This puts our
understanding of fundamental Islam on an entirely another level. It
is actually a worse ideology than Nazism. Effectively women are
denied the right of free will. The same process also ensnares the men
who also be come as compliant.
Do not think that Islam
is generally successful in what it sets out to do. But it is
successful enough to seriously skew its population part way into this
regime to the point that a modest push or event easily brings
forward fanatics.
What Mohammed began with
was no more that the normal shape of spiritualism in his time and
place and acceptable. The two changes here then imposed are contrary
to every spiritual tradition. They are not so contrary to the
abusive idol based traditions though which was all over the map when
it came to women and slaves.
Your household God was a
simple license to be a household tyrant.
Quite bluntly, Mohammed
chose to adopt barbarism when he was put to the test and applied
'dualism' to square the philosophical circle. He was in pursuit of
revenge. His was the archetypal test that Christ passed and he
failed.
Islam is facing its true
Armageddon today because modernism is grinding it down. Modernism is
in fact impossible unless the family engages the women and educates
them. An educated woman will soon work to break the bonds of the
Stockholm Syndrome.
In the short sighted
present, we see and experience the pain but not the trend lines or
even the inevitability. We can actively speed the process up but
that may not even be necessary. The Arab spring ended social
stability in the Islamic world forever. Every civil war and every
protest is grinding down the ideology of submission.
The truth may be that
these populations need to ripped back and forth internally until they
emerge out the other side as a modern people. Whatever the case,
Islam itself is doomed unless they utterly cleanse the religion of
Mohammed's conversion to barbarism on the road to Mecca.
Mohammed’s
Greatest Discovery
What
causes a Muslim woman to honor-kill the children she has borne and
raised? The explanation is ‘the Stockholm Syndrome’. It is one
of the secret keys of political Islam and Mohammed’s greatest
discovery.
The
Stockholm syndrome or ‘capture bonding’ is a psychological
paradox in which hostages develop empathy and positive feelings
towards their captors, even to the point of adopting the captor’s
oppressive ideology. One would expect captives to experience
resentment and hatred towards an abuser, but that is not what occurs
in the Stockholm syndrome.
Rather, the Stockholm syndrome takes hold in a few days as a result of captors performing small acts of kindness towards their doomed captives. The threat of certain death in contrast with kind gestures is thought to bring about the syndrome. The confused captive soon begins to identify with the cruel psyche of the captor in order to survive.
This
push-pull dynamic of terror alternating with moments of relative
benevolence produces this delusion in the mind of the captive. The
captive then begins to believe the far-fetched justifications for
brutality and murder that bend the minds of her or his terrorist
captors.
The
Stockholm syndrome is a severe form of a psychological phenomenon
known as dissociation. It is the mind's survival mechanism, the way
trauma victims convince themselves that "this isn't happening".
Mohammed discovered it by accident.
The
discovery of the Stockholm syndrome changed Mohammed’s life. Before
discovering the Stockholm syndrome, Mohammed preached religion for
13 years and collected about 150 followers. After his discovery
of capture bonding, Mohammed’s political movement grew
exponentially.
After
leaving Mecca, Mohammed’s small, impoverished movement began to
pick up ruffians to assist in pillaging the Meccans. Mohammed had
previously been living in a polite, middle class, business
environment. He and his followers were not used to the rough, rude
manners of the pillaging ‘Ansaris’ (auxiliaries) that Mohammed
had hired in exchange for a share of booty on his vengeful raids
against the Meccans. Even the manners of Ansari women were rough and
insubordinate. The women of Mohammed’s group began to pick up the
highly assertive manners of the Ansari women. At first, Mohammed took
no notice, but Omar bin Khattab did. Omar pushed Mohammed to receive
a revelation from Allah.
Allah
soon sent Mohammed an eternal revelation that men should beat their
wives into submission.
Were these original Muslim women beaten ‘lightly’ as recommended
by modern mullahs? Apparently not. Aisha (Mohammed’s preteen bride)
later said, “I
have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women.”
(Bukhari 7:72:715)
Veiling
is another important contributor to the Islamic Stockholm syndrome.
Veiling causes isolation from perspectives other than those of the
captor.
Veiling
came about when Omar yet again provoked a crisis, this time by
following Muslim women to the privies. Omar noted that free Muslim
women, if left unveiled, could not be distinguished from unveiled
slaves. Since Mohammed permitted his men to ‘molest’ slaves, Omar
demanded action “…as he desired eagerly that the verses of
al-hijab may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of "al-Hijab"
(Sahih Bukhari 1.14.148). Allah swiftly gave an eternal command about
veiling, so that married women (including Omar’s wives) could no
longer be ‘misidentified’ as kafirs and ‘molested’ by
jihadists (Koran 33.59). According
to Allah, unveiled women don’t get protection from rape.
Mohammed’s
Prisoners
By
limiting women’s independence of movement and making them
indistinguishable one from another, veiling
produces permanent isolation of women, a necessary condition for the
Stockholm syndrome.
The combination of isolation, beating and the veil turn Muslim women
into passive, isolated, malleable non-persons. Muslim
women live in a permanent state of dissociation and denial.
Because
of Omar, the freedom of Muslim women has not increased at all in the
last 1400 years, while everywhere else women’s rights have steadily
evolved. Muslim women are still restricted to a form of house
arrest as ‘domestic animals’ or ‘prisoners’, forced to
interact only with their husbands and children (read ‘Mohammed’s
Final Sermon’).
Choosing
Compliance as an Alternative to Death
As
the Stockholm syndrome takes hold, victims perceive they can either
resist the perpetrator and meet certain death or they can comply and
hope to live. The threat of certain death is a necessary factor in
the Stockholm syndrome. Islam provides this permanent threat to women
through the eternally existing Koran, Mohammed’s Sunna (perfect
example) and sacred Sharia law.
No
Islamic doctrine depends on a single verse, but on the Koran,
Mohammed’s example and the canonical decisions of Islamic jurists.
They create a three-dimensional picture of conduct that all Muslims
must follow. Tragically, Islamic law provides broad loopholes for
the honor killing of women.
The
Koran says that if a Muslim woman obeys her male owner after a
beating, no further action should be taken. The words ‘take no
further action’ (Koran 4.34) are highly significant, since they
imply that actions beyond beating may be taken, perhaps mutilation,
perhaps starvation or death through honor killing. The choice of
‘further action’ is up to the male owner of the chattels. Modern
mullahs often try to tone this down for Western audiences, but
such moderation is not in foundational Islam. Koran 4.15 & 34
offer the basis for honor killing of women, since a husband needn’t
feed a woman if her performance is unsatisfactory. She may be locked
up and starved in her home.
Mohammed’s
sacred example approves of a blind man who murders the mother of his
children because she blasphemed Mohammed.
Sharia
law also makes ample room for honor killing of women by omitting any
punishment for the murderer of an apostate or the murderer of
disobedient children or grandchildren. In the context of cousin
marriage, Sharia leaves the door open to the honor killing of women
with the blessing of the couple’s common grandparents (Reliance of
the Traveller, o1.2, 1-5). Such honor killing is perfectly legal
under Sharia, there being no punishment for it.
Honor
killing is eternally permitted (though not commanded) in Islam. Such
violence against women is part of jihad, the ‘struggle’ to force
women and ‘others’ to submit without resistance to Muslim males.
Dhimmis
capitulate to Islamic rule. Captive Muslim women (as well as entire
captive nations) are given the stark choice of being beaten (or dead)
prisoners…or living, compliant semi-slaves to Islam. Since it is
difficult to endure the despair of permanent captivity, Islam’s
captives dissociate and ‘voluntarily’ choose compliance. This
condition of surrender to Islam is called ‘dhimmitude’. When
entire kafir nations submit to Islamic supremacism, they become
pacified kafirs or ‘dhimmis’ under a humiliating ‘dhimma’
(protection) agreement. Nevertheless, if dhimmis resist their Muslim
overlords even a little, they are deemed to have broken their
contract of ‘protection’ and they revert to being unprotected
‘kafirs’ or ‘harbis’ who must be ‘fought’.
Sharia’s
logic is that a Muslim woman who resists her owner has become an
apostate from Islam, a ‘kafir’ or even a ‘harbi’ who may
lawfully be murdered, since she has abandoned the rules of Islam.
Under Sharia, no blood indemnity is required in the murder of an
apostate, so killing defiant women is permitted. This is easily done
with the consent of the parents or grandparents in a cousin marriage.
A
majority of Muslim women actually marry a first cousin, so
family-directed violence against women is rife in Islam. Cousin
marriage places a secure sociological noose around the majority of
Muslim women. Thanks to Sharia law and cousin marriage, Muslim women
are Mohammed’s prisoners having no escape from violence and death.
Jihad-and-hegira
(attack-and-retreat) is the third ‘essential doctrine’ (usul
ud-deen) in Islam. This push-pull dynamic, applied against women,
produces Islam’s Stockholm syndrome, forcing women to submit to
men. Compliant women in turn create compliant families in a
compliant, monocultural Muslim society.
Muslims
instinctively recognize jihad-and-hegira, a dualistic pattern that
allows Muslims in stages to be both militant, then conciliatory.
Jihad and hegira are opposite ends of one swing or, if you will, two
phases of one cycle. Militant jihad prepares the way for conciliatory
‘peaceful Islam’. ‘Peaceful Islam’ then sets up jihad/holy
warfare. In this manner, Islam ratchets itself forward, just as a
reaper advances into a field, cutting wheat with the
forward-and-back, swinging motion of a scythe.
Muslims
instinctively expect jihadic violence to set up the conditions for
conversion to ‘peaceful Islam’ (and so it does), but the
‘miracle’ they perceive is actually the Stockholm syndrome. An
example from the Sira illustrates this point:
“Mas’ud leapt upon Sunayna, one of the Jewish merchants with whom his family had social and commercial relations and killed him. The Muslim’s brother complained, saying, ‘Why did you kill him? You have much fat in you belly from his charity.’ Mas’ud answered, ‘By Allah, had Muhammad ordered me to murder you, my brother, I would have cut off your head.’ Whereupon the brother said, ‘Any religion that can bring you to this is indeed wonderful!’ And he accepted Islam.” (Ishaq: 369)
This
counterintuitive story from the Sira illustrates how terrorism and
the startling threat of fratricide lead to Islamic conversion. After
the carnage of 9-11, Muslims around the world claimed without
evidence that there was an increase in conversions to Islam. Muslims
sincerely believed the viciousness of 9-11 had led to a miraculous
admiration for Islam, rather than revulsion. This is a telltale
sign that Muslims unconsciously recognize the Stockholm syndrome.
However,
victims of the Stockholm syndrome are unaware they have been
programmed to endorse violence. Muslims themselves, and their
victims, become dissociated through the ratcheting motion of
jihad-and-hegira.
Kafirs
need to recognize that militant jihadists (what politicians call
‘Muslim extremists’) and ‘nice Muslims’ (i.e. ‘moderate
Muslims’) are simply opposite ends of Islam’s
bipolarity…jihad-and-hegira…rather two different kinds of Muslim.
Muslims shift easily between the two poles.
From Submissives to Co-perpetrators
From Submissives to Co-perpetrators
Jihad-and-hegira is classic Islamic dualism. Dualism explains most of Islam. In dualism, there are unequal pairs in which one side must submit to the other. In the Stockholm syndrome, there is a dominator and a submissive. In Islam, women always submit to a man. Under the permanent threat of execution sanctioned by Allah in the Koran and sacred Sharia law, Islam’s unwilling female victims are transformed into willing codependents and active co-perpetrators with the jihadists.
Gendercide
embedded in Sharia Law
Islamic
male supremacism is embedded in the eternally valid words of
Mohammed. He said that women are mentally and spiritually inferior
to men, that they may be controlled by their husbands by beating them
and by isolating them. Muslim husbands even have the right to
honor kill their wives under Koran 4.34: “Then if they obey you,
take no further action against them.”
The
choice of ‘further action’ is up to the male owner of the
chattels. Daughters and granddaughters may be honor killed under
Koran 18.81 and Sharia law (ref. o1.1-4, ‘The Reliance of the
Traveller’). In many Islamic countries, honor killings are not
punished with severity, if they are punished at all.
Mullahs
living in Western countries sometimes claim that honor killing is
‘un-Islamic’; however, here it is clearly allowed in Sharia law.
What is left unsaid in Sharia’s murder loophole is more
important than what is said, because murder is morally reprehensible
and the mullahs need plausible deniability.
Muslim
women realize honor killing is a valid part of Islam, since it is
eternally approved by Allah/Mohammed and by Sharia. Muslim women also
accept that they have half the value of a man and that their entire
body is a shameful sexual organ (‘awra’) that must be concealed
by veils. They accept that the male head of the family is authorized
under Sharia to be judge, jury and executioner within his family in
the matter of honor killings. Muslim women are sociologically
isolated through cousin marriage, so they accept there is nothing
they can do about their lot but submit. Even so, thousands of Muslim
women commit suicide every year in order to escape from Islam.
In
Islam, women are ‘prisoners’ and ‘domestic animals’ of men.
Noncompliant women may thus be culled in the same way a farmer culls
rogue animals that exhibit behavioral problems.
Muslim
males (and their female co-perpetrators) perceive honor killings as
restoring family honor by removing an embarrassing behavioral
problem.
Psychological Effect on Muslim Women
While jihadic violence is the initiating cause, the Stockholm syndrome is the psychological effect on Muslim women. Briefly put, jihad’s permanent, Allah-given threat of violence against women produces the astonishing psychological effect of cooperative victims.
One
simple definition of jihad is the subjugation of women and ‘others’
using Mohammed’s methods. Mohammed’s methods implant the
Stockholm syndrome in women.
Ideal
female cooperation with the Muslim perpetrator is illustrated in
Mohammed’s official biography, The Sira:
“When the apostle arrived at the home of his family he gave his sword to his daughter Fatima, saying, ‘Wash the blood from it, little one. By Allah, it has been true to me today.’ Ali, too, gave her his sword and said, ‘Take this and wash the blood from it. By Allah, it has been true to me today’. The name of the apostle’s sword was Dhul-Faqar (spine-splitter).” (Ishaq, Chap.14, Uhud)
Mohammed’s
daughter Fatima is the perfect example of the Stockholm syndrome: she
prepares the weapons of jihad which will in turn subjugate and
enslave more women, herself included. She is a co-dependent.
Psychologically,
the Stockholm syndrome is a Muslim woman’s attempt to escape from
the despair of lifelong incarceration in Islam. Muslim women may be
beaten, locked up and even honor-killed. Muslim women accept this
abusive relationship because Allah eternally commands it in the
Koran, as well as Mohammed in his final sermon. Muslim women give
consent to men keeping them as ‘prisoners’ and ‘domestic
animals’.
Mohammed’s
chauvinistic final commands contained in his final sermon may never
be abrogated, so Muslim women cannot be liberated until the end of
time.
With
600 million female captives, Islam is a case of the Stockholm
syndrome on an industrial scale. Muslim women cooperate in their own
captivity because it is Allah’s will that they do so, even to the
point of participating in the honor killing of other female relatives
or their own children.
Co-perpetrators in Honor Killing
Co-perpetrators in Honor Killing
Victims of the Stockholm syndrome accept the violent ideology of their captors. They accept that the captors have the right to take hostages and even murder them in the name of their cause. As the Stockholm syndrome deepens, hostages finally become true believers and even co-conspirators as was observed in the famous case of Patty Hearst.
In
Islam, all women are permanent hostages who may be honor killed by
their male guardians at any moment. The justification for honor
killing comes from Allah’s eternally valid words commanding the
murder of apostates who leave Islam (K.18.81).
A
Muslim, who refuses to be compliant to Islamic theocracy, becomes a
guilty non-Muslim kafir, one who ‘hides’ the fact that Mohammed
is right.
Islam’s
non-compliant women have become kafirs and traitors to Islam who must
be executed. Under the draconian rules of Sharia law, no blood
compensation is paid to a family in the killing of an apostate from
Islam nor is there any Sharia punishment for the killer (Reliance of
the Traveller, o8.4). This means that murdering an apostate is
normative Islam. This permanent death threat to all Muslims who rebel
—and especially to all women—is the key component of Islam’s
Stockholm syndrome.
A
Muslim woman has three options: 1) embrace the Stockholm syndrome, 2)
wait to be honor-killed or 3) flee Islam (suicide is one way of
fleeing Islam).
Tragically,
many victims of Islamic honor-killings have first been lulled into a
sense of false security by their captors before being betrayed and
honor-killed by them. Giving false assurances to victims and luring
them into a trap is the sacred example of Mohammed in the Hadiths and
Sira.
As
lifelong prisoners of men, Muslim women are Islam’s first victims.
After succumbing to the Stockholm syndrome, Muslim women endorse
Mohammed’s brutal methods. The more they dissociate and identify
with Mohammed, the more women act as co-dependents and
co-perpetrators.
In
spite of thousands of Islamic honor killings each year, Western
Feminists have shown little interest in addressing Islam’s
industrial-scale misogyny. Western Feminists have instead become
pacified dhimmis, unconsciously embracing Islam’s Stockholm
syndrome and abetting the perpetrators, rather than live under the
constant anxiety of jihad. By their silence, Western Feminists have
given up the fight against male supremacism and submitted to Islam.
The
permanent threat of death for non-compliance is the key to
understanding Islam’s great psychological control over women and
dhimmis. This ‘living under the avalanche’ creates the Stockholm
syndrome which gives Islam its enduring stability and power.
The
Stockholm syndrome is arguably Mohammed’s greatest discovery and
the key to Islam’s success. Mohammed and his followers thought the
Stockholm syndrome was a true miracle! But it is no miracle.
Fear
transforms Islamic society through the unending threat of violence
and death. The Stockholm syndrome is the psychological heart of
Islam.
No comments:
Post a Comment