The world Prophecy of Majeshi Leon For Kagame,Rwanda and The people Of Rwanda.

Dated: Sunday, 24 July 2011. 15:11hrs The Journal interviewed MAJESHI Leon about his Prophecy which will be published in ...
Read More

Amabanga y’Ikuzimu mu karere k’Ibiyaga bigari.

Uyu muryango washinzwe nabanyafurika bakundaga umugabane wabo w'Africa, ariko uyu muryango wageze mu mabako yabayobozi bo mu karere k'ibiyaga bigari ...
Read More

Intonorano muri CNR-Intwari zabagezeho.

Nk’uko twabibatangarije ubushize yuko leta ya Kigali yamaze kurekura amadollar yoguha abatavuga rumwe n’ubutegetsi bwa fpr,niko bayagenze ishyaka rya CNR intwari ryacitsemo kabiri nyuma yuko uwahoze ari minisitiri w’umutekano Rwaka atandukanye na Gen.Emmanuel BEM Habyarimana kugirango bateshye agaciro abatavuga rumwe na FPR bigaragare yuko nta opozisiyo igaragara cyangwa ihari ishobora guha ikizere abanyarwanda.


Amakuru aturuka muri opozisiyo aravuga yuko amafaranga yamaze kugera mubatavuga rumwe na Kigali,abamaze gucakira ayo madollar harimo ibinyamakuru bitavuga rumwe na Kigali,inumanews,ikazeiwacu,Veritasinfo,na shikama,abantu kugiti cyabo biravugwa yuko Akishuli nawe ayo madollar yamaze kumugera,ndetse biracyekwa yuko n’uwitwa Ntiyamira Martini nawe yaba yamugezeho.

Undi munyapolitike uri kuvugwa yuko yaba akomeje gukorera Kigali niba Atari ukumutera urubwa kugirango kagame agree kumugambi we,usibye ko yibeshya ibyari byo byise bitazamubuza kuva kubutegetsi n’uwitwa Twagiramungu Faustin ngo nawe yaba yamaze kugerwa nyuma yuko yayoboye igikorwa cya fdlr kugeza aho amahanga yemeye ko fdlr ikifuzo cyayo cyo gushyikirana na leta y’urwanda byatumye leta ya fpr ikora ibishoboka byose kugirango ibashe gushyikirana na Rukokoma .

Ibyo tukabihuaza n’ubuhanuzi aho buvuga yuko fdlr izashyikirana na leta y’uRwanda,ariko abazaba bayihagarariye muri politike bazarya intonorano«Impongano» murumva rero ko,ubuhanuzi bwihuta cyane ugereranije n’igihe ubuhanuzi bwasohokeye.

Gusa twakwibutsa abasomyi bacu nabanyarwanda muri rusange yuko ibyo byose nigicucu cy’ibigiye kubaho mu rwagasabo,ntibatere ubwoba,ahubwo bibatere kwiringira Uwiteka Imana yacu,cyane ko,byose yari yarabivuze bityo murusheho kumugirira ikizere kugirango mu gihe gikwiriye tuzabashe gusohora mu mugambi we.

Interview with Howard Bloom, Part 2 by Grégoire Canlorbe

  • Yet there is another set of facts that progressives ignore. Every civilization that has appealed to our idealism has claimed it will lift the poor and the oppressed. But Western civilization has done this the best.Islam’s second advantage is the eagerness of its militants to solve political disputes with violence. Violence is a potent force multiplier, especially in a world peppered with democratic societies.

  • Allah has given Islam’s warriors what the Qur’an calls “the fire whose fuel is men and stones” — the fire of nuclear weaponry.

There is only a handful of authors alive today whose ideas about geopolitics have won respect in both the world of Islam and in the West. Howard Bloom is one of them. The following is the second part of an interview with Bloom, published here last November.

Grégoire Canlorbe: In your 1995 book, The Lucifer Principle, you introduced a new concept in geopolitical science — “the pecking order of nations.” What new light does this shed on Islamic civilization and its relations with the rest of the world?

Howard Bloom: Research on pecking orders — known technically as “dominance hierarchies” — has gone on now for roughly 100 years. Thorleif Schjelderup-Ebbe, the naturalist who observed it in a Norwegian farmyard, called it the key to despotism. Schjelderup-Ebbe had discovered that in the world of chickens there is a social hierarchy, a division into aristocrats and commoners — lower, middle and upper class. Pecking orders also exist among men, monkeys, lobsters and lizards. And the struggle for position in a pecking order is not restricted to individuals. It also hits social groups.

The pecking order of superorganisms helps explain why the danger of barbarians is real, and why “humanitarian” assumptions in foreign policy are sometimes suicidal. With our dream of eliminating competition, we try to wish the pecking order away. But the fact is that we will continue to live in pecking orders whether we like it or not. The brutal fact is that the more we opt out of competition, the lower our position is likely to be. That holds true in our lives as individuals. And it holds even truer in our life as a nation.

We all know that Rome was picked apart by peoples any respectable Roman could see were beneath his contempt. The barbarians did not shave. They wore dirty clothes. They were almost always drunk. Their living standard was one step above that of a mule. Their technology was laughable. They usually couldn’t read and write. And they certainly had no “culture.” What could these smelly primitives do? They could fight. The moral is simple: Never forget the pecking order’s surprises. Today’s superpower is tomorrow’s conquered state. Yesterday’s overlooked mob is often the ruler of tomorrow. Never underestimate the third world. Never be complacent about barbarians.

Some readers will be outraged by my presumption. How dare I regard any group as barbaric? What appalling ethnocentrism! There are no barbarians; there are simply cultures we have not taken the time to understand. But there are barbarians — people whose cultures glorify the act of murder, and elevate violence to a holy deed. These cultures portray the extinction of other human beings as a validation of manliness, a heroic gesture in the name of truth, or simply a good way to get ahead in the world. And traditional Islamic societies tend to be high on this list.

Progressive critics are right when they point out the West’s bloody track record. Our two world wars in the 20th century killed a combined total of roughly 70 million human beings. Our two great social experiments — the Marxist-Leninist transformation of Russia and the Marxist Revolution of Mao Zedong in China, a revolution based on the philosophy of a German Westerner, Karl Marx, killed another 80 million. With our atomic bombs, we Westerners wiped out two Japanese cities in less time than it takes to read this page. We warred to control the lives of others in Korea, Vietnam and Algeria, where the French fought from 1954 to 1962 to quash a local war of independence that cost between 350,000 and 1.5 million lives. Even our conventional weapons in World War II produced fire storms that sucked the oxygen out of the lungs of innocent civilians, miles from the center of impact and roasted them alive as they suffocated and died.

Yet there is another set of facts that progressives ignore. Every civilization that has appealed to our idealism has claimed it will lift the poor and the oppressed. But Western civilization has done this the best.

If you had been born in 1850, your expected lifespan would have been 37.5 years. If you had been born in the West in 2000, your expected lifespan would have been 78.5 years. Chinese emperors were willing to spend almost all of their wealth to achieve an extra four years of life. But Western civilization has added another 40. Western civilization has more than doubled the human lifespan. No other civilization in the history of the world — not the Chinese, Egyptian, Muslim, Russian Marxist or Roman — has ever pulled this off.

If you had been the poorest-paid worker in London in 2012, a personal assistant, you would have earned what an entire tenement full of the poorest-paid workers in London were paid in 1850. You would have earned what seven Irish dockworkers made.

If you gave a bunch of average Western kids today a Stanford Binet IQ test from 1905, today’s kids would register as near geniuses. They’d register an average IQ of roughly 135. That’s an IQ jump of 35 points.

If you were in an indigenous culture, one of those tribes that “lives in peace and harmony with nature,” your odds of dying a violent death at the hands of a fellow human being would be 10 times what they are in the West today. Since 1650, Western Civilization has upped the level of peace by a factor of 10.

If you were born in 2000, your height would have been four inches higher than if you had been born in 1850.

If our great, great grandparents could give us an extra 40 years of life, we owe an extra 40 more to our great, great grandchildren. If our great, great grandparents could septuple the incomes of the poorest workers among us, surely we owe another septupling to our great, great grandkids. If our great, great grandparents could up the average IQ by 35 points, surely we owe another 35 to our great, great grandkids. And if our great, great grandparents could increase the peace in the world by a factor of 10, surely we owe our great, great grandkids 10 times more. The only way to achieve this is to defend Western civilization with all your heart and might.

Yes, like nearly every human tribe that has ever existed, we have been violent, destructive and greedy for land, wealth, prestige and power. What is the difference, then, between Americans and Muslims? Why do I claim that they, not we, are the barbarians?

First off, let me repeat, we have upped the peace in the world by a factor of 10. Then there’s the way we resolve political disputes. When Syria’s president from 1971 to 2000, Hafez al-Assad, seized power, he ran into violent resistance from Islamic fundamentalists — members of the Muslim Brotherhood. To overcome this opposition, Assad embarked on a mass extermination of over 20,000 fundamentalists in town of Hama. No American president since the end of the Civil War in 1865 has exterminated his political opponents to secure his position in office.

When Jordan’s moderate King Hussein was hosting a mass of Palestinian refugees in his country, he ran into trouble. In 1968 and 1969 the Palestinians kicked off over 500 violent “incidents,” attacking Jordanians, holding them up at gunpoint, kidnapping them, and reportedly killing Jordanian soldiers by hammering nine-inch nails into their heads. Then the Palestinians went a step further and tried to assassinate their host, King Hussein, and seize control of Jordan’s government. Hussein solved this problem in 1970 with a military attack on the Palestinians that drove them out of the country and that killed over 10,000 in the process.

This murderous chain of events, known as “Black September,” was started by a highly regarded Muslim politician, Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian leader who would go on to win a Nobel Peace Prize. Nineteenth century American leaders like Abraham Lincoln and Benjamin Harrison handled similar problems by doing what Assad and Hussein did — exterminating Native American tribes or mounting internal wars against dissidents like the Mormons and the Southern Confederates. But it’s been over 110 years since a Yankee head of state has followed Hussein’s example and killed thousands to solve an internal conflict.

Muslim citizens of the Middle East are frequently encouraged by their leaders to take to the streets and to chant for the death of Americans, Israelis and Jews. American students at military academies like West Point are also encouraged to shout, “Kill! Kill! Kill!” It’s a chilling thought, but average civilians like you and me do not take to the streets screaming for the murder of others. Nor would we tolerate it if an organization arose that made such chants fashionable. There is a little bit of the barbarian in all of us. But some are far more barbarous than others. All cultures put moral and legal limits on violence. But some indulge in carnage more than others.

The cultures that curb violence feel that debate is superior to violence, and that discourse is often preferable to the sword. They outlaw violence as a means of conflict resolution, and preach conciliation, commerce and discussion. They measure political manhood by the ability to produce voluntary consent, and they look down on those who enforce order through strong-armed methods. Their memes generate democracy, pluralism and capitalism. But in a world where some cultures elevate violence to a supreme virtue, the concern for peace can, alas, be fatal. It can degenerate into a blissful pacifism and make us forget that our enemies are real. It can blind us to the dark imperatives of the superorganismic pecking order, that of nations and civilizations.

Howard Bloom.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Many people in the West reject the idea of a “clash of civilizations” with Islam, on the grounds that this idea overlooks the complexity of human individuality. Muslims, they say, are free and independent beings, able to make their own decisions and to emancipate themselves from the yoke of their culture. What is your view?

Howard Bloom: We think of ourselves as rugged individuals, cocky Clint Eastwood-like characters capable of making up our own minds, no matter what kind of group pressures might torpedo the less independent thoughts of people around us. But we are not Clint Eastwoods, nor were we meant to be. We are incidental microbits of a far larger beast, cells in the superorganism. And the social pack is a necessary nurturer. It gives us love and sustenance. Without its presence, our mind and body literally switch on an arsenal of interior devices for self-demolition, biological self-destruct mechanisms like depression, immune system nosedives and cognitive fog. The Islamic superorganism provides the comfort of companionship and of an all-explaining worldview. And that’ is one way the memes of Islam seduce humans into their power.

The fact is that there are many Muslims who long for pluralism, tolerance and democracy. But they are torn between their membership in the ummah — the global community of Muslims — and the appeals of the Western way of life. They are torn between the cultural codes of the West and those they share with their fellow believers. And when it comes to standing up publicly, their loyalty is all too often to the Koran and Sharia Law. On October 17, 2004 in London, three highly articulate, intelligent, British-born Muslims were part of a London street mob that shouted, “Make way for Islam, we want Islam.” A CNN cameraman asked these gentlemen what their beef was. The middle class, western-dressed British Muslims answered that their version of Islam “is not just a hatred for America. It is a hatred for the whole of Western philosophy and Western civilization, freedom, democracy, human rights, international law, all of these fake concepts that have been passed to us and behind that we have been oppressed.”

There is more. Reformists and apostates are kept silent, in Muslim territories, by the threat of punishment from those who control the public spaces of Islam. They are silenced by Holy War enthusiasts and by clerics. What’s more, in the battle between memes within the Islamic community, liberalism has always lost. The Islamic “liberals” have been muzzled for nearly 1,300 years. In 1592, the Muslim emperor Akbar tried to start a free speech movement in India. He promoted what he called Din-i Ilahi, a religion of tolerance toward Hindus, Jains, Parsis, Buddhists and Christians. He also promoted sulh-i kull, “universal peace.” Despite his wealth and power, Akbar attracted only 19 supporters to his movement. And when Akbar died, Orthodox Muslims called his movement heretical and crushed it utterly.

The West has developed something that Islam never achieved, an internal self-correction mechanism, a protest industry. In the mid-1780s, the West began a mass movement to stop one of its own nightmarish crimes against humanity — slavery. A mere 20 years later, the anti-slavery movement began to achieve its purpose. The British Parliament passed the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act on March 25, 1807. Then, in the 1890s, the West developed a highly organized anti-Imperialist movement, which eventually forced the nations of Europe to abandon almost all of the foreign lands they had taken. The West did all of this, in part, because of the “Founder Effect.”

Ruth Benedict, one of the founding mothers of anthropology, says that every culture has a personality. Every culture suppresses some emotions and favors others. In her classic book, Patterns of Culture, she also hints that a culture can be a reflection of its founder’s personality. If the founder is a frowning, angry man, the culture he establishes may impose frowns and fury for centuries to come. If the founder is a man of smiles and delight, the culture he molds is more likely to encourage youngsters and adults to smile and enjoy life. Plato is even more explicit than Benedict. He doesn’t just hint that the character of a society is determined by the personality of the man who leads it. Plato is outright convinced that the personality of the leader stamps itself on the society he leads. An ignorant leader can make a good people evil, he says. And a wise, intelligent leader can make an ordinary group of followers good.

Islam uses the Founder Effect to imprison itself. It dictates that there is just one prophet, and his name is Mohammed. There is just one pattern of personality that all must follow, Mohammed’s pattern. In the West, we allow ourselves many founders, many role models. The most vividly remembered prophet in our pantheon of founding figures was not a warrior and a political leader like Mohammed. He was a man who believed profoundly in ministering to the poor, in turning the other cheek, and in rendering to Caesar what was Caesar’s — in separation of church, faith and state. Above all else, he believed in compassion. “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy,” he said. “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.” The most savage things he ever did were to send a herd of pigs over a cliff and to curse a fig tree.

That founder was Jesus. His example stood behind the activists who kicked off the anti-slavery movement in the 18th century, the anti-war movement in the mid-19th century, the anti-Imperialist movement in the late 19th century, and the human rights movement that began with these shocking words in 1776: “All men are created equal.” Paul Kengor, a political scientist and historian of the role of religion in the White House, claims that Jesus was a vivid figure in the imaginations of all 43 American presidents from George Washington to George W. Bush. Jesus was also alive in the mind of Barack Obama. He was alive in these presidents’ guiding ideas and he was alive in their worldviews, in their weave of memes. No matter what crimes these men may have committed against humanity, Jesus was somewhere in their minds saying, “No.”

The truth is that only one civilization has made its protesters a permanent fixture, a full-fledged industry. Just one civilization has made the protest industry a multigenerational institution. That civilization is the civilization of the West. Islam has never developed an equivalent to the West’s protest, free-speech, peace and human rights movements. And the supreme irony is that, once the West got a conscience, it used its troops to protect Arabs and Islam. In World War I, Lawrence of Arabia helped create the modern sense of Arab identity and solidarity. He united the bickering Arab tribes of the Hijaz, the stretch of sand, stone, and mountains in which Mohammed lived, so they could fight another group of Muslims who held them in an iron grip—the inheritors of the Ottoman Empire, the folks we call “the Turks.”

In 1992, the West mobilized its armies to defend European Muslims who were attacking and were under attack from genocidal neighbors. Bosnia’s future Muslim president, Alija Izetbegović, had published a manifesto in 1970, declaring, “There can be neither peace nor coexistence between the Islamic faith and non-Islamic social and political institutions…the Islamic movement must and can take over political power as soon as it is morally and numerically so strong that it cannot only destroy the existing non-Islamic power, but also to build up a new Islamic one.” The Serbians living in Bosnia accurately sensed that this was a declaration of war, of jihad. We ignored Izetbegović’s writings and supported him. Yes, we supported a Muslim community led by a man with extremist tendencies.

Grégoire Canlorbe: You’ve mentioned that most Muslims, in their publicly stated positions, prove loyal to Mohammed and his legacy. It also seems that a vast number of Muslims publicly condemn the barbaric acts perpetrated on behalf of Islam, while blaming the world’s problems on an American-Zionist conspiracy. How do you explain this phenomenon?

Howard Bloom: When World War II was at its peak, the American Jewish Committee commissioned a psychological research project to determine the causes of the fascist horrors. Under this program, a team of behavioral scientists at the University of California at Berkeley developed a test to probe for the kind of tendencies that may have helped a Hitler or Mussolini gain power. That test, called the F (for fascism) scale, became one of the most widely used research tools in the history of modern psychology. Literally thousands of studies revealed a profile of what the researchers called the “authoritarian personality.” Generally, this was an individual raised in a strict home where the father was the clear holder of power. The parents had shown a stern disapproval of hostile outbursts on the part of their children. They had also rigidly prohibited the acknowledgement of any form of sexuality.

Yet hostility and sexuality are both unavoidable aspects of human life. Through a technique that Freudians call projection, the authoritarian personalities excluded their own aggression and sexuality from their consciousness. Aggression and sexuality, they were convinced, boiled up only in the minds of some enemy. And here is the real trick: The authoritarians thought frequently of that enemy and his loathsome preoccupation with lechery and hate. They could actually feel the smarmy sexual sensations and livid hostility that coursed through their enemies’ veins. They could sense this so vividly because they had projected their own set of forbidden emotions onto a faceless opponent like a ventriloquist projecting his voice into the mouth of a dummy. By seeing their unacceptable impulses in some unsuspecting outsider, they managed to dwell on those impulses and deny them at the same time. Does this explain why the terrorists who killed 130 in Paris in November 2015 called the city they were assaulting the “capital of prostitution and obscenity?”

Projection is a social glue. It helps unite superorganisms, including the Islamic superorganism. In the minds of many Muslims, only believers in Islam are true champions of peace and justice. They view westerners — Americans in particular — as the ultimate destructive force, the civilization that indulged in two world wars and capped that carnage with the creation of the atomic bomb. To most Muslims, we are the people whose hands are perpetually stained with blood. The same projection mechanism helps to explain the special role Jews have played in Islamic history. Islam’s anti-Semitism did not begin with the founding of modern Israel in 1948. It started with Mohammed. And since Mohammed Muslims have projected on Jews their own lust for blood and their own intolerant and cruel manners. There is more. Every gang has its leader, its bully, its joker and its nerd.

The same is true in the pecking order of societies. Every pecking order needs its scapegoats, its victims, its easy targets. It needs its nerds because they are vital to social solidarity, to keeping the gang from tearing itself apart when it runs into tough sledding. And they’re vital to something equally important, to the group’s confidence. Jews have been Islam’s nerds, its easy targets and one of its key sources of bonding, cohesion and social glue for 1,400 years. They’ve been the cornerstone of one of Islam’s most potent military strategies: using atrocities against Jews to attract allies and, more important, to terrify bigger, non-Jewish targets into surrendering without a fight.

In 629 AD, Mohammed and his warriors attacked and defeated the Jews of three tribes: the Banu Qaynuqa, the Banu Nadir and the Banu Quraiza. Then Mohammed inflicted war crimes on these three Jewish tribes. For two tribes, he commanded ethnic expulsion. In addition, he stole these tribes’ wealth and property. In the case of the Banu Quraiza, he committed genocide. He had every male of the tribe old enough to have pubic hair beheaded in front of him in the market place of his headquarters in Medina. Then he distributed the women of the Banu Quraiza as sex slaves, being careful to take the most beautiful and highest ranking as a bride for himself.

Thanks to their lucrative victories over these Jews, the Muslims were wealthy enough to grow ambitious and to make their superorganism and the memes that drove it voracious. As one of Mohammed’s Islamic biographers puts it, after the “destruction of the [Jewish] Banu Qurayzah… All Arab tribes admired Muslim power, dominion, and the new prestige of Muhammad as sovereign of Madinah.” Haykal explains that after the beheading of the men of the Banu Quraiza, Mohammed was at a turning point. Islam’s next challenge was to fight its way up the pecking order of nations. “The Islamic message,” Haykal says, “was not meant for Madinah alone, but for the whole of mankind. The Prophet and his companions still faced the task of preparing for the greater task ahead, namely bringing the word of God to the wide world….”

Thanks to his easy wins over the Jews, Mohammed had more than treasures and sex slaves; he also had the confidence to make his first move toward establishing a continent-swallowing mega-empire. Mohammed sent letters to half a dozen of the major world leaders of his day. The list of these you-have-won-the-lottery recipients included six superpower sovereigns — the Persian Emperor Chosroes II, the Eastern Roman emperor Hercules (Heracles), the Negus of Abyssinia, the governor of Egypt, the governor of Syria and the ruler of Bahrain. By sending his letter to a head of state like the Byzantine Emperor Hercules, Mohammed demonstrated an audacity that Haykal calls “amazing.” When Hercules was puzzled and asked where Mohammed’s letter had come from, he was told that it was from a people too backward for Hercules to bother his head about: “from the Arabs, people of sheep and camels.” It had come from insignificant barbarians. But never underrate barbarians.

In 634 AD, a mere two years after the Prophet died, the armies of Islam conquered Iraq. In 637 AD, five years after Mohammed’s death, the Muslim forces toppled the emperor of Persia, sacked the Persian capital, Ctesiphon (the home base of Nestorian Christianity), and took over the massive Persian Empire. That same year, the desert Arabs of Islam snatched the city most holy to Jews and Christians, Jerusalem. In 640 AD, the Muslims conquered Syria outright and began their penetration of the Sudan in Africa. In 642 AD, a mere 10 years after Mohammed’s death, the Muslim armies conquered Egypt, began to take Afghanistan, and started sending delegations to China, winning Chinese converts, and building China’s first mosque. In 674 AD, Islam established a colony in a place so far away that no previous Middle Eastern or European conqueror had even tried to add it to his package of real-estate — the Pacific Rim island of Sumatra — 5,000 miles east of Mecca.

This totally-against-the-odds conquest of an immense territory was just the beginning. From 642 to 705 AD, Islam grabbed the entire Mediterranean coast of Africa — Libya, Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria. In Africa, the wives of indigenous kings killed themselves so that they wouldn’t become sex toys –slave girls — in the hands of the Muslim invaders. One of these queens, the Western African Sudanese ruler Dahia-Al Kahina, a Jew, either committed suicide or died in battle, depending on which account you read, in 705 AD after leading her troops against the Arabs and driving the growing hordes of Allah north to Tripolitania.

From 711 to 714 AD, the Islamic governor of Iraq, al-Hajjaj bin Yousef, a man who called himself “The Bone Crusher,” went on a campaign to expand the empire of Islam even further. He ordered his generals to conquer a breathtaking swath of territory — Central Asia’s Turkestan (including today’s Chinese province of Xinjiang), swatches of India, all of Spain, and to tighten control of North Africa. The armies sent by “The Bone Crusher” into Europe were led by an ally newly won over to Islam, a newly converted Berber slave, Tarik ibn Ziyad. Ziyad’s troops crossed the Straits of Gibraltar, toppled the Christian king of Spain — the Visigoth Roderick — seized his entire kingdom, then advanced into Southern France.

In the long run, the forces of Islam conquered or seduced the biggest empire in world history, an empire 11 times the size of the conquests of Alexander the Great, five times the size of the Roman Empire, and seven times the size of the United States. Islam continues to hold most of these lands in its grip today. That’s a ravenous superorganism climbing the hierarchy of nations and going for the top. That’s the Founder Effect. That’s the legacy of a leader who commanded 65 military campaigns, led 27 of them, idealized killing unbelievers, and preached the violent takeover of the entire earth.

In the face of this kind of juggernaut, it is vital that societies which cherish tolerance, pluralism and human rights not mistakenly imagine all other societies to be equal. It is imperative that we not allow our position in the pecking order of nations to slip — that we not cave in to the onrush of barbarians.

That is why a “monster” like Donald Trump sometimes understands the Islamic threat far better than a good-hearted, brilliant man like Bernie Sanders. It is not easy for me to admit this. I am a left-wing Jew and a long-time Democrat. Trump is, to me, a delusional and narcissistic president not worthy of leadership. Yet we have to pray that he proves able to make the positive change that he promised in foreign policy — to destroy ISIS and to rein in the Muslim Brotherhood. And we have to hope that he’s capable of something he did not promise: to defeat militant Islam and to champion a reformed and secularized Islam.

In speaking about the dangers I believe that Islam poses to Western Civilization I am taking a chance on doing the very thing I warn against — using an enemy in order to bring together those of us who believe in the Western civilization. I am in danger of demonizing Islam’s warriors and using their menace to rally those who believe in freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of trade, entrepreneurship, capitalism, gender equality and the rule of law. I’m calling forth the very superorganismic instincts whose workings I have labored so hard to reveal. But I believe with my very cells and marrow that if we do not rally on behalf of the survival of our civilization, our Western rights and freedoms could easily disappear.

Grégoire Canlorbe: You famously dissected the universal principles of collective intelligence, or “group IQ,” as expressed in your 2001 book, Global Brain. In this theoretical framework, how do you sum up the strengths and weaknesses of Islam’s group IQ?

Howard Bloom: Society is not only a superorganism that uses people shamelessly; it’s a supercomputer that wires you and me together as information processors. It’s a learning machine that turns us into nodes, modules, neurons in a group brain. A complex adaptive system, a collective intelligence, a social learning machine, operates on five principles that Dr. Don Beck, the author of Spiral Dynamics, calls the “Bloom Pentad”: conformity enforcers, diversity generators, inner-judges, resource shifters and intergroup tournaments.

Conformity enforcers stamp enough cookie-cutter similarities into the members of a group to give it an identity, to unify it when it is pelted by adversity, to make sure its members speak a common language, and to pull the crowd together in efforts sometimes so vast that no single contributor can see the larger scheme in its entirety. On the other hand, diversity generators spawn variety. They give the superorganism options, alternative ways of dealing with its problems. They also give the superorganism its butchers, bakers, candlestick makers and kings — the differentiated components of a superorganism: the feet, legs, hands, shoulders and head a superorganism needs if it is to succeed.

Inner-judges are biological built-ins that continually take our measure, rewarding us when our contribution seems to be of value and punishing us when our guesswork proves unwelcome or way off the mark.

Resource shifters range from social systems to mass emotions, but all have one thing in common — they shunt riches, admiration and influence to learning-machine members who cruise through challenges and give folks what they want. Resource shifters cast individuals who can’t get a handle on what is going on into some equivalent of pennilessness and unpopularity. Jesus captured the resource shifters’ algorithm — its working rule — when he said, “To he who hath it shall be given; from he who hath not, even what he hath shall be taken away.”

The superorganism’s collective intelligence is not always brilliant. But nature has a way to make sure the group IQ is as smart as can be. That method is testing through competitions between superorganisms and between the groups inside a society, between movements and sub-cultures.

This is where intergroup tournaments come in. Intergroup tournaments are gang wars ranging from the Lilliputian to the gargantuan, from friendly baseball games and corporate competition to terrorist raids, world wars and nuclear confrontation. Those face-offs force each collective intelligence, each group brain, to churn out innovations for the fun of winning or for sheer survival’s sake. The standoff between superorganisms, whether the peaceful rivalry of commerce or the violent confrontation of war, has as its end product pecking orders.

Although diversity generators are essential, taking them too far can destroy a civil culture. For example, the form of diversity generation we call multiculturalism may be demonizing our very civilization. That’s healthy in moderation. But any good thing in excess is a poison. Life, as Claude Lévi-Strauss knew so well, is a matter of avoiding the extremes. “In each civilization there are optimums of openness and closure, between isolation and communication, which correspond to the most fertile periods in their history,” he said in 1988.

Similarly, conformity enforcers are necessities, but they can become mass-mind throttlers when they grab hold totally. As history shows, an overdose of conformity enforcement can paralyze a mass mind and put the superorganism it controls out of business. Thanks to the pecking order and to intergroup tournaments, other groups will eat the socks of the conformity-bound social beast, driving it to the bottom of the pecking order, beating it in peaceful competition, whomping it in war, and swallowing the remains of the defeated superorganism whole. Not only does this make sense, but it’s supported by the work of authoritative complex adaptive systems researchers like the Santa Fe Institute’s Stuart Kauffman, who calls conformity-enforced paralysis the “Stalinist regime.”

We all know what happened to the Leninist-Stalinist system Russia adopted in 1917 and refined under Stalin in 1934. In 1989, after 62 years of the Leninist-Stalinist experiment, the USSR and its symbol, the Berlin Wall, fell. Russia and its former satellites decided to try a different approach — a free-market system with a semblance of democracy. The system with an overdose of conformity-enforcement collapsed.

Islamic civilization, therefore, poses a puzzle, as Islam has proven that a Stalinist regime is not always a failure. It has demonstrated that an overdose of conformity enforcement is not always poisonous.

In fact, it seems that ruthless conformity is a winning strategy when a new meme produces a military culture, an imperialistic culture, what anthropologist Raymond Kelly calls “an expansionist” culture, a culture that specializes in conquest. Military victory requires heavy-duty conformity enforcement. It requires discipline, obedience and daily practice at working in sync with your fellow fighters. When men make choreographed muscular movements together over and over again, it gives them an enduring bond. It pulls them together tightly as components in a cohesive social group, cells in a superorganism. The historian William McNeill calls this social glue “muscular bonding.”

Islam’s five group prayers a day are one of the Five Pillars of Islam. They are also among Mohammed’s cleverest meme-hooks, his most innovative conformity enforcers. Five times a day, thirty-five times a week, 1,825 times a year, men are required to gather in ranks, like those of warriors, to show their absolute submission to Mohammed’s revelations. “Submission,” is one of the key meanings of the word “Islam.” Muslims in prayer are not just a disciplined unit isolated in a single mosque. They are following a central timetable whose orders circle the planet. Today that central timetable is available on your smartphone as an app.

Grégoire Canlorbe: When it comes to the contemporary pecking order, that of the globalized era, which group will come out on top? Who will win the competition between the Islamic world, the United States, Russia and China? Which superorganism will be most blessed by the rules of the learning machine?

Howard Bloom: A radically new human environment has appeared in the 21st century, radically transformed by computers, networking, upgrades in freight transportation and by mega-markets. Six pecking-order players are trying to grab the top spot in this digitally-and-demographically upscale land of risk and opportunity: Europe, the United States, Islam, Russia, India and China.

The West coheres around a set of values that it sees as necessary imperatives for all of the humans on this globe. These include democracy, freedom of speech, gender equality, multicultural tolerance and what we call “human rights.” We Westerners have attempted to spread these values through the International Court of Justice, through UN Peacekeepers and through NGOs out to heal the wounds of an injured world.

These organizations use smartphones, iPads, wireless connectivity and laptops to weave formerly isolated peoples into a seven-continent struggle for social justice and eco-consciousness. Even our conservatives are trying to spread their free-market philosophy globally via organizations like the Economic Freedom Network and the Ayn Rand Institute. Then there is Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, Pentecostalism, Anglicanism and Evangelical Christianity, five other carriers of Western values. All are spreading explosively in lands as far apart as South America, Africa and Asia, including Russia and China.

Meanwhile, we are witnessing the emergence of a new struggle between superorganisms more massive than any social structures the human species has ever seen. The populations of Islam, China and India are each bigger than the entire human population on this planet in 1850, the peak year of the Industrial Revolution.

When there are shakeups in a barnyard pecking order, that’s when upstarts can step in and take over. When every chicken knows her place in the pecking order and puts up with her rank, no matter how lowly, there is farm-yard peace. But when a new chicken is tossed into the barnyard and pecking-order positions are up for grabs, all hell breaks loose. The same thing happens when the geopolitical environment changes. Power vacuums open. Pecking order positions are up for grabs. Islam’s response to the shift from superpowers to megapowers has been what we call “terrorism.” That word radically underrates Islamic militants’ true aim — a thrust for a revival of the pecking order supremacy that Islam held from roughly 637 AD to 1827.

Then there is what China has been up to in the Western Hemisphere, quietly moving to spread its influence in a way that defies its old rules of empire. Those ancient ways of doing things involved expanding by conquering the nations conveniently located on the Chinese borders. When it came to distant foreigners, the Chinese emperors didn’t leave their palaces. They required the pitiful barbarians to send emissaries who arrived in the Chinese court bowing, scraping and bearing gifts. But in 2001, Chinese President Jiang Zemin did something utterly unprecedented and utterly un-Chinese: He left Beijing and went on an international tour, visiting six Latin American nations, signing cooperation agreements and calling on China and Latin America to work toward building what he called a “new international order,” designed “as a counterbalance to what it [China] views as overwhelming American hegemony.”

Three years later, in November 2004, Chinese President Hu Jintao followed up Jian Zemin’s performance by flying to Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Cuba, where he signed a total of 39 strategic partnership and bilateral cooperation agreements — in the Western Hemisphere, the hemisphere that America had declared strictly its own in the Monroe Doctrine.

Then China got even more cheeky. It convinced the European Union to enter a strategic partnership that would include “cooperation in banking and international finance, energy and raw materials, anti-terror and nuclear nonproliferation, [and] technology transfer.” By 2016, the EU website on the Strategic Partnership explained that “the 1985 EU-China trade and cooperation agreement, has grown to include foreign affairs, security matters and international challenges such as climate change and global economy governance.” The website explained that “The EU is… China’s biggest trading partner.” And the Strategic Partnership issued an EU-China 2020 Strategic Agenda for Cooperation.

China thus appeared to be quietly positioning itself for the day when Islam and the United States would bleed each other into exhaustion, allowing the growing Chinese mega-power to step in and become the new hegemon, the new alpha superorganism in the global pecking order, the master of the “New International Order” that Jiang Zemin spoke of, the keeper of a new planetary peace.

China’s economy is growing faster than any in the history of mankind, and the rules of the learning machine often favor economic leaders. “He who gets, gets more,” say social learning machine rules. This promises to put China at the head of the flock. Meanwhile, the economies of most of the world’s 57 Islamic nations are doing very poorly, especially those in the Middle East.

However, Islam has two advantages in the global shoving-match for top position. Advantage number one: Islam’s emphasis on the word “one”: one God, one prophet, and, most important, one government, one law code and one unified military system. Yes, one government, one global government. That global government is the longed-for caliphate. And it comes along at a time when even some Westerners long for a one-world government. The caliphate is not just a Muslim fantasy. It existed for 1,292 years, moving from Damascus to Baghdad to Egypt to Spain, and, finally, to Istanbul, the captured Christian city of Constantinople.

The caliphs lived in opulence. They had enormous harems and the last word on the life or death of every citizen – or “slave” — of their empire. But their empire was so immense that they were seldom able to govern all of it. They also could not stop the Muslim world’s internal battles between leaders, tribes, sects, dynasties and clans for pecking-order supremacy. Today, however, with modern technology, Islam’s dream of ruling the world from one central city may finally be achievable.

Islam is the only superorganism with a meme team — a worldview and a “total system of life” — built for global rule by its founder. Islam’s second advantage is the eagerness of its militants to solve political disputes with violence. Violence is a potent force multiplier, especially in a world peppered with democratic societies. The chant among young Muslim jihadists is, “We love death more than you love life.” Why? Because those who die killing unbelievers have an express ticket to fame, sex and paradise. The result: suicide bombers.

What’s more, a hungry Muslim superorganism may well use nuclear tools to expand and achieve “victory” over what Osama bin Laden called “the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind” — our civilization. Nor would jihadis be deterred by the fact that any nuclear attack on America could bring a retaliatory attack that could erase cities like Tehran or Karachi from the map. Death-by-nuke would do the citizens of Tehran and Karachi a favor. It would give every believing Muslim in those places an express trip to paradise.

A 21st century jihadist, Seif Al-Din Al-Ansari, writing in al-Qaeda’s now-you-see-it-now-you-don’t online magazine, Al-Ansar, declared in 2002:

“The elements of the collapse of Western civilization are proliferating… In spite of all the characteristics of power at their command, these infidel states are no more than a handful of creatures on the speck of dust called Planet Earth… Allah told us of the certainty of the annihilation of the infidels… by means of the Muslim group, which would, in accordance with the Islamic commandment… torture them… The question now on the agenda is, how is the torture Allah wants done at our hands to be carried out?”

The answer to that question may be easy now that Allah has given Islam’s warriors what the Qur’an calls “the fire whose fuel is men and stones” — the fire of nuclear weaponry.

Remember, thanks to globalization, we are undergoing an unprecedented evolutionary quantum leap. The gluttony of superorganisms is shifting to meme-driven ambitions aimed at domination of the planet. If the battle of the global mega-organisms turns to the sort of no-holds-barred mass murder of early Islam’s conquests or to the bloodshed of the Western world’s massively industrialized killing in WWI and WWII, the consequences will be catastrophic. In an age when nuclear weapons have gone retail, Islam’s global jihad and America’s counter-jihad could destroy humanity.

Grégoire Canlorbe, a journalist, currently lives in Paris. He has conducted interviews for journals such as Man and the Economy, founded by Nobel Prize-winning economist Ronald Coase, and think tanks such as Mises Institute and Gatestone Institute. Contact:

Interview with Howard Bloom – Part I by Grégoire Canlorbe

  • “Millions of Muslims envision Islam as a religion of tolerance, pluralism, and peace. But there is a blunt fact staring us in the face…. For Allah and His Messenger demand that Muslims be on top. They demand that Muslims allow others to live only if they take a role as second-class citizens in a purely Muslim state and pay the jizya, a tax designed to shame. And they demand that Islam rule every inch of land on God’s own speck of dust — the planet Earth.” — Howard Bloom.

  • “Those who want to ‘annihilate’ or to convert their fellow men in the West are not madmen. They are rational and they are something more — they are idealists. They want to save us…. If we are tricked into following false laws, believing in false gods… we will go to an unspeakably painful hell.” — Howard Bloom.
  • “It is very unlikely that [Iran’s former president, Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad was proposing a ‘thought experiment.’ He was proposing a reality that Iran and its fellow Muslim states would be able to achieve with their upcoming weaponry — and with the existing 120 Islamic nuclear bombs of Pakistan — bombs that could easily fall into the hands of ISIS.” — Howard Bloom.
  • “My introduction to Islamic culture came in 1962. In the back of a library file on the Middle East, I found several English-language pamphlets printed by the Arab League, a coalition of twelve leading Arab governments. The pamphlets tried to reach people like you and me with an extremely urgent “clarification” of historical errors. First, the Holocaust, the mass murder of six million Jews by Germany’s Nazis, was a charade, a hoax. It never happened.” — Howard Bloom.
  • “As hungry replicators eager to remold the world, ideas often turn their ultimate weapon — the superorganism — into a killing machine. And, contrary to the doctrines of some modern critics, they do not engage in this ‘hegemonic imperialism’ only in the purportedly ‘malevolent West.'” — Howard Bloom.

There are only a handful of authors alive today whose ideas about geopolitics have won respect in both the world of Islam and in the West. One of those authors is Howard Bloom.

Bloom’s second book Global Brain was the subject of an Office of the Secretary of Defense symposium in 2010, with participants from the State Department, the Energy Department, DARPA, IBM, and MIT. And the Department of Defense’s SENSIAC Military Sensing Symposium then relied on Bloom to explain how to see the world through the eyes of Osama bin Laden.

Bloom’s 182 appearances on North America’s highest rated overnight talk radio show, Coast to Coast AM, a show that airs on 500 of the continent’s leading radio stations, have covered everything from the Gulf War and 9/11 to the Fort Hood shootings. In addition, he has dissected headline issues over 30 times on Saudi Arabia’s KSA2-TV, Ekhbariya TV, Economics TV, and on Iran’s global English language PressTV.

Howard Bloom has also debated one-one-one with senior officials from Egypt’s Moslem Brotherhood and Gaza’s Hamas on Iran’s global Arab-language Alalam TV News Network. Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Dubai’s ruler, who doubles as the Prime Minister of the United Arab Emirates, has named a racehorse after one of Bloom’s books.

Howard Bloom.

Grégoire Canlorbe: In a market overwhelmed with books on Islam, what is unique about The Muhammad Code?

Howard Bloom: The Muhammad Code tells a story quite unknown in the West, namely the story of the only founder of a major religion ever to call himself “The Prophet of War” and to command 65 military campaigns. It tells the story of how that man set our ancestors in the West up for over 1,300 years of enslavement and attack, the story of how he laid the groundwork for the destruction of superpowers far more potent than the United States, and the story of how he started the longest-running world war in history. And most important, The Muhammad Code tells the story of how that prophet to many people demands that his never-ending war be turned today against the ideals we hold dear in the West—human rights, gender equality, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of trade, entrepreneurship, pluralism, and democracy.

Millions of Muslims envision Islam as a religion of tolerance, pluralism, and peace. But there’s a blunt fact staring us in the face. What ISIS is doing is merely one attack in the world’s longest running world war—the war of “Mohammed the Conqueror” and the “knights” of Islam, as Bin Laden used to say, against every other civilization on the face of the planet. For Allah and His Messenger demand that Muslims be on top. They demand that Muslims allow others to live only if they take a role as second-class citizens in a purely Muslim state and pay the jizya, a tax designed to shame and humiliate. And they demand that Islam rule every inch of land on God’s own speck of dust—the planet Earth. So Muslims in the West can never be happy. At least not according to the standards of the Hadith and the Qur’an. Not according to the standards of al Qaeda, Boko Haram, the Iranian Islamic Revolution, and the Islamic State. That is, “good” Muslims cannot be happy until Shariah rules every land. And that includes your land and mine.

Since the beginning of history, we have been blinded by evil’s ability to don a selfless disguise. From our urge to pull together comes our tendency to tear each other apart. From our devotion to a higher good comes our propensity to the foulest atrocities. And from our commitment to ideals come our excuses to hate. Righteousness in Islam consists in following Muhammad’s footsteps. And those footsteps are violent, imperialist, colonialist, sadistic, and genocidal. But those who want to “annihilate” or to convert their fellow men in the West are not madmen. They are rational and they are something more—they are idealists. They want to free us. They want to save you and me.

As they see it, you and I were made from a clot of blood by Allah, by God. We were given everything we have by Him. Since we are His creations, we will experience true justice and peace only if we live by His laws and are enlightened by His truths. What are those laws and truths? The ones that God himself gave to Mohammed in the seventh century. Islam believes it is out to save us in an even more profound way. If we are tricked into following false laws, believing in false gods, and sticking to what Osama bin Laden used to call false “opinions, orders [and] theories,” we will go to an unspeakably painful hell. Our earthly life is but a brief interlude, a brief gift, a brief test to see if we can follow God’s path. But hell and heaven are forever.

Islamic militants want to save you so you can spend the time that really matters, the time that lasts the longest, the time from your death to the Day of Judgement, in the luxurious upper rooms of paradise. Only if your eyes are opened to the legacy of Mohammed, only if you are persuaded to drop all other “opinions, orders, theories and religions” can Islam save you. What happens, according to them, if you stubbornly refuse Islam? What happens if you cannot be won over to the light? You must be wiped out. You must be kept from corrupting the minds of others and dragging them down to hell with you.

When former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad held a press conference in September 2006 to report on his visit to Senegal, Cuba, Venezuela and the United Nations, he said, “And God willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism.” He had also made the same word-for-word statement the previous year. It is very unlikely that Ahmadinejad was proposing a “thought experiment.” He was proposing a reality that Iran and its fellow Muslim states would be able to achieve with their upcoming weaponry—and with the existing 120 Islamic nuclear bombs of Pakistan, bombs that could easily fall into the hands of ISIS.

Islam has called for the annihilation of the Jews for close to 1,400 years. But why eradicate those of us who live in America? My suspicion is this. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Abubakar Shekau, and Islamic militants from Iran to Indonesia and from Trinidad to Dearborn, Michigan, feel that Europe is eager to appease the Muslim world, eager to bow to Islam’s will. Europe can be saved. Europe can be brought into the fold of Islam. But America stubbornly insists on promoting its Satanic culture, a culture that will drag millions down to the pit of fire. Hit America with a few nuclear weapons, take out New York, Washington, and a handful of other American coastal cities, and those left in America will embrace Islam. What’s more, the weak-willed Europeans will finally see the truth and will accept second-rate status in something Allah promised Mohammed long ago—Islam’s global empire.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Besides your concern for the survival of the modern Western civilization, how did you come to have an interest in Islam? Does it have anything to do with your personal history?

Howard Bloom: My introduction to Islamic culture came in 1962. My parents and grandparents were Zionists—people who wished ardently for the right of Jews to return to a homeland that appears in a flood of Hebrew prayers, the Promised Land, the Hebrew territory from which Jews were expelled over and over again and which the Jews stubbornly rebelled to retake in 66 AD, 133 AD, 351 AD, 438 AD, and 614 AD. Those Jews, my ancestors, battled the biggest imperialists of the day, the Romans. Rome periodically got fed up with Jewish freedom fighters and removed most of the Hebrews from the land Jews had inhabited since 1,200 BC. Rome scattered this remnant across the face of the Old World. Yet Jews insistently trickled back into what they considered their native land again, and by 636 AD, Arab historians say these Hebrew returnees, and the Jews still on the land of Judea, had built 41 cities in what is today called Palestine and Israel.

Then came an imperialist force that made the Romans look like pipsqueaks; a violent, militaristic, colonialist empire on its way to becoming largest in the history of the planet—one of the few imperial powers still around in today’s world and still, like us, in a mood for conquest: the empire of Islam. Mohammed himself did not take kindly to Jews. Mohammed said, “Whoever of the Jews falls into your hands, kill him.” And, “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.” According to the 9th century Muslim historian Abu Al-Abbas Al-Baladhuri, the armies of Islam wiped those 41 Jewish cities off the face of the map. For the next 1,312 years, Jews would end their springtime holiday Passover dinner with the phrase, “Next year in Jerusalem.”

Zionists such as my grandparents and parents were proud of the fact that Jews had trickled back into Israel once again in the 19th and 20th century, had drained the malarial swamps, had run irrigation lines to the deserts, and had made this small slice of miserable Turkish land into a garden, a rich farmland. To my grandparents and parents, Zionism meant establishing a Jewish state and teaching our Arab brethren to turn the vast and barren two billion acres under Arab control into a land with trees, groves, and valleys abundant in harvests.

In 1962, when I was 19 years old, my father offered to send me for a year to Israel, a country a mere fourteen years old. Israel had kibbutzim—one of the most radical forms of social experiment on the planet. These were socialist agricultural communities in which the land and goods were held in common by roughly 350 adults. The children were raised together by child-care experts, the meals were made in a communal kitchen and eaten in a communal dining hall, and the laundry was done by a communal laundry staff. As a result, when they finished their day of farming, parents could romp with their kids for hours, free from the worry of nagging their children to clean up their bedrooms, and free from the need to shop and cook a meal.

My dad’s offer sounded good. I wanted to see if 19th and 20th century thinkers were right: if by changing the structure of society you could change human nature and wipe away greed, gripes, and violence. The kibbutz was a laboratory of social change. So I said yes. To prepare myself, I hitch-hiked from my hometown, Buffalo, New York, down to Pennsylvania’s Swarthmore College, where I had friends, and spent a month in the library studying peoples of the Middle East, such as the Natufians of 11,000 years ago and a little-known culture, the Nabataeans, who invented a system of terraced irrigation that allowed them successfully to farm the deserts of southern Israel and the surrounding lands from 312 BC to 105 AD.

Then one day, I had a shock. In the back of a library of materials on the Middle East, I found several English-language pamphlets printed by the Arab League, a coalition of twelve leading Arab governments. The pamphlets tried to reach people like you and me with an extremely urgent “clarification” of historical errors. First, the Holocaust, the mass murder of six million Jews by Germany’s Nazis, was supposedly a charade, a hoax; it never happened. Second, World War II had not been a confrontation started by the Germans in an effort to take over the world on behalf of a blond and blue-eyed master race. It had been started by Jews out to win the sympathy of the world and to establish the state of Israel. Third, Adolf Hitler had not been a Jew-hater. To the contrary. He had, according to them, been a Jewish puppet, a Jewish creation set in motion, once again, to achieve the establishment of a so-called Jewish homeland.

The villains behind these radical misunderstandings of history were, according to the Arab League, those clever liars, those people out to dominate the world, those “sons of pigs and monkeys,” the Jews—my family and me. One of my aunts had managed to survive the Holocaust’s concentration camps. One of my cousins had lost her parents, her brothers, and her sisters, and had been saved by a Catholic farm family in Poland. The rest of my family in Europe, the Shebshelovitzes of Riga, Latvia, and the Wechelefskys of Belarus, had disappeared entirely. I was under the impression that the Holocaust had been real. Very real. But the Arab League wanted me—and you—to believe otherwise.

This was one of my first introductions to the fact that another culture can have a radically different system of thought, a radically different way of seeing the world. It was also my introduction to Islamic anti-Semitism. Where did this hatred of Jews come from? There are fewer Jews on the planet than the inhabitants of just one Muslim city, Cairo. Did the officials of the Arab League seriously imagine that a tribe so absurdly small could manipulate the mind of the German Volk, the mass mind of the German people, and could plan and promote one of the biggest wars in history?

If I were to understand just how different the world looked through the lens of another culture, I might as well study a culture that made hatred of me a central preoccupation. For the next four decades I studied the instinctual underpinnings of war, creativity, and genocide. For the next four decades I studied mass behavior, from the mass behavior of quarks, nucleons, and galaxies to the mass behavior of reptiles, chimpanzees, rats, birds, fish, bacteria, and human beings. And for the next four decades I used the culture of Islam as a test-case, a supreme living specimen in which to watch the instinctual forces of history at work. That’s how I came to write The Muhammad Code.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Your book invites the reader to pay attention to the achievements and the mentality of Mohammed, especially to understand the mass murders and infringements of personal freedom perpetrated now on behalf of Islamic fundamentalism. Could you tell us more about the life of “the Prophet”?

Howard Bloom: To understand men such as Osama bin Laden, the iconic example of guerrilla warfare; Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the “George Washington” of the Islamic Revolutionary Republic of Iran; Dr. A.Q. Khan, the father of the Pakistani Islamic Bomb of 1998; to understand the heads of groups such as ISIS, Boko Haram, and Hamas; to understand the Islamic militants making headlines today and who will make headlines tomorrow, you have to understand the key to their way of thinking, and, like them, you have to understand the life of Mohammed.

Two hundred years after the fall of Rome, Mohammed was a merchant living in the desert town of Mecca, a bleak and isolated community on a caravan route over which passed camels carrying goods to far‑off, elegant cities such as Damascus. At the age of twelve, when he was an apprentice to his uncle—a trader—Mo­hammed made his first trip to cosmopolitan Syria to learn the export/import business. When he was 25, Mohammed married a well‑to‑do woman of 40 and became a respectable, wealthy burgher, a man whose opinions were listened to. But all that changed when Mohammed reached a mid-life crisis at 39. He began to have visions. He had been sitting in a cave in the mountains one day, he said, praying in solitude, when the angel Gabriel had appeared in a blinding light, grabbed him in a bear hug, and forced him to read a message from God. Since then, claimed Mohammed, he had been functioning as God’s spokesman on earth.

Some modern scholars feel that Mohammed’s visions may have been the result of epileptic fits. The citizens of Mecca would have found the diagnosis believable. When Mohammed planted himself on street-corners and declaimed the new truths that the angel Gabriel had communicated to him, his fellow Meccans were certain that this formerly upstanding, middle‑class man had gone insane. They mocked Mohammed or ignored him. One, while Mohammad was praying, put a slimy camel foetus down his neck. Another tried to stran­gle him. Only a few believed him. Among the believers were a handful of close relatives, one good friend, and a disconcerting number of slaves.

The citizens of Mecca were none too happy with the havoc Mohammed’s new notions wreaked on their households. Slaves who had abandoned the tried and true religions stopped their household chores and ran off to pray and wash themselves at all kinds of strange hours. But Mohammed would not keep his visions to him­self. When a plot was hatched to murder him, Mohammed fled. He sought refuge in a community where his views might be a bit more welcome, more than 200 miles away in Medina, another town isolated in the desert along the caravan route. In Medina, Mohammed found more willing listeners. During the course of a few years, he was able to build a following large enough to dominate his adopt­ed city’s politics.

The fledgling prophet was no man of peace. He consolidated his hold over Medina by ordering opponents assassinated. Then he masterminded a series of assaults on passing Meccan caravans and the armed escorts sent to protect them. When Mec­cans, fearful of Mohammed’s new power, attacked the outskirts of Medina, he led his faithful against the intruders and won. Mohammad’s military success impressed some of the fierce tribes that wandered in the hills outside of town. They signed up with the new, battle‑tested religion. A few years later, the prophet marched his troops 200 miles to the Jewish town of Khaibar and conquered it. He killed all of Khaibar’s 900 men and carried off the women and children as slaves.

At last Mohammed was ready to take revenge for the indignities his former neighbors in Mecca had heaped on him. In 630 AD, eight years after he had fled, the prophet led an army of 10,000 followers back to his old home town. The Meccans were not particularly interested in being treated as the Jews had been the previous year. They gave up with scarcely a fight. Thanks to the heavily armed Islamic squadrons parading through the streets, Mohammed was able to convert Mecca’s inhabitants to the beliefs they had formerly scorned as the ravings of a madman.

Once Mohammed’s birth­place had been conquered, the sword of Islam was not sheathed. The city’s wealthy traders and illit­erate Bedouins joined the army that had begun in Medina, and went out to conquer the world for their new belief. They were astonishingly successful. In short order, the legions of Islam overran the ancient empires of Persia, Mesopotamia and Egypt. During the next hundred years, the Mohammedan hordes spread across northern Africa, taking Algeria, Morocco and Libya. They invaded India—attacking the towns that had defied even the invincible Alexander the Great. They snipped off parts of Spain and nearly conquered France. They even faced the mighty forces of the Chinese army at Talas in Central Asia.

Within a few generations of Mohammed’s death, these men from backwater towns and primitive desert tribes had built an empire of awesome size. But their victories did not stop there. In coming centuries, Mohammedans would repeatedly make the Euro­peans tremble—eventually attacking even Vienna. They would seize African lands as far away as the Sudan and the Niger. They would convert Afghanistan, win over the Mongols, and spread their rule as far as the Pacific islands of Indonesia and the Philippines. The notions of a man who had claimed to meet an angel in a cave would spawn battles whose bloodshed would soak the earth for the next 1,400 years.

Grégoire Canlorbe: You conceive of Mohammed’s ideology—his complete system of values and beliefs—as a “meme” or replicator. Could you clarify this notion, borrowed from Richard Dawkins?

Howard Bloom: In 1976, Oxford zoologist Richard Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene rearranged the way that many of those who deal with animal and human behavior see the world around them. Dawkins came up with the idea of the “replicator.” The replicator is a clever and narcissistic mega molecule that is able to make copies of itself. That avaricious mega molecule is the gene. Dawkins said that we tend to see ourselves and the creatures around us as the masters of our genetic endowment, but that in reality, we are merely servants. We are not using genes to achieve our own ends; our genes are using us. The idea had been anticipated by the English poet and satirist Samuel Butler in the 17th century. Butler had quipped that, “A hen is just an egg’s way of making more eggs.”

If Dawkins is right, humans and their social groups originated as mere puppets, complex tools of tiny mole­cules. You and I were fashioned as if we were cranes, dump trucks and tanks, designed to be driven by a set of replicators. We are gatherers of raw materials operating at the behest of microscopic mini‑factories seated at the center of our cells. For genes are infect­ed with an overweening ambition: their ultimate goal is to repro­duce—and in the process, to overrun this world. Up to this point, Dawkins was summing up and simplifying the evolutionary biology emerging around him. Then Dawkins made a totally original contribution: He posited the existence of a new replicator, one that has no physical substance, and can not be studied under a microscope or kept in a jar. It is the meme—the catchy idea.

Genes, said Dawkins, first made copies of themselves in primordial puddles. But memes also copy themselves in the puddles of human minds. And the ones that are truly successful jump from one mind to another until they girdle the planet. Think of the pop song you loathe but cannot get out of your mind. That is a successful meme. So are Islam, Christianity, and freedom. The memes that count the most are the ones that assemble vast arrays of re­sources in startling new forms. They are the memes that con­struct social systems, from tribes to empires. As genes are to the individual organism, so memes are to the social organism, or super-organism, pulling millions of individu­als together—family, tribe and nation—into a collective creature of awesome size.

The meme, like its predecessor the gene, is capable of assembling vast amounts of matter. Unlike the gene, the meme can manufacture forms of order than mere genetic stuff could never dream of. And finally there is something that Dawkins himself failed to see. Very often, it is the meme, not the gene, whose survival and expansion come first. We are willing to live and die for “something bigger than ourselves.” And that something is the cluster of ideas that sits at our culture’s core. But there is more. As hungry replicators eager to remold the world, ideas often turn their ultimate weapon—the superorganism—into a killing machine. And, contrary to the doctrines of some modern critics, they do not engage in this “hegemonic imperialism” only in the purportedly “malevolent West.”

The ravenous voice of the meme calls out to charismatic men and women. Disguised as revelation or inspi­ration, it has spoken to humans as diverse as Mohammed, Napoleon I, Lenin, St. Paul, Moses, Hitler, Joan of Arc, Mahatma Ghandi, Thomas Jefferson, Karl Marx, and the Ayatollah Khomeini. Its message varies. But under the many disguises is one imperative: gather a group together and awaken them with my words. Wield them into a mighty force which will impose its dominion on a large swatch of the world.

The voice of the meme calls out to those on a lower level as well. To them, it dictates sacrifice. The converts have a sublime perception of truth and feel caught up in a fren­zied oneness with some superior being whose power leaves them in awe. But the holy vision or lofty secular ideals that create this thrill may be merely the voice of the larger social beast calling for some ultimate contribution—demanding that a seventh century Mohammedan hurl himself against the defenses of a city far from his ancestral home; or that his descendant hijack a civil aircraft and crash it into an American office building.

Grégoire Canlorbe: The intellectual elite in the West is often reproached for believing blindly in the neo-Darwinian view of evolution, according to which genes (instead of groups) are the true objects of “natural selection.” It implies, in particular, that humans and other social animals, far from sacrificing their own individual interests—survival and reproduction—for the sake of a mythical Leviathan, society, instead cooperate for their own selfish motives and, unwittingly, in the interest of their genes. What are your thoughts about that?

Howard Bloom: Our membership in a larger organism—and the fact we occasionally find ourselves expendable in that superorganism’s interests—is indeed not a fashionable theory at the moment among academics. As I mentioned, current evolutionary theory says that preservation of your genes is your first priority—preservation for yourself, your children, and for your remaining relatives. And self-sacrifice in the interest of the group, the very definition of altruism, does not quite square with the notion of genes fighting for themselves no matter what. Underlying the notion of genetic selfishness is another, even more basic assumption, the theory of individual selection, according to which the “struggle for life” occurs between individuals—and only between individuals. In fact, the idea that this competition could occur between groups has been resoundingly dismissed since the publication of The Selfish Gene. It has been mocked and scorned.

Yet Dawkins and individual selectionists have had a very bad time dealing with the problem of altruism. August theorists such as W.D. Hamilton and R.L. Trivers explained away the seemingly “altruistic” tendencies in humans and other species by generating a new mathematical system, the notion of kin selection. It stated that individuals would only sacrifice their own interests in favor of others if the others in question were relatives, creatures who contained similar sets of genes. In other words, self-sacrifice was “selfless” only at first sight. In fact, it consisted of increasing the number of our genes in generations yet to come. The selfish-gene theory of evolution is partly right. It is a powerful tool for cracking the mysteries of evolution and human behavior. But from Darwin himself to V.C. Wynne-Edwards, Robert Ardrey, and the late Edward. O. Wilson, its limitations have been attacked by a line of scientists with powerful minds. Those critics demonstrate that our biology often refuses to follow the paths that scientific assumptions about personal survival and kin selection would predict.

We come complete at birth with an arsenal of survival instincts in the interest of our genes. But we are also equipped with self‑destruct mechanisms—depression, anxiety and hopelessness. Not to mention the deactivation of our immune system when we are seriously discouraged. That depressed immune system invites disease to come in and do its worst. And we are crippled by the stress hormones that flood our system—glucocorticoids. These hormones in short, sharp doses are energizers, emergency handlers. But in the long, never-ending doses that hit us when we are down, stress hormones destroy our health. Stress hormones are poisons generated within us—not by psychology alone, but by our biology. According to selfish gene theory and the theory of individual selection, these self-damaging circuits should not exist. So why are self-destruct circuits present in animals of all kinds?

A wide range of evidence—evidence you can find in my books The Lucifer Principle and Global Brain—indicates that these biological suicide circuits turn us into components of a mass IQ, neurons of a collective brain. And our fellow neurons in the collective brain, our fellow humans and thought partners, are not necessarily our kin. How do self-damagers increase the collective intelligence? They turn down the resources and the influence of those of us who do not seem to be able to solve the problem of the moment. And they turn up the popularity, health, vigor, cash, and influence of individuals who do seem to have a handle on things. They are tricks our body uses to turn us into modules in a neural net. A massively parallel-processed social learning machine—to repeat, a group IQ.

If preserving our genes were indeed our ruling force, then self-destruct mechanisms should not exist. Or, at best, their action should be limited to aiding those who carry genes nearly identical to our own. Even more damning, our acts of valor on the battlefield have generally nothing to do with an individualistic gene selfishly protecting a copy of itself. By the standards used by the selfish gene clique, and their colleagues in economics and the social sciences, the rational choice crew, the genes of kamikaze aviators in the closing stages of World War II were radically different. They did not show the degree of genetic relatedness demanded by Hamilton’s and Trivers’ mathematics. To many Americans, the kamikaze’s ultimate devotion to their emperor and the glory of Japan seems baffling, alien, something that could never happen here. But it has hap­pened here. Patrick Henry was declaring his loyalty to the cause of his fellow revolutionaries when he said, “Give me liberty or give me death.” He was confessing that the social organism of which he was a part was more important than his genetic interests—his own survival and that of his genes.

Here is the bottom line. Evolution, either biological or cultural, is not just a competition between individuals. It is also a competition between groups. It is a race between the varieties of cooperation that grow up between solitary creatures—the unseen ties that bind those creatures together into a larger unit. Men and animals do not merely struggle to maintain their individual existence. They are part of social organisms that scramble for survival—and that work for mastery over other organisms of their kind. And very often the interests of the group outweigh those of the individual, including his life and the posterity of his genes. What’s more, our savagery, not only as individuals but as groups, comes as an actual feature of our biological legacy. As E.O. Wilson writes in his 2012 book, The Social Conquest of Earth, “To form groups, drawing visceral comfort and pride from familiar fellowship, and to defend the group enthusiastically against rival groups—these are among the absolute universals of human nature and hence of culture.” “It can now be argued in the context of modern biology,” says Wilson, that “our bloody nature is ingrained because group-versus-group was a principal driving force that made us what we are.”

From military crusades to ethnic deportation, mass slaughter, and migratory invasion, culture alone is not responsible for group violence. In fact, it comes from something both sub- and superhuman, something we share with gorillas, apes, fish and ants—a brutality that speaks to us through the “animals” in our brain. From bacteria colonies to human conglomerations, superorganisms are hungry creatures, attempting to break down the boundaries of their competitors, chew off chunks of their opponents’ substance and digest and redistribute it as part of themselves. In the world of humans, that struggle takes the form of a competition between ideologies, between worldviews, between group souls. When the Japanese aviators guide their planes to the American enemy, when the Crusaders of Christendom march off to challenge the Empire of Islam, or even when Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin gauge each other, the struggle is not a battle of men, but a battle of networks, learning-machines bound together by memes, testing and confronting their respective shapes, claiming supremacy over each other.

In law, politics, and economics, individualism is a personal credo of great importance. I, for one, am a passionate believer in free speech, democracy, and capitalism. But to scientists, the obsession to place emphasis on the individual has been a chimera leading them down a dead‑end path. History, either natural or human, has never been the sole province of the selfish individual, essentially preoccupied with preserving his genes. For history is the playfield of the superorganism—and of its recent step-child, the meme. It is the environment of the mass murders that occur when one animal society tries to dominate another, the large‑scale savageries that arise when one human culture tries to impose its own system of values. On May 12, 2004, Osama Bin Laden explained how powerfully the 21st century’s wireless jihad was driven by Mohammed’s ideology. In a message to the worldwide community of Islam he wrote, “The main confrontation,” is “a religious and doctrinal one, not an economic or military one.” “The clash,” he said, “is in fact a clash of civilizations”—a clash of worldview-driven sociopolitical blocs.

Bin Laden also told us just how powerfully Mohammed’s notions powered him and what those memes mean for the Western civilization in a statement he addressed directly to us Americans, a statement most of us missed. “Why are we fighting and opposing you?” asked bin Laden. “What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you? The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam. The religion of the Unification of God; of freedom from associating partners with Him [Islamic code for Christianity], and rejection of this; of complete love of Him, the Exalted.” Then bin Laden commanded us to “the discarding of all the opinions, orders, theories and religions which contradict the religion He sent down to His Prophet Muhammad.” In other words, bin Laden called for a worldwide end to Christianity, Buddhism, Judaism, yoga, New Age beliefs, secularism, humanism, Darwinism, constitutions, and separation of Church and State. Only time will tell if our memes have the stick-to-it-iveness to survive or if Mohammed’s ideology will take over your life and mine.


Howard Bloom is the author of The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History (“mesmerizing”-The Washington Post), Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century (“reassuring and sobering”-The New Yorker), The Genius of the Beast: A Radical Re-Vision of Capitalism (“Impressive, stimulating, and tremendously enjoyable.” James Fallows, National Correspondent, The Atlantic), and The God Problem: How A Godless Cosmos Creates (“Bloom’s argument will rock your world.” Barbara Ehrenreich).

He also has two books about to be published in new versions: How I Accidentally Started the Sixties (“a monumental, epic, glorious literary achievement.” Timothy Leary), and The Muhammad Code: How a Desert Prophet Gave You ISIS, al Qaeda, and Boko Haram—or How Muhammad Invented Jihad (“a terrifying book… the best book I’ve read on Islam,” David Swindle, PJ Media).

Bloom explains that his field is “mass behavior, from the mass behavior of quarks to the mass behavior of human beings.” That specialization gives him a wide scope. In 2005, Bloom lectured an international conference of quantum physicists in Moscow—Quantum Informatics 2006—on why everything they know about Schrodinger’s Equation is wrong, and the concepts Bloom introduced were later used in a book proposing a new approach to quantum physics, Constructive Physics, by Moscow University’s Yuri Ozhigov.

Bloom has his own YouTube series, Howard the Humongous, which gets up to 790,000 views per installment. His website,, has had between four and five million hits.

Grégoire Canlorbe, a journalist, currently lives in Paris. While presently collaborating with Howard Bloom, he has conducted many interviews for journals such as Man and the Economy, founded by Nobel Prize winning economist Ronald Coase, and think-tanks such as Mises Institute and Gatestone Institute. Contact:

Integenke zabakiranutsi zibasha gukiza abanyabyaha!Inkozi zibibi

28th FEB,2016 Ijambo ry’Uhoraho rinzaho maze rirambwira riti,mwana w’umuntu,uyu munsi wandike iby’umuhamagaro w’Uwiteka ku mwana w’umuntu,kugirango uwboko bwanjye busobanukirwe impamvu habaho intambara ikomeye cyane kubahamagawe n’Uwiteka Imana ya bakiranutsi uko niko Uwiteka avuga.


Dore bamaze igihe bakuvuga cyane harabakuvuga nabi cyane kuko ubangamiye inyungu zabo ni cyubahiro cyabo,hari nabakuvuga neza kubera umurimo ukomeye naguhamagariye ku nkorera ibyo rero ntibiguhagarike umutima kuko uko niko bigenda abana b’Abantu bazirana n’umuntu Uhoraho ahagurukije kubera ishyari hamwe ni mbaraga z’umwijima zibakoreramo

Bahora bavuga yuko bakeneye Imana cyane,ariko Uwiteka yagira atya agahagurutsa umuntu runaka intabara zigatangara bagatangira kurwanya uwo Uwiteka yambitse imbaraga z’umwuka wera nyamara bakibagirwa yuko Uwiteka ari we Mana kandi ari we mugenga wa byose uko niko Uwiteka avuga.

Njyanwa mu iyerekwa mbona ibikomeye maze gucishwamo,mbona amagambo ya bantu bavuga akanyuraho hejuru yanjye nk’umuyaga maze nerekwa wa muvugabutumwa w’umugore witwa Marie Esther Murebwayire araza arambwira ngo,ejo barimo bskuvuga nabi cyane ku buryo amagambo bavugaga ntashobora kuyasubiramo!

Ijambo ry’Uhoraho rinzaho maze rirambwira riti,mwana w’umuntu,iyo mvugo niy’umuntu ushaka ko mwakongera gusubirana cyangwa kuvugana ntaho ihuriye nukuli kwibyo akubwira,kuko byamaze kugaragara yuko ufite ho Uhoraho nka gakondo yawe usibye se ku kuvuga,no ku kwica ntibaba barakwishe?Uko niko Uwiteka abaza!

Nuko rero ntiwite ku magambo ya bantu kuko abo bose iyo Uwiteka ataza ku kulinda bari kuvuga yuko wabuze ubwenge uko niko abana b’Abantu bakora ndetse ninako bateye niko bamera iyo ibintu bimaze kubayobera batangira guhimba amayeri yo kwigarura buretse gato ahubwo uzumva n’uwahoze ari madamu wawe atangira kwigarura yiyibagize ko yakwise imbwa ndetse yanatutse mama wawe witabye Imana ku wa 1st Mutarana 1981 kandi wowe utarigeze utuka nyoko bukwe uko niko abadamu bamera biyibagiza ibibi byabo bagashaka kubitwikiriza ibyiza batagira kugirango bibanyuze mu muhanda base nabambaye kandi bambaye ubusa(Ibikorwa)niko Uhoraho avuga

Uyu munsi wandike kumuhamagaro w’Abraham,Issack,Yakobo,Esau,Josepf kugirango ubwoko bwanjye bubashe gusobanukirwa yuko gukorera Uwiteka ntabwo arukudamarara kuko umwanzi aba arwanya ijambo ry’Uhoraho kugirango bigaragare yuko Imana itajya igirira neza abantu bayo.Nyamara Uwiteka aba afite icyerekezo kigari cyane akwerekezamo ariko kubera gukunda ibyavuba na vuba bybadayimoni akenshi bituma abantu batabasha gusohoza umugambi w’Uhoraho bagaca inzira ngufiya maze bagapfukamira umwanzi Satani akabaha ibyo bifuza barangiza bakabibatiza amazina y’Uwiteka babeshya yuko Uwiteka ariwe wabahaye umugisha uko niko umwanzi akoresha amayeri kuko asobanukiwe integenke za muntu ko ntakwihagana agira mubuzima bwe bwaburi munsi kugirango atazabona ubugingo buhoraho uko niko Uhoraho avuga.

Bene data bakundwa ikigisho cyo kuri uyu munsi wa mbere wisabato,uko niko Uhoraho yagitegetse kugirango dusubire ku bakurambere bacu ba cyera twitegereze kandi tunyure munzira zabo za kera maze tubashe gusohoza amahoro mu bugingo buhoraho twateguriwe n’Uhoraho

Banza utekereze amagambo nibitutsi byavuzwe ku mugaragu w’Imana akaba n’umuhanuzi nk’uko Uwiteka yabibwiye Umwami Abimelech ubwo yamubwiraga yuko Sarah atar’umugore we ahubwo ko yari mushiki we.Nibyo kuba yari mushiki we ntibyakuragaho kuba babana nkumugore n’umugabo kuko icyo gihe buri bwoko cyangwa buri muryango bashakanaga ukwabo kuko babaga bataziranye ndetse nururimi rwabaga rutandukanye

Ariko yamaze imyaka myinshi ategereje isezerano uhereye kumyaka 75 kugeza kumyaka ijana 100 year agitegereje isezerano ry’Uhoraho.Kugeza ubwo Sarah amubwiye ati,ubanza Uwiteka atari we wavuganye nawe,ngaho nguhaye uburenganzira genda urarane na Hagar turebe ko wabona akana ejo tutazasiga ubutunzi bwacu tukabusigira Elizari utari uwo murubyaro rwacu.Tekereza uyu munsi ari wowe bibayeho ukageza muri iyo myaka mbese byaba byifashe gute?rubanda,abo muvukana,inshuti zawe,nabandi ubwo se wajya ubabwira ngo ufite isezerano urabona bakumva?

Ungera utekereze ku bantu bihaye amasezerano detse bamwe biyise mama ISSAC ese n’Uwiteka wabise ayo mazina?Ubwo se koko nibasaza batikoze imugongo urumva ako gahinda kangana iki?Umwuka w’ikinyoma ngo uko niko bizera Imana? Ofcaurse birababje cyane !!! Ibyo byose byabereyeho kugirango byigishe ibisekuruza bizakurikiraho kuko Uwiteka atajya akora umushinga wigihe gito ahubwo akora uwibihe byose “Long term Eternal” Project”kugirango nabandi bazabyigireho.

Uko byagendekeye Abraham,ninako byagendekeye umuhungu we ISSAC, “a Son like father”cyakora we kuko isezerano ryari ryegereje yamaze imyaka (20) we na Rabech batarabona urubyaro tekereza icyo gihe amagambo mukuru we Ishumail yaba yaravugaga nubwo tutari duhari ariko umenye yuko yirukanywe kugirango atazaraganwa hamwe na ISSAC ngo niwe ufite Imana da!!!Akenshi kuko abantu baba batazi umugambi Uwiteka agufiteho,bihutira kuguciraho iteka nyamara iyo ugiriwe Ubuntu ugahabwa ubwenge ubuhanga no kumenya ukabasha gusobakirwa yuko wahamagawe kandi ko Uwiteka agufiteho umugambi atar’ibyo wabwiwe nabafarisayo bishobora ku kugufasha bikaba byakugeza kure cyane yahoo utekekereza

Nubwo bigaragara yuko Abraham n’Umuhungu we ISSAC babeshye Umwami ko abadamu babo atari abafasha babo ahubwo ari bashiki babo,Uwiteka ntiyabuze kubarwanirira.Tekereza iyo Abimelech aza kurongara Sarah ese SARAH yari kuzapfa yongeye gusubirana na Abraham?ISSAC wabeshye ko REBECH atari umufasha we iyo Abimelech aza kumurongora usibye ko Imana yaciye inzira akababona barimo basomanira mugikari urumva byari kuzagenda gute?Umwami yagutwara umugore ukazongera kumubona?Uyu jyewe nawe twari kuba tuvuga iki?

Uwiteka Imana yabakiranutsi,azi ingaruka ni ntengenke byaba bantu kandi azi ni ngaruka bigira kumurimo we,ahangaha rero urabona ko Uwiteka iyo ataza guhagarara kumurimo we uyu munsi umwanzi satani aba adukwena cyane atwereka yuko Uwiteka atajya alinda abakiranutsi.Ariko tunakuramo isomo rivuga yuko kubo Uwiteka yahamagaye ndetse yanatoranije ajya abalindira no muntegenke zabo ibyari ibinyoma akabihindura ukuri

Uko niko byagendekeye Yakobo wavukanye na ESAU nyamara imigenzo yicyo gihe kugeza na nubu umwana wimfura niwe uragwa imitungo ahanini yose yo murugo ndetse nabahawe iyabo uwagizwe umutware ahabwa ububasha bwo kubagenzura kandi aba atari iye kugirango hatazagira uyivuyarara ejo akazahinduka ikibazo mu muryango kandi yarahawe umunani we.

Ariko kuri ESAU we siko byamugendekeye kuko atahawe umunani cyangwa umugisha kubirebana n’iby’umwuka kuko ISSAC abana be bari bamuzi yuko arumuhanuzi bityo rero bakaba barizeraga yuko ijambo rimwe gusa yavuga kumwana we,ryagombaga kuzagira ingaruka nziza kubugingo bwabo.

Umunsi wo gutanga umugisha Imana yateje ikibazo umubyeyi wabo ISSAC asaba kugaburirwa inyama wagirango ntiyarasanzwe azirya?Nuko abwira ESSAU ati mwana wanjye geregaza unzanire inyama maze nkwihere umugisha igihe cyose umubyeyi w’umugabo aba aganira n’umwana we wimfura,usanga umugore aba ashaka kumenya icyo baganiriye kubera amatsiko igihe cyose ISSAC yaganiraga na ESSAU Rebech yazaga kumviriza kuko niwe wari yaravuganye n’Uwiteka Imana ubwo yaratwite impanga zabo bana bombi

Gukundwa n’umubyeyi utakunzwe n’Uhoraho nta cyo byakumarira kuko Yakobo yakunzwe n’Uwiteka yanga ESSAU ntumbaze impamvu Uwiteka icyo kibazo niwe ukizi kandi ninawe wagisobanura ngirango ashingira kuri kamere y’umuntu bitewe nuko ateye ahari(Abaroma 9:10)Imana yakunze Yakobo,ESSAU iramwanga

Ninayomvu agiye guhiga akabura umuhigo kuko igihe cyo kwamburwa umugisha cyari cyageze uko niko abatari muri gahunda y’Uhoraho bagiye kwamburwa umugisha aho bazajya guhiga ntibaronke bakazasanga Uwiteka yamaze kuduha umugisha w’iby’umwuka bakazasigara barira mu myotsi.

Kubera umujinya ESSAU yahise ashaka abanyamahanga kazi abamowabu kazi kugeza nawe igihe yaje kwitwa MOABU kuko umugisha wamatungo nta cyo ushobora ku kumarira amaze kubona yuko abonye umugisha wa matungo yibwiye yuko wa mugisha murumuna we yamwambuye nta cyo ukivuze,ariko ntiyigeze amenya yuko umugisha yambuwe warumugisha wiby’umwuka muri gahunda y’Uhoraho yateganyaga kuzahindura urubyaro rw’Abrahamu kuzahinduka nkumusenyi wo kunyanja.

Yakobo kubera yuko yaraziko azicwa na mukuru we ESSAU yahise abwirwa na Nyina guhungira kwa nyirarume Rabani aho yagiye akaba umugaragu imyaka (20) maze nawe unyumvire umuntu uzakomokwaho kuzaba ihanga rikomeye cyane mu isi yabazima!Yragiraga ihene n’intama

Ahangaha ubaye wowe usibye wenda umaze kumenya gahunda ya Yakobo,ariko tekereza uramutse urangije amashuri yawe,usibyeko Yakobo ntamashuli yagiraga usibye kurota no kwerekwa hanyuma ukajya kuragira ihene za nyokorome mbese wabifata ute?Ubundi se wabyemera?Iby’Imana namabanga.

Tekereza muri ibi bihe ubwiwe ko uzasimbura umwakagara ku ngoma wenda nibura amezi (2) gusa mbese wabyizera? Tureke kuvuga ibikomeye cyane ahubwo tuvuge ibigaragarira amaso ya bana b’Abantu bijyanye nubuzima turimo uyu munsi wa none bitekerezeho burya kwizera umuntu yizera ijambo ry’Uhorahp yavuganye nawe niba utajya uvugana nayo waba ufite ikibazo gikomeye kuko bynakugora kwemera cyangwa kwizera ko uzajya mu ijuru

Ariko muri ubwo butayu bwa Yakobo yakomeje kwizera Uwiteka Imana niho yavuze ngo,iyo itaba Imana ya data ISSAC na Abraham uba waransezereye amara masa! Itangiriro 31:39-43 iyo Uwiteka agufiteho gahunda umwanzi satani nta tinya gukoresha mama wawe cyangwa papa wawe cyangwa abavandimwe bawe ba nyogosenge cyangwa ba nyokorome cyangwa babyara bawe ngo arusheho kugandamiza ndetse bashobora no ku kuroga bakakugirira nabi kugirango utazegera ubaruta ukagera muri ya masezerano y’Uhoraho nyamara se nubwo Josepf tuza kumugeraho ntiyabuze kubagirira neza nyuma yo gutabwa murwobo bamwita karosi,nyuma yo gukurwa murwobo agurishwa kwa mu Misiri afungwa imyaka (13) muri gereza ategereje isezerano Imana irahamurindira kugirango atajya kuzerera akavangirwa nabadayimoni kuko muri gereza bamugize umubozi ndetse akajya anasobanura inzozi za bantu barose uwo ni Majeshi Leon kumulindi kuri 15 yafunzwe iminsi (700) yamaherere arimo gutunganywa n’Uwiteka Imana yabakiranutsi kubw’umulimo warumuri imbere akora uyu munsi

Ariko nubwo Yosefp yabaye ukomeye ku Mwami,ntiyigeze yita kubyo abavandimwe be bamukoreye ahubwo yihutiye kubaramira vuba na vuba ngo batarimburwa ninzara iyaza kuba undi yari guhamagaza ababyeyi be abandi akabareka bakarimbuka bakicwa ninzara ariko kubera urukundo ntiyigeze abitura inabi bamugiriye reka nibwire yuko nanjye ariko bishobora kuzangendekera kuko mbitekereje hakiri kare ahari bishobora kuzangirira umumaro nawe usomye ibi nanditse uramenye icyo gihe nigisohora ntuzatinye kunyibutsa kugirango satani azakorwe nisoni zibyo yadukoreye amenye ko ntawurwanya Uwiteka Imana kuko afite imbaraga ububasha nubushobozi kuri buri kiremwa cyose.

Ndakubwiz’ukuri niba wiyizi neza ko ufitanye isezerano nayo,menya yuko byanze bikunze abakurwanya bose uzabagaburira ubahembure mu gihe cya akaga bamenye yuko Uwiteka Imana wizeye itajya itetereza abayihungiyeho izakulinda amajya namaza ntukangwe nibyo bitero bya Satani na Jackson nkurunziza hamwe na Nyiramongi Jezebel n’umwakagara kuko mu gihe kitari kure Uwiteka agiye kwigaragaza kuko intwari ubu zirataka zinyinyiriwe ahasigaye nah’intwarane

Nuko rero ubwo bimeze gutyo niki utekereza,izi nyigisho zaba har’icyo zikumariye?Urumva hari icyerekezo waba ubonye mbese intambara zawe uzirwana gute?Ese waba urumunyabwoba?Nawe se waba ushaka gutanga umugore wawe kubera gutinya umwakagara?Numutanga Uwiteka atagufiteho umugambi,aramutwara ntabwo azamukugarurira cyeretse nimba wizeye ko Uwiteka ari kumwe nawe

Ikindi nuko kuba Umwami Abimelech yarabashije guhamya ko Uwiteka yavuganye nawe akamubwira yuko Sarah arumufasha wa Abraham,byongereye kwizera Abraham nubwo Sarah we nta cyo byaje kumumarira Abraham yamenye yuko Uwiteka ari kumwe nawe kandi abasha kumunuranira kandi cyane ndetse no mu gihe cya kaga na makuba mu gihe we integenke imbaraga zo kwizera Uwiteka Imana zamurangiranye ndetse kuruhande rwa Abimelech nawe yarataravugana n’Imana kuva yabaho ariko kuko umugaragu w’Uhoraho yari yageze murugo rwe byatumye Uwiteka Imana abasha kuvugana nawe binyuze muntegenke za Abraham

Bivuzengo, mu ntegenke zabakiranutsi,abanyabyaha babasha kubonamo imbaraga z’ Imana niba rero integenke za bana b’Abantu habonekamo imbaraga zitangaje,byaba bugenda gute mu ntegenke z’Imana?Aya magambo subwambere nyandika ndetse sunubwakabiri bubaye ubwa gatatu bitekerezeho kuko uyu munsi Uwiteka yagambiriye yuko wagira icyo wigamo bikakubera ingirakamaro kugirango ubashe kugera kurwego rwo kwizera Uwiteka Imana akwifuzaho!Aha nashaka kubabwira ngo no muntegenke zacu Uwiteka ajya abana natwe ndetse integenke zacu akazihindura imbaraga zo kwizera zigirira umumaro inkozi zibibi zigahabwa kumenya Uwiteka Imana yabakiranutsi

Hanyuma se nimba aruko bimeze,noneho imbaraga zabakiranutsi zaba zingana iki?Niba integenke zabo zishobora gutuma bamenya Imana bizagenda gute umunsi bazahabwa imbaraga?Iki kigisho cyo muri ibi byanditswe ubanza nsa naho naba ngishoje ariko umwuka wera naramuka ampaye irindi hishukirwa sinzabura kongera kubyandikaho Uwiteka abane namwe kandi abagirire neza ndetse murusheho gushora imizi yo kwizera nunanirwa kwemera iby’ijambo ry’Uhoraho basi uzemere ibyanjye kuko ibyo mpura nabyo ninabyo nandika kandi bijyanye ni jambo ry’Imana

Harumuntu nabwiye ngo nagere ikirenge mu cyanjye arambwira ngo nta bwo ndi intumwa Paul,ndamusubiza nti nyamara yabivuganye kwizera shingiye kumurimo yakoraga nanjye mbasha kubivuga mu gihe cyose numva nta mutima uncira urubanza kuko numva binkwiriye kuvuga gutyo nkigisonga cya Kristo.

Erega ibyo abagaragu b’Uhoraho batubanjirije bakoze natwe tubasha kubikora igihe cyose tuzaba twmeye kugendana n’Uhoraho(Umwami Yesu ati nimunyizera muzakora ibiruta ibyo nakoze urabona yuko Umwami wabakiranutsi Yesu Kristo atigeze ashyiraho inzitiza zo kumwizera cyangwa zo kumukorera icyo usabwa gusa nukugendana ni jambo rye ibindi azajya abyikorera.

Intangiriro yabo, yabaye iherezo ryabo.

Nkuko bisanzwe repubulika ya lll y’Urwanda iyobowe nishyaka lilikubutegetsi FPR,iri mu myiteguro yo kwizihiza umunsi wo kwibohora,ubwo agatsiko kagizwe n’Abatutsi bo muri FPR,biganjemo abavukiye mu gihugu cy’Ubugande bafata imiheto bavuga ko baharanira ubwoko bw’Abatutsi bari baraheze ishyanga,bahahejejwe nabanyarwanda bo mu bwoko bw’Abahutu “Kiga”bavugaga ko ngo iyo ikirahure cyuzuye amazi arameka.


Aka gatsiko mu buryo butemewe n’amategeko,ndetse bitananyuze muri demokarasi bahisemo gutaha mu gihugu cyabo,ntawe babanje gusaba uruhushya yaba mubihugu bikomeye cyangwa byoroheje,mu minsi ibiri (2);gusa nibwo Col.DODO Twahirwa yahise yivugana umugaba w’ingabo warubarangaje imbere maze ibintu bisubira irudubi.

Iyo ntambara yamaze imyaka (4);barwana nabavandimwe babo bo mu bwoko bw’Abahutu babasaba yuko bakumvikana bagaturana kuko na nyina wundi abyara umuhungu,perezida Habyarimana na MRND bavugaga ko inkotanyi ar’udukoko dufite imirizo tumeze nk’inzige twateye igihugu cy’Urwanda tuvuye mu gihugu cyabaturanyi cya Uganda.

Igihe cyaje kugera uwabitaga udukoko”Inyenzi”maze yemera ko,utwo dukoko nabo arabantu,akimara kwemera imishyikirano twadukoko twahise tumwivugana afata iyihuse dore yari mu ndege yihuta cyane yisangira mu genzi we,Gen.Fred GISA Rwigema,utu dukoko twinyenzi twaje guhindukamo abantu bamanuye iyo ndege bitemewe n’amategeko,bafata igihugu hakoreshejwe imbaraga hitwajwe ko baje gukiza abantu barimo bica nababantu barwanyaga utwo dusimba.

Aba bantu bose maze kwica nzabakizwa niki?

 Ishyaka FPF,na kagame bahise bashyiraho leta cyangwa ubutegetsi ubwo bafata umurwa mukuru wa Kigali kuwa 04 Nyakanga 1994,kuwa 19th Nyakanga 1994 bahise bashyiraho leta yari iyobowe na Bizimungu Pasteur waje gukurwa kuri uwo mwanya nyuma y’imyaka (6);gusa agahita ashyirwa mu nzu y’imbohe ahoy amaze imyaka (5);bamaze kubona ko amaze kwiga kubana n’Abatutsi bo muri FPR,baramurekura.

Iyi repubulika kugez’ubu ihakana ubwigenge bw’Abanyarwanda kandi yarangiza ikabwemera murwego rwokujijisha,bivugwa yuko Independence ivugwa ko yasabwe n’Umwami w’Urwanda Kigeli wa V Ndahindurwa ,nubwo Kayibanda yiyitirira ko ariwe wasabye independence ntibibuza umuryango FPR inkotanyi kwita uwo munsi ko,arumunsi wabahutu kuburyo bawurutisha umunsi wokwibohora .

Mu gihe FPR ishishikajwe no gutegura uwo munsi, kuwa 30 Kamena ntabwo wizihizwa bitewe niyongenga bitekerezo ko,arumunsi wabahutu!Ese koko abanyarwanda babonye ubwigenge?bwashatswe nande?turasaba abanyarwanda bazi amateka,kudufasha bakatubwira ukuri kubyabaye uwashatse ubwigenge hagati y’Umwami na repubulika (l);ninde?mushobora kutwandikira kuri iyi e-mail ibitekerezo byanyu tuzabishyira ahagaragara maze abanyarwanda barusheho kumenya ukuri kubyabaye ku gihugu cyabo.

Ntabwo ari repubulika ya (lll);yonyine yaranzwe n’uburiganya,na repubulika ya (ll);yajyaga yizihiza umunsi  yakoreyeho kudeta ubwo KIga yakuraga uwahoze ayobora icyo gihugu nyakwigendera Kayibanda nawe wagiye kubutegetsi muburyo bw’uburiganya!kuwa 05th Nyakanga 1973 nibwo nyakwigendera Habyarimana yakuye Kayibanda kubutegetsi muburyo bunyuranije n’amategeko.

Amakuru avuga ko,yahise amufunga kugeza ubwo Kayibanda yaguye muri Gereza yishwe n’urushwima, maze aba abonye ingororano yoguhemukira ubwami bw’Urwanda.Habyarimana nawe nkabandi bose,Father like a son,yizihizaga umunsi wogukora amarorerwa kurusha umunsi wa independence,gusa aho bitandukaniye na FPR,yanyuzagamo akizihiza uwo munsi bemera ko uRwanda rwabonye ubwigenge.

Kayibanda nawe abifashijwemo nabazungu yahengereye Umwami w’Urwanda agiye Congo –Kinshasa gusaba ubwigenge maze bahita bamwoherereza telegram ko atagomba kugaruka mu gihugu cye,ngo kuko  abaturage bahisemo gukora amatora bagatora repubulika mucyimbo cyo gutora ubwami.

Aha urebye neza urasanga ar’ikinyoma gisa gisa!Ninde wagombaga guhagararira amatora ya kamarampaka Atari Umwami,ese ayo matora yahagarariwe nande Umwami adahari,ubundi se yateguwe nande,ngayo ng’uko repubulika z’uRwanda zagiye zirangwa n’uburiganya,none zigezeho zihakana ibyo zivuga ko zemera.

Ngirango mu minsi yashize niho repubulika ya (lll);yizihije imyaka (50);uRwanda rubonye ubwigenge,nyamara umunsi uRwanda rwaboneyeho ubwigenge ntabwo ujya wizihizwa,none se bishoboka bite ko,bwitwa ubwigenge bw’abanyarwanda kandi badashobora ndetse nabo bahutu bemera ubwo bwigenge badashobora kwemererwa kwizihiza ubwo bwigenge?

Turasaba abanyarwanda ko badusobanurira bakoresheje iyo e-mail twatanze hejuru,batrubwire niba umunsi wo kwibohora nyawe ari kudeta cyangwa ar’ubwigenge,ikinyoma burya ntikiramba ku ngoma igihe kiragera kikajya ahagaragara kandi iyo kigaragaye burya cyiba cyavuye ku ngoma.

Page 276 of 372
1 274 275 276 277 278 372
Skip to toolbar