Home Islam is Colonialism, Palestine is Colonialism
Home Islam is Colonialism, Palestine is Colonialism

Islam is Colonialism, Palestine is Colonialism

At Israeli Apartheid Week, campus haters claim to be fighting “colonialism” by fighting Jews. Columbia University’s Center for Palestine Studies, dedicated to a country that doesn’t exist and which has produced nothing worth studying except terrorism, features diatribes such as Palestine Re-Covered: Reading a Settler Colonial Landscape”. This word salad is a toxic stew of historical revisionism being used to justify the Muslim settler colonization of the indigenous Jewish population.

You can’t colonize Palestine because you can't colonize colonizers. The Muslim population in Israel is a foreign colonist population. The indigenous Jewish population can resettle its own country, but it can’t colonize it.

Muslims invaded, conquered and settled Israel. They forced their language and laws on the population. That's the definition of colonialism. You can't colonize and then complain that you're being colonized when the natives take back the power that you stole from them.

There are Muslims in Israel for the same reason that there are Muslims in India. They are the remnants of a Muslim colonial regime that displaced and oppressed the indigenous non-Muslim population.

There are no serious historical arguments to be made against any of this.

The Muslim conquests and invasions are well-documented. The Muslim settlements fit every historical template of colonialism complete with importing a foreign population and social system that was imposed on the native population. Until they began losing wars to the indigenous Jewish population, the Muslim settlers were not ashamed of their colonial past, they gloried in it. Their historical legacy was based on seizing indigenous sites, appropriating them and renaming them after the new conquerors.

The only reason there’s a debate about the Temple Mount is because Caliph Omar conquered Jerusalem and ordered a mosque built on a holy Jewish site. The only reason there’s a debate about East Jerusalem is because invading Muslim armies seized half the city in 1948, bombed synagogues and ethnically cleansed the Jewish population to achieve an artificial Muslim settler majority.

The only Muslim claim to Jerusalem or to any other part of Israel is based purely on the enterprise of colonial violence. There is no Muslim claim to Israel based on anything other than colonialism, invasion and settlement.

Israel is littered with Omar mosques, including one built in the courtyard of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, because Islam is a colonial entity whose mosques testify to their invasive origins by celebrating colonialism as their true religion. The faith of Islam is the sworn religion of the sword.

Islam is a religion of colonialism that spread through invasion, settlement and conquest. Its caliphs, from the original invaders, including Omar, to the current Caliph of ISIS, wielded and wield religious authority in the service of the Islamic colonial enterprise.

Allah is the patron deity of colonialism. Jihad is just colonialism in Arabic. Islamic theology is nothing but the manifest destiny of the Muslim conquest of the world, colonial settler enterprises dressed up in the filmy trappings of religion appropriated from the culture of conquered Jewish and Christian minorities. Muslim terrorism is a reactionary colonial response to the liberation movements of the indigenous Jewish population.

Even “Allahu Akbar” did not originate as a religious sentiment. It does not mean “God is Great”, as it is often mistranslated. It was Mohammed’s taunt to the Jews he was ethnically cleansing. His purge of a minority group proved that “Allah was Greater”. Islamic colonialism is used to demonstrate the existence of Allah. And the best way to worship Allah is through the colonialism of the Jihad.

Islam would not have existed without colonialism. It still can’t exist without it. That is why the violence continues. The only way to end the violence is for Muslims to reject their theology of colonialism.

But instead of taking ownership of their real history, the Muslim settler population evades its guilt through propaganda by claiming to be the victims of colonialism by the indigenous Jewish population. This twisted historical revisionism is backed by bizarre nonsense such as claiming that Jesus was a Palestinian or that the Arabs are descended from the Philistines. The Muslim settlers insist on continuing to celebrate colonialism while claiming to be an indigenous population that was always living in Israel.

You can have one or the other. You can have your mosques celebrating the conquest and suppression of the indigenous population or your claims of being the indigenous population. But you can’t switch from being the indigenous population to being its conquerors whenever it suits your pseudo-historical narrative. You can’t claim to be the Philistines, the Jews and their Islamic conquerors at the same time.

From its Roman origins, Palestine has always been a colonial fantasy of remaking Israel by erasing its original Jewish identity. The Arab mercenaries who were deployed by the Romans in that original colonial enterprise continued it by becoming self-employed conquerors for their own colonial empire. The name Palestine remains a linguistic settlement for reimagining a country without a people and a past as a blank slate on which the colonial identity of the invaders can be written anew. That is still the role that the Palestine myth and mythology serves.

Abdul Rahim al-Shaikh complains about “linguistic colonialism”. When Muslims rename the Spring of Elisha, a Jewish biblical figure, Ein as-Sultan in honor of an Islamic colonial ruler, that’s linguistic colonialism. When Jews restore the original indigenous names that Jewish sites held before Muslim colonialism, that’s not colonization. It’s the exact opposite. It’s decolonization.

Promoting mythical claims of a Palestinian state isn’t decolonization, it’s colonization. Or recolonization. Advocates for “Palestine” are not fighting colonialism, but promoting it. They are advocating for a discredited Muslim settler fantasy and against the indigenous Jewish population of Israel.

Abdul Rahim al-Shaikh complains about “geographic amnesia” among “Palestinians”. There’s no geographic amnesia because you can’t remember what never existed. There’s only paramnesia because there was never a country named Palestine.

Palestine has no history. It has no people. It has no borders. It has never been anything except a colonial invention. It is a name used by a variety of foreign settlers operating on behalf of colonial empires.

You can’t colonize Palestine. How can you colonize a colonial myth? You can only decolonize it.

Every Jewish home built on land formerly under the control of the Caliphs is decolonization and decaliphization.

When Jews ascend the Temple Mount, they are also engaging in decolonization and decaliphization.

When the liberation forces of the Jewish indigenous population shoot a Jihadist colonist fighting to impose yet another Islamic State on Israel, that too is decolonization and decaliphization.

Resistance to Islamic terrorism is resistance to colonialism. And Jews have the longest history of resisting the Islamic State under its various Caliphs throughout history. Israel is still resisting the colonialist Jihadist plans for the restorations of the Caliphate.

Zionism is a machine that kills Islamic colonialism.

The existence of Israel not only means the decolonization of Abdul Rahim al-Shaikh’s imaginary colonial fantasies of “Palestine”, but inspires resistance in peoples struggling against Islamic colonialism throughout the region, from the Copts to the Berbers to secular intellectuals fighting for freedom.

Islamic colonialism has always been defeated, whether at the Gates of Vienna or in the Sinai Desert. Its colonial fantasies are false and will be defeated as many times as it takes, whether in the form of Palestine or ISIS.


  1. I blame the British for screwing up Israel. In a nutshell:

    1) 1917 - Brits wanted US in WWI and realized Jewish influence in US so issued Balfour Declaration that said the Jews get their homeland. Also a payback to Chaim Weizman for his contribution to war effort.

    2) 1917/1918 - The 400 year Ottoman Muslim rule ends in land of Israel as General Allenby defeats the Ottoman Turks.

    3) Jan 3, 1919 - Prince Feisal Prince/Leader of Syria and later Iraq agrees in Treaty and in writing with Weizmann that Jews and Arabs are brothers and ok with Jews having a new land for them in Palestine. Remember under the Ottomans there was no "Palestine" - this was the "Eyalet of Damascus - Southern Syria."

    4) 1920-1922 League of Nations votes 57-0 to give a huge chunk (120,466 square km) to create Jewish State - read especially Article 22 of the Palestine Mandate.

    4)1920 - 1922 Great Britain (99% Arabist) begins policy of screwing the Jews out of their promised homeland -systematically and ruthlessly. Takes 77% of above area and gives it to Hashemites for Jordan

    5) From 1922 to 1948 - Britain reneges on every British promise and every world traety promise made to the Jews and sides with the Arabs in their war against the Jews of the Jewish homeland.

    1945-1948 Labor government tours WWII post war Europe and tells surviving death camp Jews to go back to their country of origin: Meaning Germany, Poland etc. - but not to even think about going to Israel.


    From Time Immemorial by Joan Peters
    Battleground by Samuel Katz


    and all the treaties and source documents.

    No British treachery and stupidity - no problem today.

  2. Infidel10/4/16

    Good article.

  3. Rochel Sylvetsky11/4/16

    You forgot the Canaanites. Ashrawi once wrote in National Geographic, of all places, that the Palestinians were the original Canaanites - a smart move as the Bible says they were there when Abraham came. Except that there are no more Canaanites, as there are no more Gergashites, etc.

  4. Y. Ben-David11/4/16

    Required reading for everyone!
    It is telling that the Arabs don't even have a name for the country...they have to reach back to name it after an extinct tribe of idol worshiping Philistines with whom they have nothing in common. It is actually degrading for Muslims to claim a connection with idol worshipers like the Philistines. Among themselves, as Daniel points out, they would never brag about that, they would instead say they are descendants of the imperialist Arab/Muslim invaders that came after Muhammed. The adoption of the phony "Philistine/Palestinian" identity is intended for consumption by the non-Muslim world only .

    In addition, it is vital that people understand the Jerusalem is NOT "holy" to the Muslims, it is ANTI-HOLY. At the times it was under Muslim rule it was purposely neglected because Mecca and Medina are holy and to encourage the idea that Jerusalem is somehow holy to Muslims is heresy in that it that downgrades the status of Mecca and Medina. In reality , the Muslims believe they have to rule Jerusalem in order to eradicate the view that it is holy. Islam is a religion that bases its claim to legitimacy on triumphalism....the fact that it conquers other religions and then builds its mosques on their pre-existing holy sites to show that are now passe. Thus, when the Jews return to Jerusalem, this seems to be a direct proof that their religion is false and they fear that many believers will now come to the conclusion that they have been following the wrong religion. Thus, the Muslim hysteria over control of Jerusalem, and the invention of propaganda that claims, falsely, that Jerusalem is "holy" to Islam when, as was pointed out, it is anti-holy to them.

  5. Great stuff. Two questions:

    1. Are the Palestinians Arab Muslims, non-Arabic Muslims or a mix? If it's the middle one then they didn't invade but were converted to Islam at some point. Would we need a DNA test or do the Palestinians proudly claim Arabic heritage?
    2. Was it the Muslims who drove the Jews out or the Romans? If the latter then it will just be labelled more European colonialism.

    The reason I ask is that I want to use your argument and need to have my facts straight.

    1. Anonymous17/4/17

      An answer to your second question: The Romans exiled the Jewish inhabitants of Judea after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD. It's a destruction that was never forgotten and continues to be remembered in traditions like the groom shattering a glass under the chuppa on his wedding day. To add insult to this horrific injury, the Romans renamed the land Palestine to taunt the Jews with the memory of their longtime enemies the Philistines, believed by some historians to be a seafaring tribe from Crete which settled on the coast of the Promised Land and which the Hebrews/Israelites/Judeans/Jews fought constantly throughout their history. It is from the land being called Palestine/Ottoman Palestine/British Mandate Palestine from which Palestinians get their identification.

  6. Anonymous11/4/16

    I did not know this history but there are many sites that detail the conquest of Palestine by Muslim forces. I think in 636. The idea that Palestine was colonized by Islam presents some difficult questions for those who oppose Israel's existence. If Palestine was colonized and Jews are merely restoring their pre-colonization status, how does that differ from American Indians doing the same - a position supported by the left (read those who generally oppose an "Israeli occupation." Ditto former colonies of the Europeans.

    1. American Indians never had a national character consisting of a common language,common culture, defined borders, or an absolutely centralized capitol. every attempt to do so was endlessly in flux. Anything approaching what we would recognize as a city failed, within a century or two. With this understanding The notion of first nations is a joke.

  7. An almost mathematically clear logical proof of who where the original inhabitants and whom where the real colonizers. A proof which however nowadays way too many even well educated often young westerners utterly fail to understand due to decades of repeated palestinian-arab and left-wing media lies that increasingly obfuscate the light of historical and moral clarity.

  8. If I could force-feed people in this world anything, it would be this post.

  9. sandman, no group is absolutely pure, but their identity is Arab Muslims

    The Romans invaded, using Arab mercenaries as auxiliaries, Herod, e.g. was an Arab, as the empire declined, growing waves of migration followed by conquest took place.

  10. Anonymous11/4/16

    One can be either a good person and a bad muslim or a bad person and a good muslim. A moral dilemma that haunts leftists as well.

  11. Anonymous11/4/16

    As a citizen of Atlantis, I must strongly condemn this slander against our cousins, the Palestinians!

  12. Great writing and a flip on the decades old myth of Jewish 'colonialism'

    Romans renamed Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina after massacring through the land by Hadrian. Byzantines came after that, and then the Muslims and Ottomans.

  13. Herod btw brought relative peace and stability to the region, even though he became progressively more mad and unstable mentally. Thats why Augustus preferred him over others, he never caused problems for Rome. Jewish monarchs prior to Herod were not model rulers, constant infighting, weak central govt, etc

  14. In a million words, SUPERB ARTICLE!

  15. Anonymous11/4/16

    This video provides an excellent visual that greatly refutes the claim that Muslims are victims (instead of the aggressors that they are) throughout history: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_To-cV94Bo

  16. Daniel Greenfield: Herod wasn't Arab but Edomite, one of the oldest peoples in the region East of the Dead Sea. Arabs at that time sited more to the South. The only Arab tribe near to the Edomite and Judeans were the Nabateans who were spread in Northern today's Negev.

    1. Nabateans were in Petra. They had their own faith, culture and deities. And quite abit of art and artifacts that are prized among collectors.

  17. Herod was the son of a Nabatean mother and Idumean father. The Nabateans were Arabs. Some historians theorize that the Idumeans were a Nabatean variant.

    I wrote about this in the past


  18. Anonymous12/4/16

    National Geographic hss been nothing but an islamic propaganda outlet for decades. They consistently lie and whitewash islamic terrorism, persecution (i.e. of the unbeliever in islam), ethnic cleansing (also of the unbeliever in islam) and genocide. Their digusting whitewashing of islamic terrorism in Israel (and India) is particularly blatant and been ongoing since the 1960's.
    I don't believe the scum at National Geographic have ever acknowledged the genocide of some 2.5 to 3 million Hindus in Bangladesh in the 1970's.

  19. When Mark Twain visited the area, it was mostly a barely inhabited wasteland. The Jews than set about to make it bloom. The more the Jews succeeded, the more the Arab freeloaders poured in. In Mandate Palestine, the British rulers chopped off what is now Jordan to give it to the Hashemite Arab dynasty. In the remainder, the British encouraged intensified Arab immigration while discouraging or preventing Jewish immigration, even after the Nazis began their genocide. Despite all this, we have the State of Israel, where Muslims and Christians typically live better than in all the surrounding countries.

  20. Firstly Islam does not equal Arab, The majority of Muslims in the World are not Arab, Somalia and Sudan are still Black African just like Iran is still Persian and Pakistan and Bangladesh are still genetically Indian, Islam didn't "colonize". Philippines are still East Asian and Albania is still White European. Palestine on the other hand is no longer Palestinian, Just like North America is no longer Red Indian and Australian is no longer Australian aboriginal.

    By your twisted schitzoid logic it's okay to blame Black African Christians for colonization because they are Christian. If you can't see the glaring false dichotomy you imposed there's no hope for you and I would strongly advise you to seek psychiatric attention

    1. Anonymous14/4/16

      No need for baseless ad hominem attacks, miss. Your profile seems to indicate that you are a strongly anti-Israel Muslim, might your view be biased somewhat?

  21. We need someone to lead an articulate charge against disparate impact as incompatible with the rule of law and that the rule of law is more important than not being racist.

  22. Islam originated as a tool of Arab conquest. Non-Muslim Arabs were also the victims of this totalitarian ideology, just as Germans and Russians who refused to shout Heil Hitler or endorse Communism could also suffer.

    Islam still remains a tool for projecting the imperial power of Arab kingdoms and states such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, while exploiting non-Arab Muslim populations.

  23. Unknown. Islam is a totalitarian oppressive cult.
    Easy to join, death or total isolation if you reject its murderous leader and evil ideology.
    People of all other religions have religious freedom.
    Islam has a schitzoid leader and brainwashed followers who will and do commit all manner of atrocities in his name. That's what makes this awful ideology different to other world religions.

  24. Infidel12/4/16

    Brilliant and enlightening article. I was just reading the comments on A7 where the article also appears.

  25. Y. Ben-David13/4/16

    The fact that millions of Indians became Muslim as a result of seeing millions of other Muslims killed because they refused to become Muslims does not negate the colonialist nature of Arab-created Islam and it does not "Indianize" Islam. Compare to the two parts of India that were created when the British pulled out in 1947. The Hindu-majority state of India has been pulling itself up by its bootstraps and has begun to take off economically and is providing a better life for much of its population. The Muslim Indians who created Pakistan created a state that tore itself apart in a civil war that lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands in Bengali East Pakistan (Muslims butchering their brother Muslims whom they claim to love). The remnant (West) Pakistan has become a failed state, wracked by ongoing violence on several fronts (not just the Taliban) and vicious persecution of minorities such as the Christians and Shi'ite Muslim (which is ironic because Muhammed Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan was born a Shia Muslim).
    Thus, we see that although a Muslim India arose, it adopted all the negative influences that the original Arab-based Islam bore with it.

    1. I do agree with this and it is indeed sad. The ongoing bloodshed in the Middle East is Islam against Islam. And it begs the question of how can ther eonly one God and how can believers in this God slaughter each other with such vengeance?

  26. Anonymous13/4/16

    I. McMahon Correspondence gives Arab chief the right to determine the border for the independent Arab state.

    The letter from McMahon to Hussein dated 24 October 1915 on the independence of the Arabs subject:
    ...Subject to the above modifications, Great Britain is prepared to recognize and support the independence of the Arabs within the territories in the limits and boundaries proposed by the Sherif of Mecca.

    II. Partition in 1947 is accepted by Israel, even though it dismisses Jerusalem. By that Jews officially buried any other border after that, and gave up Jerusalem forever.
    Jews should not eat the vomit.

    III. The confusing term "national home" is the insult to Jews because in 1914 the world was introduced to other term "National Home" for Bohemian refugees in America. It is somewhat non-existent phrase in diplomacy.
    According to the building permit issued March 20, 1914, the Bohemian National Home (Cesky Norodni Dum, as written in stone on the front of the building) was built by a group called the Bohemian Society. The original Bohemian immigrants came to Detroit to escape Prussian oppression and economic hardship in their homeland.

  27. I love the article but almost no one on our side uses these arguments, with the exception of the Kahanists and similar factions. Its always we want peace, look at Israel's tech and how homosexual friendly we are, it's pathetic.

  28. Anonymous13/4/16

    Jews should stop referring to Balfour and San Remo. No one uses the term "National home" in diplomacy. The term is a joke or insult.
    Britons do not promise Jews to give them independence, but they do promise independence of Arabs (McMahon-Hussein).

  29. Islam is the system of Arabs to control other peoples' conscience and properties

    It is a tool invented by Arab peninsula Mouhammadians to conquer and control hundreds of different ancient peoples (Assyrians, Edomite, Nabateans, ) and tribes. They already did a "good job" by conquer and dominate the world between Indonesia and Morocco. Islam is the greatest, longest and cruelest colonial regime in human history.

    Unlike nation-states in Europe, modern Lebanese, Jordanian, Syrian, Libyans, Saudis and Iraqi "nationalities" did not evolve. They were arbitrarily and artificially created by colonial powers to compete and control the Muslim aggressiveness. The latest "Palestinian people" was invented as a tool of Muslims to fight against indigenous Jews located in the middle of their Islamic space (Dahr el-Islam). As far as Muslims think, any of their conquests in history regarded as their "natural territory", even taken back by the indigenous locals. In that sense, once Muslims conquered Palestine it is theirs forever, exactly as they still regard Spain, Portugal, Southern France and certain territories in the Balkan as conquered by Christians.

    The other not-Islamized-yet territories all over the world are called by Muslims "Dahr el-Harb" (the space of war and conquer) which yet waited to be conquered by them and redeem the world by the returning of the 12th Imam (the Islamic interpretation of idea of Messiah).

  30. It doesn't follow that Non Arab Muslims are not invaders. Once conquered by Arab Muslims, they saw it as Islamic land, and Muslims from many different places might move there. The Ottomans, for example, deliberately moved people there, but there was other movement amongst the Muslim Umma.


Post a Comment

You May Also Like