Top Menu

The Jews Are Helping Muslims Take Over The West


By Garibaldi

One often hears Islamophobes in the “counterjihad” movement claiming to be defenders of the “Judeo-Christian” West against the spread of Islam and the enfranchisement of Muslims in Western democracies. The term Judeo-Christian gained currency in the middle of the 20th century,

“promoted by groups which evolved into the National Conference of Christians and Jews, to fight antisemitism by expressing a more inclusive idea of American values rather than just Christian or Protestant.”

Ironically, in the past several decades and especially since 9/11, Judeo-Christian has most often been used by the rightwing to exclude differing religions and cultures from staking their own claim to Americanness, specifically, to amplify the so-called “Islamic threat.”

The rightwing considers America’s “uniqueness” to be rooted in its Judeo-Christian values. Take radio host Dennis Prager, who writes,

[o]nly America has called itself Judeo-Christian. America is also unique in that it has always combined secular government with a society based on religious values. Along with the belief in liberty—as opposed to, for example, the European belief in equality, the Muslim belief in theocracy, and the Eastern belief in social conformity—Judeo-Christian values are what distinguish America from all other countries.

The claims about “European,” “Muslim,” and “Eastern” societies are simplistic generalizations but there is some truth to Prager’s claim that “only America has called itself Judeo-Christian,” in so far as the USA is where Judeo-Christianism was born. If one can speak in such broad terms at all of an alliance/unity between Jews and Christians it is relatively recent; only 70 years out of the past 2,000 years.

A different kind of alliance

A recent article published on Loonwatch about the Spanish government’s commitment to give descendants of Sephardic Jews expelled over 500 years ago from Andalus automatic citizenship brought to mind the longer and deeper history of Jewish and Muslim collaboration.

The history of Jewish-Muslim alliance has led some scholars to the interesting thesis that the roots of medieval European Christian anti-Semitism was rooted not in charges of deicide (Jews killed Jesus) against Jews but in their alliance and collaboration with Muslims.

In Allan Harris Cutler and Helen Elmquist Cutler’s book, “The Jews as Ally of the Muslim,” the authors,

[R]evise the traditional explanations of the roots of anti-Semitism. They contend that the great outburst of anti-Semitism in Western Europe during the Middle Ages … derived from primarily anti-Muslimism and the association of Jew with Muslim.

Islamophobe Daniel Pipes, in one of his less bellicose and polemical articles wrote a review of the book in 1987 that is worth reading, concluding that “it offers an intriguing and ultimately convincing argument.” Though he takes exception to the authors’ advice to Pope John Paul II to “transform his office and mission from a more narrowly Christian into a broadly Abrahamic one . . . to create a new spiritual and institutional unity between Jews, Christians, and Muslims.”

Among certain nationalists and White Power currents in the “counterjihad” there is a continuation of the idea that Jews are allying with Muslims to help them take over the West, just as Jews aided Muslims in conquering Hispania from Visigoth tyranny.

In the view of these counterjihadists Jewish intellectuals have opened the gates of fortified Europe and America through modern day liberalism. Hence, their usage of “Leftist” in the familiar Islamophobic expression, “Leftist-Muslim alliance to destroy the West,” is a P.C. way to refer to Jews. “Leftist” masks an undercurrent of antiSemitism, since in their view Jew=Leftist.

The website Islam Versus Europe: Where Islam Spreads, Freedom Dies, did a three part series titled, “Jewish collaboration with Muslims during the invasion of Spain” by Cheradnine Zakalwe. The website has a global Alexa ranking of 703,552 and a US ranking of 262,275.


IslamVersusEurope is considered by other “counterjihadists” to be a “respected CounterJihad blog” and is linked and blogrolled on numerous Islamophobic sites. The site has also been approvingly linked by Deacon Robert Spencer even after Zakalwe’s series of articles. (Not surprising considering Spencer’s alliance with antiSemites such as Eric Allen Bell and the anti-Jewish stances of his ally Pamela Geller).


The main point of Zakalwe’s three part series is summed up in his first post,

So the Jews in Spain were enslaving European Christians. This provoked the irritation of other European Christians, who then took measures against the Jews. This caused the Jews to reach out to their fellow Jews abroad and to the Arabs, urging them to invade Spain and bring this Christian oppression to an end. When they did so, the Jews eagerly collaborated with the Muslims, acting as administrators for the conquered cities and realm.

The parallels with our own time are striking, with Jewish intellectuals having paved the way for the modern Muslim conquest by pushing the benefits of immigration, diversity, tolerance, special minority protection, etc., denigrating nationalism and wielding the Nazi stick forcefully against anyone bold enough to dissent. (Emphasis mine)

These views are not limited to Zakalwe but can also be found on unabashedly racist and Islamophobic sites like Occidental Dissent and Occidental Observer.

The truth is that yes, there was a long history of collaboration and affinity between Muslims and Jews which fueled animosity on the part of European Christendom. Pipes in his review of the Cutlers’ study even notes,

[T]he Hebrew language shares much with Arabic, and Judaism shares much with Islam; on the most abstract level, both are religions of law, while Christianity is a religion of faith. More specifically, they share many features such as circumcision, dietary regulations, and similar sexual codes. Further, because the Muslims were preeminent in the medieval centuries, “Jews themselves associated Jew with Muslim.” When this became known among the Christians, it much harmed the Jews’ position. Most damaging of all, Jews on occasion helped Muslim troops against Christians (as in the initial Arab conquest of Spain) and some Jews held prominent positions in Muslim governments at war with the Christians. Even when they did not actually take part in the fighting, “Jews usually rejoiced when Christian territory fell into Islamic hands.”

Mattai and Pope Alexander

Mattai and Pope Alexander

While there were great similarities and affinities, it must be pointed out that it is only logical that Jews would ally with those who would treat them better and with whom relations would be more advantageous. If medieval European Christians were offering less discrimination and interference in religious, family and financial life than Muslims then certainly Jews would have collaborated with Christians more than Muslims. In other words one cannot discount the importance of community interests, foremost survival as the motivation for such alliances.

This was driven home to me while watching the third season of Showtime’s historical drama, The Borigas. In one of the episodes, the leader of the Jewish community, Mattai meets with Pope Alexander,

Mattai meets with Alexander and tells him the whole Turkish navy could be burned to the waves with oil. He proposes stuffing some ships with oil for Ramadan and sending them over there just in time to berth for the holy month. Once they’re there, Mattai’s connections will set them alight. That’s if Alexander issues a papal bull that eases up on the taxes on the Jews in Rome. Alexander moans that he asks for a great deal, but Mattai refuses to back down, and even gives Alexander a bit of lip…He says he needs money to buy all this oil, and Alexander says that he’ll issue the bull if Mattai can ensure the success of this scheme.

Alexander meets with Mattai, Cardinal Sforza, and a few others. Mattai tells him the ships loaded with oil are already docked and the conflagration may have already happened.

In Constantinople, oil leaking out over the water is set alight, swiftly engulfing the anchored ships.

Back in Rome, Alexander sits and signs the papal bull, while in Constantinople, the ships explode and sailors flee for their lives. In a fantastic long shot, we see the entire fleet from a distance, burning away.

While the actual historicity of these events are dubious and likely never occurred, it highlights the reasons and motivations that guide communities. Jews who aided Muslims in Spain did so not primarily because both Muslims and Jews circumcise males or eschew pork but rather because they trusted that they would have a better and freer life.

The “counterjihadists” know that “perfidious” Jews aren’t opening up the gates to Muslim hordes. It is no longer the 14th century, there isn’t a “Christendom,” let alone a “Caliphate.” Many Christians are united alongside Muslims and Jews and others to make society and the world better, that is what the interfaith movement is all about.

Opening our doors to the stranger, seeing the image of G-d in our fellow human being and their inherent dignity should not be the opposite of our values but the very core of what we struggle to achieve and become.

This however is appeasement to the paranoid and conspiratorial “counterjihadists,” who in the place of our multi-faith and multi-cultural reality want to take us back to an unrealistic mono-faith, mono-cultural world.

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • The greenmantle

    Can I just say I am dissapointed that the other branches of the traditional bogey men are not included – masons , the illuminatri and homosexuals . Communists being members of four of the formentioned groups dont count .
    Sir David

  • Tanveer Khan
  • Talking_fish_head
  • Reynardine

    Home skuling.

  • SarahAB

    That’s really interesting – I was surprised to see (if I interpreted the results correctly) that there is a strong correlation between support for religious groups being given such funds and the (young) age of respondents.

  • Tighe McCandless

    Do you ever post anything that isn’t tripe or do you simply come back to this Disqus account every now and then in some vain hope that some will find your lame attempt to make Muslims look bad credible?

    On the miniscule chance that you are a Muslim, however, I find it odd indeed you’d persist with such beliefs when racism is explicitly condemned in Muhammad’s final sermon. Humans are flawed creatures but it’s hard to weasel one’s way around the man you’d presumably think has a direct land line to God.

  • Pingback: The Jews Are Helping Muslims Take Over The West | Workers Bush Telegraph()

  • Tanveer Khan

    And they’ll be reigniting interest in the whole damn thing.

  • Talking_fish_head

    According to wikipedia the definition of semite is
    “A member of any of various ancient and modern Semitic-speaking peoples originating in the Near East, including; Akkadians (Assyrians/Syriacs and Babylonians),Ahlamu, Amalekites, Ammonites, Amorites, Arameans, Chaldeans, Canaanites, Eblaites, Dilmunites, Hebrews (Israelites, Judeans and Samaritans), Edomites, Ethiopian Semites, Hyksos,Arabs, Nabateans, Maganites, Maltese, Mandaeans, Mhallami, Moabites, Phoenicians (including Carthaginians), Shebans, Sabians, Ubarites and Ugarites. It was proposed at first to refer to the languages related to Hebrew by Ludwig Schlözer, in Eichhorn’s “Repertorium”, vol. VIII (Leipzig, 1781), p. 161. Through Eichhorn the name then came into general usage (cf. his “Einleitung in das Alte Testament” (Leipzig, 1787), I, p. 45). In his “Geschichte der neuen Sprachenkunde”, pt. I (Göttingen, 1807) it had already become a fixed technical term.”[sic]

    But most people agree that anti-semitism is largely used against people of Jewish decent.

  • Talking_fish_head

    I would honestly be surprised if they passed primary school, of course for that to happen they would need to leave their mothers basement :)

  • Reynardine

    In fact, the Christian Zionists only want Jews to return to Israel so Armageddon can happen, after which the Jews either have to come to Jesus or
    go to Hell, while all the ril Chrischuns get raptured.

  • Reynardine

    Let us be exact: anti Semitism is not just anti-Judaism; it is anti-*Semitism*. In the minds of bigoted Christians, the Jew and the Arab/Muslim are the interchangeable, desert-born, dangerous Other. You ever check out a manger scene? Usually the figures in it are dressed in a way that would pass muster in much of the Middlle East and North Africa. And if the real Jesus returned-dark, foreign, Araby-looking, preaching socialism- all these ril Chrischuns would be screeching to have him thrown into Gitmo and waterboarded.

  • Lithium2006

    “Google ordered to remove anti-Islamic film from YouTube”–sector.html?vp=1

    I’m guessing the cretins over at websites like jihadwatch will be crying “suppression of the freedom of speech.”

  • GaribaldiOfLoonwatch

    Glad you found it useful. :-)

  • sasboy

    That is true.

  • Tanveer Khan

    Are you sure? I always thought it was triple digits…. in the minuses.

  • Talking_fish_head

    I can tell you that the collective IQ of a typical islamophobe is a single digit

  • LiesYouTell

    Islamophobes blaming the Jews!? LOL
    Great article Garibaldi. Keep exposing those sickos.

  • Talking_fish_head

    Islamophobia is just antisemitism with a new coat of paint

    If you notice, the same antisemitic propaganda that Germany used against the Jews in the 1930’s is now being repeated again in 2014 against Muslims

  • mindy1

    Well I am glad I could help in the moooslamic takeover 😉 but in all seriousness, the people who think things like that make me wonder about the collective IQ of the world at times.

  • GaribaldiOfLoonwatch

    There you go feeding the conspiracists. j/k

  • Just_Stopping_By

    Well, we may not be helping the Muslims take over the West, but we are much less interested in being obstacles to Muslim religious observance. :-)

    Here is a fascinating set of results from a Pew poll. Compare with .

    The first asks, “…please tell me whether you would favor or oppose this group applying for government funds to provide social services to people who need them. First: Individual churches, synagogues and other houses of worship”

    The second asks, “Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose Muslim mosques applying for government funds to provide social services to people who need them.”

    So, the same question, but it moves from a general set of applicants to mosques in particular. That is useful because the difference in the answers is then not due to people who have a general issue with government funding of religious groups to provide social services, but depends on what happens when the only change is to identify the applicant as a mosque.

    Results in favor for the first and for the second question, and the difference in the two figures in percentage points:

    Overall: 58.7%, 38.7%, -20.0%
    Protestant: 60.2%, 35.1%, -25.1%
    Roman Catholic: 62.3%, 39.0%, -24.3%
    Other Christian: 66.4%, 39.4%, -27.0%
    Jewish: 62.7%, 52.2%, -10.5%
    Other Religion: 60.0%, 41.7%, -18.3%
    Atheist/Agnostic/Nothing in Particular: 47.0%, 43.9%, -3.1%

    Also interesting: the biggest drop by political ideology is in Conservative, not Very Conservative. And the biggest drop of all: Less than High School Education, from 62.8% to 29.8%, a drop of 33.0%.

    I also recommend for those who are interested browsing through the data library there. You can see questions like overall impression of Muslims by age, education, etc. of the responder. Click on Codebook from either link above.

  • Laurent Weppe

    It’s not a marriage: Islamophobia is the daughter, nay, the Dolly of Antisemitism: when antisemitic rhetoric became too politically radioactive to be used in the open, far-right leaders decided to re-use its rhetorical tricks and flourish against a new set of targets

  • sasboy

    Islamophobia and anti Semitism – the marriage made in hell !

  • JD

    This whole Judeo-Christian nation bs is a recent thing used by Israel lovers and Zionists to do the us ( Zionists , and God cant come back unless there is a war in the ME Christians) vs them ( Muslims) them . If I remember History correctly Jews were persecuted very bady here in the US for a long long time. Many had to hide there religion and change there name so they would be treated fairly I guess every Immigrant that comes to here has to take there lumps until they move on to a new group. from wiki


    In the mid 17th century, Peter
    Stuyvesant, the last Director-General of the Dutch colony of New
    Amsterdam, sought to bolster the position of the Dutch Catholic Church
    by trying to reduce religious competition from denominations such as Jews, Lutherans,
    Catholics and Quakers.
    He stated that Jews were “deceitful”, “very repugnant”, and
    “hateful enemies and blasphemers of the name of Christ”. He warned in
    a subsequent letter that in “giving them liberty we cannot (then) refuse
    the Lutherans and Papists”.

    There were only about 12 Jews living in North America in the 17th century.
    These faced a number of restrictions, including being banned from practicing
    law, medicine, art, and other professions.

    By 1840, as immigration increased the Jewish population
    to 50,000 by 1848, negative stereotypes of Jews in newspapers, literature,
    drama, art, and popular culture grew more commonplace and physical attacks
    became more frequent.

    By the time of the Civil War, tensions over race and immigration,
    as well as economic competition between Jews and non-Jews, combined to produce
    the worst outbreak of antisemitism to that date. Americans on both sides of the
    slavery issue denounced Jews as disloyal war profiteers, and accused them of
    driving Christians out of business and of aiding and abetting the enemy.[citation

    Major General Ulysses S. Grant was influenced by these
    sentiments and issued General Order No. 11 expelling Jews
    from areas under his control in western Tennessee:

    Beginning in the early 1880s,
    declining farm prices prompted elements of the Populist movement to blame the
    perceived evils of capitalism and industrialism on Jews because of their
    alleged racial/religious inclination for financial exploitation and, more
    specifically, because of the alleged financial manipulations of Jewish
    financiers such as the Rothschilds.

    With the entry of the United States into World War I,
    Jews were targeted by antisemites as “slackers” and
    “war-profiteers” responsible for many of the ills of the country. Antisemitism
    in America reached its peak during the interwar period.[citation
    needed] The rise of the Ku Klux
    Klan in the 1920s, the antisemitic works of Henry Ford,
    and the radio speeches of Father Coughlin in the late 1930s indicated the
    strength of attacks on the Jewish community. In 1924, Congress passed the Johnson-Reed Act severely restricting
    immigration. Although the act did not specifically target Jews, the effect of
    the legislation was that 86% of the 165,000 permitted entries were from
    Northern European countries, with Germany, Britain, and Ireland having the
    highest quotas. The act effectively diminished the flow of Jewish immigrants
    from Eastern Europe to a trickle. During the 1930s and 1940s, right-wing
    demagogues linked the Depression of the 1930s, the New Deal, President Franklin Roosevelt, and the threat of war
    in Europe to the machinations of an imagined international Jewish conspiracy
    that was both communist and capitalist. The SS St.
    Louis sailed out of Hamburg into the Atlantic
    Ocean in May 1939 carrying one non-Jewish and 936 (mainly German) Jewish refugees seeking asylum from Nazi persecution
    just before World War II.[34][35]

    On 4 June 1939, having failed to obtain permission to disembark passengers
    in Cuba, the St. Louis was also refused permission to unload on orders
    of President Roosevelt Roosevelt showed limited willingness to take
    in some of those on board despite the Immigration Act of 1924, but vehement
    opposition came from Roosevelt’s Secretary of State, Cordell
    Hull, and from Southern Democrats — some of whom went so
    far as to threaten to withhold their support of Roosevelt in the 1940
    Presidential election if this occurred.

Powered by Loon Watchers