Ivory Coast Joins the Ummah

Thursday, December 09, 2010

The latest news from the Ivory Coast sounds like corrupt business-as-usual in sub-Saharan Africa. An election of questionable quality is held. The incumbent protests the legitimacy of the newcomer’s victory. The international community then puts pressure on the incumbent to recognize the “democratic” result. So what else is new?

The general outline is given in this article from The Cape Times:

ABIDJAN: The African Union (AU) has suspended Ivory Coast until President Laurent Gbagbo hands over power to Alassane Ouattara, considered by the AU the winner of last month’s election.

The AU’s peace and security commissioner, Ramtane Lamamra, said in Ethiopia that the executive council had decided to suspend Ivory Coast “until Mr Ouattara, a democratically elected president, takes over effectively”.

And the United States is threatening sanctions if Mr. Gbagbo fails to cede control to his opponent.

What this article and others like it don’t tell you is that we are witnessing one of those watershed moments in history: Ivory Coast is about to toggle from a (mostly) Christian country to a Muslim country. The winner of the election is a Muslim — the head of the Muslim rebel forces in the north of the country — and the loser is a non-Muslim. Ivory Coast is on the verge of officially joining the Ummah.

The report below cites the surge of illegal immigrants from Ivory Coast’s Muslim neighbors as the cause of Mr. Ouattara’s victory. However, Ivory Coast is already a member of the OIC, and as of the 2004 figures in my database, it had a population of 17,298,040, with 6,677,043 Muslims. That’s 38.6%, which is already past the point where you would expect the imposition of sharia. What is happening now is simply the formal handing-over of the keys.

Muslims do not need to be in the majority to force Islamic rule on a country. They simply need to be present in numbers sufficient to terrorize, threaten, bribe, and defraud their way into power. The exact percentage varies according to circumstances, but absent intervention from an external force, full Islamization can be expected by the time a country becomes 40% Muslim.

Below is a bulletin on the situation from ASSIST News:

Ivory Coast on the brink
A call to pray for Ivory Coast
By Elizabeth Kendal

Religious Liberty Prayer Bulletin (RLPB) 085
Special to ASSIST News Service

AUSTRALIA (ANS) — Like Sudan and Nigeria, Ivory Coast sits atop a volatile ethnic-religious fault-line. Whilst the less-developed North has long been predominantly Muslim, the South — Ivory Coast’s economic and political engine — has historically been predominantly Christian and African Traditional Religion (ATR). Decades of mass immigration (1960-1993) from the neighbouring Muslim states of Burkina Faso, Mali and Guinea might have been great for the economy, but they have tipped the demographic balance so that Ivory Coast — officially about one-third Muslim — is actually majority Muslim.

The civil war that erupted in September 2002 was portrayed by the international media as a crisis of democracy and human rights caused by Southern xenophobia and Islamophobia. In reality, Ivory Coast’s crisis is the consequence of decades of mass Muslim immigration coupled with political ambition and an internationally-sponsored Islamic agenda. The civil war was fought essentially between those who want all Ivory Coast’s Muslim immigrants naturalised — giving Ivory Coast a Muslim majority overnight — and those who do not. Though he denies it, former Prime Minister Alassane Ouattara, a Northern Muslim, was doubtless behind the September 2002 failed coup that triggered the war. Ouattara and his party, the Rally of the Republicans (RDR), have been playing the race and religion cards for political gain. Ouattara’s intent has been to have all the Muslim immigrants naturalised (over 4 million: estimated to comprise between 30 and 40 percent of the total population) so that he (their champion) can dragnet the Muslim vote. Ouattara has long had his eye on the presidency.

The civil war left Ivory Coast totally polarised, split between a virtually ethnic-religiously cleansed, rebel-controlled Muslim North and a government-controlled predominantly Christian, non-Muslim South. Since the war the North has been in serious decline with AIDS, poverty and lawlessness increasing exponentially. In November 2004 Ivory Coast’s Christian president, Laurent Gbagbo, launched surprise airstrikes against rebel positions in the North in an attempt to reunify the country. However, former colonial power France (which backs the rebels [Muslims] for economic gain) intervened, razing all IC’s airforce planes, destroying runways and sending tanks against the Presidential Palace, around which loyalists formed a human shield.

The West had insisted that Ivory Coast could be reconciled, reunified and essentially saved by means of democratic elections, such is their faith in ‘democracy’ and the inherent goodness of man. In reality, the divisions are so profound and the stakes are so high that, unless genuine reconciliation occurred first, elections could only trigger conflict. Elections were held on 28 November 2010, with both Gbagbo and Ouattara claiming victory. The US, European Union and African Union have recognised Ouattara as the winner and called for Gbagbo to respect democracy and step down. Russia meanwhile is blocking a UN statement that would recognise Ouatarra, saying that this is not the UN’s role. Ivory Coast’s non-Muslims are traumatised, fearing that their homeland — once the most prosperous ‘Christian’ nation in West Africa, home to the region’s largest cathedral, home-base to most of West Africa’s regional Christian ministries — is about to come under Muslim political domination.

(COMMENT: Ivory Coast’s crisis — the consequence of decades of Muslim mass immigration — is a foretaste of what several states in democratic Europe may be facing in a generation or two.)

PLEASE PRAY SPECIFICALLY FOR GOD TO:

  • give Ivory Coast’s Christian leaders — pastors and politicians — great spiritual wisdom and authority.
  • bring revival to the Church in Ivory Coast so believers will be compelled to go out with the gospel in boldness, empowered by the Holy Spirit, so that Ivory Coast might be spiritually transformed. For only then will the peoples ‘beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks …’ (Isaiah 2:4 ESV)
  • intervene in the tense climate by interposing a spirit of restraint, compelling the people to seek a negotiated solution as a means of averting another destructive civil war — a war that would certainly attract international jihadists.


Hat tip: Frontinus.

Posted by Baron Bodissey at 12/09/2010 11:49:00 PM Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Google Buzz

2 comments:

Profitsbeard said… 1

This post has been removed by the author. 12/10/2010 10:03 PM

Profitsbeard said… 2

Those who do not name Islam as the deathcult that it is invite their own destruction by its imperialistic, totalitarian Terror.

The Koran is a poison pill for Civilization.

Resist it, or perish.

12/10/2010 10:05 PM

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2010/12/ivory-coast-joins-ummah.html

About these ads

10 responses to “Ivory Coast Joins the Ummah

  1. Pingback: Islamic Takeover of Ivory Coast Imminent | Conservatives for America

  2. Indeed. This is how the West will fall to Islam. Thousands of years of civilization democratically wiped out by the muslim majority around the world.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/8238812/Surge-in-Britons-converting-to-Islam.html

    • Encouraged by our politicians- the EUMED is intended to flood Europe and the UK with their chosen gestapo that of islamic followers!

      When ex muslim Dr Sookhdeo wrote about THE HIJRA years ago he was banned from our written and spoken media.

      THE HIJRA

      Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration
      By Sam Solomon and Elias Al Maqdisi
      ANM Publishers, 2009
      139 pp., $14.95
      Within the past few decades, mosques have increasingly dotted the landscapes of American and European cities and towns, with mega mosques often overshadowing adjacent, centuries-old churches in predominantly Christian regions. Islamic schools or academies and a host of Muslim organizations have become omnipresent across the West.

      Meanwhile, Americans and Europeans have made countless accommodations to Muslim demands. They have included footbaths; high-decibel, five-times-daily calls to prayer; segregated male-female gym and swimming pool hours; halal food; workplace dispensations for handling pork products and for female head and face coverings; and special, public prayer rooms. Also, shari’ah-compliant financial transactions, the expunging of offensive likenesses of Mohammed or imagined depictions of Arabic characters that connote “Allah,” official swearings-in on Korans in place of customary Bibles, the neutralizing of official descriptive language about Islamists and the jihad, the revision of so-called offensive content in movies and television programs, the removal of representations of pigs from the public sphere, and many other acculturations to Muslim entreaties have all been made in the service of respecting Muslim religious beliefs and practices.

      To those in Western democracies, these accommodating actions appear, on the surface, to be little more than harmless civil gestures, respecting the needs of a growing religion in their midst and welcoming a new addition to their proud, multicultural tradition. Many Westerners pat themselves on the back for their liberal bent, their tolerance and their open-mindedness.

      Little do they realize that this strategic pattern of demands is part of an insidious, 1,400-year-old proscription for Muslims that originates in the Koran and the Sunnah, the deeds of Mohammed. It is the Hijra or doctrine of immigration. Modeled by Mohammed’s migration from Mecca to Medina, this immigration is not to a romanticized melting pot wherein newcomers gratefully search for opportunities for a better life in liberty and freely offer their talents and loyalty to benefit their new homeland. This is immigration for Islamic expansionism employing ethnic separatism to gain special status and privileges within the host country. Hijra is immigration designed to subvert and subdue non-Muslim societies and pave the way for eventual, total Islamization.

      In their compelling book, “Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration,” authors Sam Solomon, a former professor of shari’ah law and convert to Christianity, and Elias Al Maqdisi, an expert on Islamic teachings, explain the migration of Muslims to the Dar-al-Harb, the “land of war,” as a religious edict with a basis in Islamic doctrine. They delineate the step-by-step process of this 1,400-year-old strategy of conquest. It is a transitional strategy which they characterize as the most important step in spreading Islam and preparing for jihad. From their carefully delineated treatise on Hijra, it is clear that migration in concert with military conquest comprise the bookends of Islamic expansionism.

      Solomon and Al Maqdisi review the phases of the Hijra and its juristic or legal basis in Islamic doctrine. Under the cover of taquiya or deception, the step-by-step methodology of the migration process is designed to subdue, then, subjugate the host culture, culminating in implementation of shari’ah law.

      The beginning phase of Islamization usually includes activities pivotal to building a physical presence. It consists of public calls to prayer; founding of schools, libraries and research centers; and the teaching of Arabic — actions that appear to be reasonable and respectable infrastructure requirements necessary to support the presence of a faith. At this point in the Hijra, it is permissible for Muslims to engage in haram, or forbidden actions, out of necessity to establish and empower the umma or Muslim community. Koranic rules such as the prohibition against friendships with infidels are suspended while the objectives of future Islamization are systematically put into place. In its initial phase, the Hijra passes scrutiny by the West whose citizens erroneously view the migration as mainly economic — a pilgrimage for a better life.

      Solomon and Maqdisi examine the comprehensive strategy that begins with the establishment of the umma or Muslim community. The mosque becomes the locus of power, a strategic base and the center of all activities. They explain how in this embryonic phase, a top priority is the scouting for new arrivals to expand and empower the existing Muslim community. Muslim leaders offer solicitous assistance and helpful suggestions for schools, housing, mosque worship, halal markets and other services to ingratiate themselves with new arrivals and bring them into the local Muslim community. Agents of local mosques, ever alert for new immigrants and potential converts, engage in subtle forms of indoctrination and police local Muslims.

      This first step of establishing the mosque as the center of local Islamic life and activities is mistakenly viewed by non-Muslims as merely the benign construction of houses of worship. Its true goal escapes notice, that of firmly establishing a purposeful non-integrated Muslim identity to advance the goal of Islamization.

      Once the consolidation of the Muslim community occurs under the radar, the purposeful fight for special status and shari’ah follows. As dictated by the Koran and Sunnah, segregation from non-Muslims is a natural outcome of the advancement of the Hijra.

      Visible changes begin to be apparent as the Muslim population achieves more of a critical mass. Over time, the dress code, often beginning with a hijab in segregated enclaves and moving toward the complete covering of a neqab in the public sphere, separates Muslim women from men and from non-Muslim women. Eventually, as the host population becomes familiarized with what they believe to be the requirements of religious piety, demands are made for segregation at public facilities, in the workplace and at schools and universities. Requests for halal food, shari’ah-compliant financial transactions and the addition of Muslim holidays to public calendars further elevate the Muslim community with a special status making them separate and distinct.

      All demands are initially presented as benign attempts to accommodate the religious requirements of devout Muslims. Any actions to suppress them are decried as religious discrimination. In the United States, requests for separate swimming and gym hours for Muslim men and women, demands for identification photos for licenses for women wearing hijabs and refusals to handle pork products or don immodest dress in the workplace have appeared. At this point, representatives of the Muslim community are often working cooperatively with the host government to bring about change. As Solomon and Maqdisi explain, the idea is to get the host society accustomed to Muslim buildings, customs, holidays, dress and food. Newcomers are encouraged by Muslim leadership to become citizens, vote and run for political office to increase the umma’s influence.

      At the university level, students are indoctrinated to become advocates for Islam, engage in interfaith activities and da’wa or proselytization and train for jihad. Non-Muslims professors are solicited through zakat or payments to present courses favorable to Islam and write and speak publicly to promote Islam. The bequeathal by Saudi Prince Al-waleed bin Talal of $20 million dollars for Islamic study centers at Harvard and Georgetown universities, respectively, was a gesture to insure the promulgation of positive research, publications and presentations toward Islam.

      In “Modern Day Trojan Horse,” Solomon and Maqdisi point out that as Muslims gain power and mass in the host country, consolidation of identity occurs, as well as strengthening of their infrastructure of mosques, schools, clubs, organizations and media. The doctrine of taquiya is firmly in place as Muslims hide behind the dictates of their religious devotion and seek cultural changes in the land of the non-Muslim or kuffar. At this more advanced stage, attempts are made to silence opponents and curry favor. The judicious use of zakat elicits favorable views of Muslims and Islam from politicians, representatives from the media and other organizations. For example, within the last couple of years in the United States, the words, “jihad” and “Islamofascism,” have been expunged from the lexicon of government officials and the words, “Islamic” and “terrorism,” are rarely paired. In Europe, which is further advanced in this process, a dangerous turn materialized with the murder of filmmaker ,Theo Van Gogh, who produced a film on the subjugation of women in Islam, and with death threats against Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilder for his outspoken criticism of Islam.

      As Islamization of the host culture proceeds apace, preparations begin for learning the skills necessary for jihad. Young jihadists may travel to their countries of origin for further indoctrination and terrorist training. This development has been noted within Somali Muslim communities in Minnesota and Tennessee. Young Muslims have disappeared to Somalia to rendezvous with Al Shabaab, a terrorist group linked to Al Qaeda.

      As the resident Muslim community becomes more established and begins to wield considerable power in the political arena, pressure is brought to bear on politicians to permit shari’ah law courts in exchange for Muslim votes. This is very much evident in Britain where parallel systems of legal jurisprudence currently coexist. Muslim inhabitants of the host country are pressured to follow shari’ah law in lieu of the prevailing legal system. Several recent legal decisions by non-Muslim judges in Europe have referenced shari’ah law as a standard for verdicts concerning Muslims.

      As the intensity of the hijra advances, the appearance of open ghettos or Muslim-only regions occurs. These are areas where non-Muslims are essentially prohibited and where, if they enter, they actually may be physically threatened. Such no-go zones, where even non-Muslim community workers are unwelcome, exist throughout Europe today. Remarkably, Muslim movements are never restricted; they venture freely anywhere in the host country.

      As Solomon and Maqdisi point out, the Hijra is a comprehensive and direct political attempt to undermine the culture and values of the host country and replace them with Islam and shari’ah. It is an insidious migration seeking transformation of the culture, behaviors, customs, rules and laws of a host society to spread Islam and establish an Islamic state. The stages of the Hijra are very much evident in varying degrees in all Western societies today. Ironically, our open democratic societies with constitutionally mandated freedoms of speech, religion and assembly have facilitated this march toward the very demise of our way of life.

      “Modern Day Trojan Horse” should be required reading for all citizens of Western democracies who urgently need to understand the Hijra and the threat it represents. The book sounds the alarm for the cautious evaluation of what may appear to be innocent religious practice in our midst but has sinister motives to transform our societies forever.
      64 Comments on “The Hijra”

      http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/the_hijra.html

      Can’t allow the natives to have too much knowledge of their future can they?

  3. Pingback: We are losing Africa to Islam — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami

  4. Pingback: Muslims Slaughter Over 1,000 in Ivory Coast Massacre | Conservatives for America

  5. Pingback: UN Helping Muslims: MASSACRE: MUSLIM TROOPS SLAUGHTER 1,000 CHRISTIANS IN IVORY COAST | Centurean2′s Weblog

  6. Pingback: The Fairfacts Media Show » Blog Archive » Muslim Immigrants slaughter Christian natives as Islamists take over !!

  7. Shep,

    Why would the US and UN support a radical Muslim??

    LOL- Research yourself child!

    Start with Trojan Horse – Al Hijra.
    USA Supported radical islam in Yugoslavia KLA!!
    USA Bill Clinton used US dollars to build an Al-Qaeda monument then stood head bowed like the US dhimmi he is!!

    UN- checkout the UN before making stupid comments about this Pro islamic organisation of Fabians.

    Where ever you have islam you’ll always have Al-Hijra and Jihad thats’ the nature of the beast.

    Religion?
    Thats’ your own big mistake!

  8. Pingback: Christian Brothers crucified by Ouattara forces in Ivory Coast | Conservatives for America

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s