excerpts from some essays written in 1830 by John Quincy Adams:
In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. …He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE.
Between [Islam and Christianity]…a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. That war is yet flagrant; nor can it cease but by the extinction of that imposture…While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men. The hand of Ishmael will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him…(Blunt, 1830, 29:269, capitals in orig.)….
The precept of the koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force (Blunt, 29:274)…
The fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion, is the extirpation of hatred from the human heart. It forbids the exercise of it, even towards enemies. There is no denomination of Christians, which denies or misunderstands this doctrine. All understand it alike””all acknowledge its obligations; and however imperfectly, in the purposes of Divine Providence, its efficacy has been shown in the practice of Christians, it has not been wholly inoperative upon them…The unqualified acknowledgement of a duty does not, indeed, suffice to insure its performance. Hatred is yet a passion, but too powerful upon the hearts of Christians. Yet they cannot indulge it, except by the sacrifice of their principles, and the conscious violation of their duties. No state paper from a Christian hand, could, without trampling the precepts of its Lord and Master, have commenced by an open proclamation of hatred to any portion of the human race. The Ottoman lays it down as the foundation of his discourse…(Blunt, 29:300, emp. added).
Written, as I said, in 1830, and completely un-PC. Unfortunately, events that have transpired between then and now have borne out its truth.
JQA was spot on.
And now we have to listen to all this BS about the Religion of Peace and diversity.
Within a decade or less, polygamy will be legal thanks to the Muslims.
Equality! Love! A fundamental right being denied to a protected class!
The future does not belong to those who slander uh me!
That first paragraph…wow. And occasionally, a Muslim will confirm it. “Jihadi Cleric Justifies IS Beheadings: ‘Islam Is A Religion Of Beheading'”
This guy starts out with an outright lie, which those who hate always do;
And Cornhead has the right of it regarding polygamy. Judicial affirmation of same-sex marriage through the rationale of the 14th amendment, removes all legal barriers to plural marriage’s censure.
And now, in the UK we have, “World’s first three-parent baby could soon be born in UK, as Government approves treatment” plus, “Three parent babies banned from knowing ‘second mothers'”
What could go wrong?
From The River War by Winston Churchill. Still true today including slavery and the subjugation of women
“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property — either as a child, a wife, or a concubine — must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die: but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”
Un-PC, sure. But this is the same JQ Adams who was an abolitionist; who after leaving the Presidency kept returning to Congress to pursue abolition and was censured for it; who refused to attend the dedication of the Bunker Hill monument (he’d witnessed the battle as a kid) because it was presided over by a pro-slavery President and speaker.
IOW and advocate for human freedom, not just some “dead white man.”
“Between [Islam and Christianity]…a war of twelve hundred years has already raged.”
Of course it is Un-PC to state the true nature of Islam. PC is a weapon of the left. The left is at war with Christianity and Islam is at war with Christianity.
By beheading journalists who lean left, ISIS may have temporarily weakened the alliance between Islam and the left. However since they are both driven by intense hatred for traditional Western civilization, which is based on Judeo-Christian values, the rift will be quickly pasted over.
We sure could use a few leaders like those old, long dead white men today.
The wonderful thing about that peculiar cadre of dead white males the Left love to hate is they continue to speak from the grave and are immune to all their amulets – the pentagrams, hammers and sickles, red stars, crescent moons, and PoCo incantations. Can’t kill a dead white male or the truth.
Sooner than that, Coernhead — a federal judge has just ruled that Utah (Utah!)’s ban on polygamy is unconstitutional.
Sooner than that, Cornhead — a federal judge has just ruled that Utah (Utah!)’s ban on polygamy is unconstitutional.
Richard Saunders: That was just a single trial court judge. To really solidify this wholly illegitimate idea, the Left will need Muslim plaintiffs in many states leading to a SCOTUS ruling by King Kennedy.
Please realize that if Neo posted these paragraphs in Great Britain, France, Austria, Italy (and probably a host more European nations), she would be subject to arrest. If she posted them on a college campus and was faculty, staff or student, she would be subject to discipline and possible termination.
The Muslims John Quincy Adams was discussing were todays “moderate” Muslims not the radical Wahhabi Muslims. Muhammad ibn Ê¿Abd al-Wahhab died in 1792 just 40 years before John Quincy Adams wrote that passage. His fundamentalist movement which inspires so many modern jihadis was still in the startup phase. The mainstream Islam which he was dealing with were the remnants of the Ottoman empire – today’s moderate Muslims.
Richard Saunders and Cornhead,
My understanding is that the judge did NOT rule that Utah’s ban on polygamy is unconstitutional, he ruled that Utah’s ban on cohabitation, on unmarrieds living together (de facto marriage) is unconstitutional. That means that as long as a polygamous group does not publicly claim to be married, there is no basis for prosecution under the law.
Yep. Still true today.
I see no way that this doesn’t end up as a war of extermination, either them or us. Western Civilization and Islam cannot coexist on the same planet.
Now if only the leaders of the West were not fools or outright traitors.
Britain: You are correct. But a comprehensive polygamy ruling is coming. Expect it from a federal court in MA. Most of the judges there are Ivy League libs.
They will follow the strategy used by the gays after the gays win with King Kennedy.
rickl,
You have put 5 in 1 MOA at 100. There is an either/or situation staring us in the face. Under the PC states of the USA they win, we lose. Study urban street fighting if you live in an urban area. Out in flyover country we have measured the distances and know how to adjust our scopes quickly. Body armor is useless if I put one on their nose at 400 yards. And those with 50 cal can put one on the nose, easily, at 1000 yards. They know not what we, ordinary Americans, can do. Country boys and girls will survive.
Cornhead,
Oh, I agree. Though it will be more than polygamy, we’re talking plural marriage or group (“polyamorous”) partnerships in which any combination of ‘partners’ is legal. Only age of consent and degree of consanguinity will remain and they are necessarily subjectively arbitrary and therefore, by same-sex marriage advocate’s own rationale, discriminatory.
In an article posted in Jan. 2010, “Marriage and Premise; Moral Lines of Latitude and Longitude” I laid out my reasoning. I’m not a lawyer but I felt confident that the logic was unassailable. Turns out some prominent legal scholars agree, see; “Gay marriage, then group marriage?”
Illuminati…
“The Muslims John Quincy Adams was discussing were todays “moderate” Muslims not the radical Wahhabi Muslims. Muhammad ibn Ê¿Abd al-Wahhab died in 1792 just 40 years before John Quincy Adams wrote that passage. His fundamentalist movement which inspires so many modern jihadis was still in the startup phase. The mainstream Islam which he was dealing with were the remnants of the Ottoman empire — today’s moderate Muslims.”
Shockingly enough, you are fundamentally incorrect.
While Wahhabism is certainly the strain that animates KSA and Qatar…
The worst of the worst are Pakistanis — who don’t get their marching ideology from Wahhab at all. Instead, they are largely Deobadis, so named because of where they fled to when pursued by the British.
Without the Pakistani/ Deobadi influence, there would have never been a 9-11 atrocity, nor the 7-07 atrocities in Europe, nor the Afghan war.
As radical and nutty as the Wahhabi influence is, it’s so hyper-Arabian that it doesn’t travel well. One might analogize it as Islamic Nazism… with all of the racial supremist foundations. Notably, Wahhabism did NOT ‘sell’ in Afghanistan. It’s also a dud in Turkey.
Deobadi ‘thinking’ travels well.
And, it’s not for nothing that essentially EVERY significant fanatic brigade targeting the West has Pakistan as its training base.
Islamabad really is the new Berlin. It’s at war with everybody.
It’s self-reinforcing, too. (the ‘economics’ of its war)
Islamabad has stayed above water by way of its NATO/ ISAF shakedown racket.
Pakistan has BOTH an explosive population growth AND a large base to grow from. It doesn’t have anything going for it besides wombs.
So it’s largely organized like a human version of
army ants. At this point, the Pakistani army is in need of a fulsome war to bleed off its excess warriors.
And towards that end, the FATA is emptying out — providing ISIS with countless jihadis. This shift is per orders from Islamabad. Any jihadis that have been foolish enough to stay behind are being inconvenienced at this very hour.
And who can forget that Barry Soetoro visited Pakistan — as a youth. I guess that makes Barry a blend of Wahhabism and Deobandism. (His childhood imam was a Wahhabist — straight from KSA, hence his Saudi Arabic accent. If Barry wants it, he can have his own Arabic radio show. He’s THAT fluent. Spoken Arabic, BTW, is actually easy to pick up.)
For obvious political reasons, Barry never admits that he speaks fluent Arabic. Even the LA press has repressed his comments to the faithful. So o o o embarrassing.
&&&
In sum: nutty as it is, most of the fanatics are highly alienated from Wahhabism.
Mo’s dicta were radical enough, all by themselves, to regenerate hatred brigades by the score. And this is also why they’re so MANY. Muslims have essentially no unity of command. Baghdadi is trying to change all of that. Should he pull a Napoleon, a Lawrence, then the West will REALLY have its hands full.
I don’t think ISIS is the real threat.
Baghdadi, himself, is the real threat.
We’re facing a messianic character — which the Western press just can’t put into print.
Neither can the punditry, CIA or the Pentagon.
He’s still being tossed off as a rag-head.
His record — even this early in — ought to be a wake-up call.
In the case of Napoleon, the monarchs didn’t get the message until he’d conquered most of Europe. Yes, they were THAT slow and stupid.
They dismissed the fact that Napoleon ran clean through every French rival he ever had — sometimes dispatching same with a gaze and fifteen minutes of pep talk.
Al Baghdadi is a pope of hatred, and he’s recruiting LARGE.
Britain.
Agreed.
Read the opinion from the LA federal judge. There is a rational reason for the current law. Then read Posner’s opinion of today. (Case decided in about two weeks; a world record.) Posner did not write a legal opinion but a political tract. Intemperate.
And I am a lawyer.
Nine days from oral argument to decision.
Unheard of for a federal appellate court.
Al Baghdadi, aka, Al buggeranythingthatmoves, is also open to buggering headless journalists. Call him Al bugger because he’s buggering the whole world.
If the Muslims should ever have unity? Wow. Immediate war. Now, how about if the Muslims ever have any brains?
Blert says:
“Shockingly enough, you are fundamentally incorrect.”
I’m not sure how we disagree. My point is that the Islam Adams was confronting was not the radical Wahhabi version of Islam or in fact was it the Pakistani Islam. You appear to have made the same point.
Speaking of Pakistani Islam, I have corresponded with a Pakistani Muslim who decries the influence of Saudi money in Pakistan which had financed radical Madrassas. He believes that the Saudis have radicalized Islam in his country. Of course, deeply religious Muslims like Pakistanis are radical enough without Wahhabi influence.
Blert says:
“Shockingly enough, you are fundamentally incorrect.”
I’m not sure how we disagree. My point is that the Islam Adams was confronting was not the radical Wahhabi version of Islam nor in fact was it the Pakistani Islam. You appear to have made the same point.
Speaking of Pakistani Islam, I have corresponded with a Pakistani Muslim who decries the influence of Saudi money in Pakistan which has financed radical Madrassas. He believes that the Saudis have radicalized Islam in his country. Of course, deeply religious Muslims like Pakistanis are radical enough without Wahhabi influence.
Sorry for the original typos.
Interesting, isn’t it, that J.Q. Adams and Winston both put their fingers on the core problem with Islam: its violent misogyny.
“The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property — either as a child, a wife, or a concubine — must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.”
Amen, Winnie.
As an outside salesman / sales engineer for an industrial bearing company, I flew a lot at one time. Before cell phone long distance charges became manageable, we continued to use AT&T long distance “credit cards”. I used pay phones a lot. And at airports between flights. My AT&T credit card number was stolen and used. As I never lost it or had it stolen, I must have been watched unaware. This was the early nineties.
Before AT&T shut my card down and issued me a new one, over $5,000.00 in phone calls were made from the U.S. to Pakistan in a matter of a couple weeks.
If there is one reason for universal martial law empowering the President to transform our constitutional nation into a totalitarian one, it would be an onslaught of significant terrorist attacks and the threat of many more. That’s Obama’s goal; he dreams of unlimited power. His model is Islamo-fascism and his strategy is coded acquiescence to his Muslim brothers. As he benefited from being inside the Trojan Horse and gained access within our walls, and has used that access to attempt to destroy our nation, he cannot wait until the day he can declare himself and gain the adulation and worship from the Muslim hordes.
At the same time, I believe he dithers, not knowing if he can really pull it off. If we are besieged by terrorists, will our nation really allow Obama, who is responsible, make even FDR’s rule look tame?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/05/top-cia-official-in-benghazi-delayed-response-to-terrorist-attack-us-security/
Stand down, says Obama.
Or as Pamela Gellar points out, Obama on Islam says “Respect it.”