Dedicated to the men and women of the United States Military and dedicated to the Conservative Cause betrayed by the elitists of the now positively defunct Grand Old Party. We will seek to either rebuild or replace said same political party.
I Am A Proud Member of Vets For Freedom
For up to date progress in the War In Iraq, please visit Vets For Freedom, an organization I am proud to be a member in good standing of.
If you wish to catch a buzz without the usual after affects, CLICK TO MEMEORANDUM. (It will not disturb the current page)That will be all. We now return to regular programming.
This Blog Is Moving
Greetings. After this weekend, this Take Our Country Back Blog will be moving to the new web site. Too many conservatives are getting zapped by the intolerant dweebs of the Obama Goons and seeing that this editing platform is a free site, Blogger can do pretty much what it feels like doing. Hence, I now have a paid site and will be migrating the last 1400+ posts shortly.
So, one day, you just may click this page somewhere and it will show up as "private". It has been fun but the intolerant Czarbie Goon Squads are brain dead idiots. They can come play at the new site which I OWN outright.
Bare Naked Islam, the video rich blog about current events related to Islam, taken down by Word Press after badgering by CAIR, is back, on its own, previously registered domain.
At present, there is a redirect from the old WordPress domain, but that might not last forever, so visitors should go to http://www.barenakedislam.com/ bookmark it and sign up for email notification of new posts. Tyrants & dictators have long sought to squelch critics; the Stamp Act and attempts to limit access to printing presses played a role in causing the ar of Revolution which resulted in American independence. George Washington said something of vital importance about free speech, we must ever bear his wise words in mind.
When attackers threaten, we must be free to identify & accurately describe the source of the threat and warn our fellows to fend off approaching danger. Islam arrogantly demands that the alarm be silenced so as to facilitate conquest. Moe set the pattern, by commissioning the murder of poets & singers who criticized and mocked him. Bare Naked Islam, which had more than 100,000 page views per month at WordPress, is one of the premier watchdogs, loudly sounding the alarm. It will not be silenced.
Pamela Geller Reams Them a New Orifice. Pamela Geller is fast, frustrated & furious in this 40 minute video she reams indolent society a badly needed new orifice. She has much more than she can say in such a short time, but she gives us a very good outline, drawing her points together to form a circle which encompasses the globe full of issues.
Its war, and you are an army of one. Pamela is your General. She gives you your orders: learn and teach others. If you do nothing more, at least watch this video and share it with everyone who will listen. Thanks and a tip of the hat to Front Page Magazine http://frontpagemag.com/2011/09/23/pamela-geller-wednesday-morning-club/ Reading the Qur'an is not easy because it is archaic, redundant and jumbled, lacking context & chronology. The Noble Qur'an, translated by Hilali & Khan, is reputed to be 95% accurate and contains parenthetical expressions from tafsirs and the translator's footnotes. Several Surahs are essential to understanding the malignantly militant nature of Islam: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 33, 47, 48, 49 & 61. You can select them from a pick list at the top of the page. Hadith are sayings of Muhammad, passed down from mouth to ear by his companions. They have been collected by several scholars, the most widely accepted collection being that of Bukhari. Like the Qur'an, hadith collections suffer from redundancy. Begin with Books 52, 53 & 59, then read the others if you have sufficient patience. Tafsir are scholarly explanations of the Qur'an. They use parallel verses and relevant ahadith to clarify the verses. Tafsir Ibn Kathir is fairly complete and easily accessible. You can select the Surahs listed above and read them instead of the Qur'an & hadith to save time and effort. Islamic biography and history are also important, but less easily accessible than the Qur'an, hadith and tafsir. Craig Winn compiled selections of the canon into a 1000 page book with the quotes compiled into handy appendices "The Prophet of Doom". For those lacking the time, patience and ambition to tackle the large tomes, there is a short book which encapsulates the most essential information: Suhas Majumdar's "Jihad: The Islamic Doctrine of Permanent War". Pamela Geller raises the issue of Shari'ah: Islamic law based on the Qur'an & hadith. Much of it is arcane, dealing with matters of prayer & ritual purity. The really important parts deal with "justice", marriage & divorce. It will be easier for you go go to Amazon and buy a hard copy of Reliance of the Traveller. If you can tolerate a low resolution scan and large, pdf, this link will get you into Chapter 9 of Book O; "Justice".You can scroll up to Books N & M. If you delve deeply into Reliance, you will discover that divorce is affected by the husband's thrice repeating "I divorce you". You will discover that a father can force his virgin, pre-pubescent daughter to marry the man of his choice. You will learn that a Christian woman married to a Muslim can not obtain child custody in divorce.
CAIR vs. Santorum and Gingrich: More Islamic Lies CAIR published a press release objecting to remarks by Rick Santorum in which he asserted that Islam is not the source of the concept of equality. I have selected some representative quotes and will disprove CAIR's lies with citations to the Qur'an, hadith & Shari'ah.
"The Quran, Islam's revealed text, is the best refutation of Mr. Santorum's inaccurate and offensive remarks, which are unbecoming of anyone who hopes to hold our nation's highest office. Christians, Jews and Muslims all worship the same God and share religious traditions that promote justice and equality.
worship the same God
Do Christians and Jews worship Satan, the deceiver?
And they cheated/deceived and God cheated/deceived, and God (is) the best (of) the cheaters/deceivers.
Miim-Kaf-Ra= To practice deceit or guile or circumvention, practice evasion or elusion, to plot, to excercise art or craft or cunning, act with policy, practice strategem.
And when those who disbelieved deceive/scheme at you to affix/affirm you, or kill you, or bring you out, and they scheme/deceive , and God deceives/schemes and God (is) best (of) the deceivers/schemers .
Truly, the ones who are hypocrites seek to trick God. And HeisThe One Who Deceives them, and when they stood up for formal prayer, they stood up lazily to make display to humanity. And they remember not God but a little,
Verily, the hypocrites seek to deceive Allah, but He deceives them; and when they rise up to pray, they rise up lazily to be seen of men, and little do they remember Allah;
The hypocrites try to deceive God but He, in fact, deceives them. They stand up in prayer lazily just to show that they pray, but, in truth they remember God very little.
PRON– 3rd person masculine singular personal pronoun
N– nominative masculine active participle PRON– 3rd person masculine plural possessive pronoun
اسم مرفوع و«هم» ضمير متصل في محل جر بالاضافة
Do Christians and Jews Worship a blood thirsty demon who appoints warlords as prophets and demands great slaughter as their price of admission to Paradise?
8:67. It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allâh desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.
promote justice and equality
"The Quran and theProphet Muhammad(peace be upon him) stress racial andgender equality.The Prophet said: 'All people are equal as the teeth of a comb.'
Allah's word declares that men are superior to women, whose testimony is valued as half that men and who inherit half as much as men.
4:32. And wish not for the things in which Allâh has made some of you to excel others. For men there is reward for what they have earned, (and likewise) for women there is reward for what they have earned, and ask Allâh of His Bounty. Surely, Allâh is Ever AllKnower of everything. 2:282. [...] And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence). 4:11. Allâh commands you as regards your children's (inheritance); to the male, a portion equal to that of two females; if (there are) only daughters, two or more, their share is two thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is half. [...]
"The Prophet once told a companion: 'You are not better than people (of other races) unless you excel them in piety.' (Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 1361)
excel them in piety
How might Muslims excel us in piety? Allah conceals, Moe reveals, look beneath the surface of the text! Muslims excel us in piety by attacking and enslaving us.
3:110. You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh - and rebellious against Allâh's Command). Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 80: Narrated Abu Huraira: The Verse:--"You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind." means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.
Religious liberty is one of the fundamental ideas of America, but not of Islam. The Qur'an treats Christians and Jews rather harshly, criticizing, cursing and declaring war against them.
1:7. The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians). 2:159. Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidences and the guidance, which We have sent down, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allâh and cursed by the cursers. 2:160. Except those who repent and do righteous deeds, and openly declare (the truth which they concealed). These, I will accept their repentance. And I am the One Who accepts repentance, the Most Merciful. 2:161. Verily, those who disbelieve, and die while they are disbelievers, it is they on whom is the Curse of Allâh and of the angels and of mankind, combined. 9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Where Allah's writ runs, Christians and Jews are subject to draconian restrictions under Shari'ah. The following quote is from Reliance of the Traveller.
Such non-Muslim subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. In addition, they:
-1- are penalized for committing adultery or theft, though not for drunkenness;
-2- are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar);
-3- are not greeted with "as-Salamu 'alaykum";
-4- must keep to the side of the street;
-5- may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims' buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;
-6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;
Newt Gingrich Misses the Mark on Islam & Shari'ah News Gingrich swerves dangerously close to the truth, but veers away at the last moment. Thanks and a tip of the hat to Pulp Ark, who posted a link on Facebook. I viewed the video and read the accompanying article at Huffington Post.
The amateur transcript which follows will not be perfect, but should be close enough. I have highlighted some major points which I will consider below. Q: Now you mentioned that the founding fathers have said that we are all created equal as men and also you have unquestionable support for Israel, obviously. My question is on foreign policy--you've mentioned through the campaign theat the Palestinian people were invented people. What do you suggest should happen to them, should they become Israeli citizens, or should they just... what do you suggest should happen to them? The other question is: I know this is South Carolina, I am from South Carolina, but ...is 60% Evangelical Christians and with a strong support for Israel, but also my question is, you know, the governor of the state is, you know, of Indian heritage, her parents came from India, and we have a Catholic running for President, a Mormon running for President; would you, as Newt Gingrich support a Muslim American running for President, would you endorse, at one point in the future, in American history, that a Muslim American could possibly be running for President given that we had a woman running for President in Hillary Cl8inton and we had a Jewish American in Joe Lieberman running for Vice President, thank you very much? A: I think it would depend entirely on whether they would commit in public to give up Shari'ah. I am totally opposed to Shari'ah law, being accepted by any court in the United States, in fact I favor a federal law that preempts it and says Shari'ah law will not be used in any court in the United States and this is a very fundamental question. I mean, people who are truly moderate ...we have a friend in Arizona who served in the U.S. Navy, who is a medical doctor, who is Muslim but he is a totally modern person trying to find ways to bring Islam into modernity. When you realize it was said last night that a rising Islamization of Turkey has been accompanied by a 1400% increase in women being killed; when you look at the actual implementation of Shari'ah in places like Iran, when you look at churches being burned in Nigeria and in Egypt...the decline of Christians in Iraq from 1,200,000 when Americans arrived to about 500,000 today; It depends entirely on the person: If they are a modern person integrated into the modern world, and they are prepared to recognize all religions, that's one thing, on the other hand, if they are the Saudis, who demand that we respect them while they refuse to allow either a Jew or a Christian to worship in Saudi Arabia, that's something different. and I think we need a President who stands up, tells the truth and rejects any kind of effort to impose on us a sense of guilt because we believe in our religion and we're prepared to tell the truth and I am totally opposed to the State Department meeting a week ago with the Organization of Islamic Countries who are seeking to censor any comment about Islam because I think it is a fundamental violation of our right of free speech as Americans. But within that framework, a truly modern person who happened to worship Allah would not be a threat. A person who belonged to any kind of belief in Shari'ah, any kind of effort to impose that on the rest of us, would be a mortal threat. Now, the Palestinian question is a good one. I think if HAMAS and the PLO would recognize Israel's right to exist, and if they meant it; if they would hunt down and stop the terrorists and the bombings, I would favor peace with the Palestinians; I would favor an independent state, I would an ability of them to become prosperous and live in safety and have the right of property rights. But, in Novemeber, eleven missiles were fired into Israel; that's not a peace process, that's war, and I think this idea... and HAMAS's official position is the extinction of Israel...we don't have negotiations with somebody who says lets sit down and negotiate while I figure out how to wipe you out. and I think that we have tolerated for too long terrorist activities disguised as diplomatic behavior, and i think the Palestinian people should throw out the folks .who want to destroy Israel and should say "Ok, we accept Israel's right to exist, if Israel will accept our right to be prosperous, have the rule ... of our property... and candidly, that means giving up the 'right of return', and the reason I talk about it that way is no natural right of return. Greeks have no right to return to Turkey, East Germans have no right to return to Poland, Poles have no right to return to Russia, and we;ve had all sorts of changes in territorial boundaries in the last 200 years, and the only place where it's propped up is against the state of Israel and the purpose of propping it up is to destroy Israel and we are to say 'fine, that's over; there is no right of return, now lets negotiate the future. '.
give up Shari'ah
Including that phrase in a conditional clause is either a token of irony or ignorance. I am not sure which applies in this case. Abandonment of Shari'ah is an act of apostasy, one of twenty such acts listed in Reliance of the Traveller, Book O8.7.
-14- to deny the obligatory character of something which by the consensus of Muslims (ijma`, def: B7) is part of Islam, when it is well known as such, like the prayer (salat) or even one rak'a from one of the five obligatory prayers, if there is no excuse (def: u2.4);
-19- to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law;
Allah's permissions, prohibitions 7 imperatives, expressed in the Qur'an, are the primary source of Shari'ah.
Only Allah has the right to rule
5:44. [...] And whosoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed, such are the Kâfirûn (i.e. disbelievers - of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allâh's Laws ). 5:49. And so judge (you O Muhammad ) between them by what Allâh has revealed and follow not their vain desires, [...] 22:41. Those (Muslim rulers) who, if We give them power in the land, (they) order for Iqamat-as-Salât. [i.e. to perform the five compulsory congregational Salât (prayers) (the males in mosques)], to pay the Zakât and they enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm orders one to do), and forbid Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism and all that Islâm has forbidden) [i.e. they make the Qur'ân as the law of their country in all the spheres of life]. And with Allâh rests the end of (all) matters (of creatures). 33:36. It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.
truly moderate
That phrase defines a hypocrite [47:20], not a believer. Believers are only those who engage in jihad, killing others and being killed fighting in Allah's cause [9:111]. Newt appears to imply that he would endorse the candidacy of Dr. Zuhdi Jasser if he seeks high office. I find Dr. Jasser to be an exemplar of cognitive dissonance because, while professing to be Muslim, he asserts that Islam can be modernized or reformed; that it is compatible with our Constitution & Republic, which it clearly is not. You will not catch me knowingly voting for a Muslim, including Dr. Jasser!
bring Islam into modernity
Dr. Jasser might as well try to fly by jumping off his roof and flapping his arms like wings. Islam is perfected and immutable.
5:3. [...]This day, I have perfectedyour religion for you, completed My Favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islâm as your religion. [...] 6:115. And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can change His Words. And He is the AllHearer, the AllKnower. 10.64. [...] No change can there be in the Words of Allâh, this is indeed the supreme success. 18:27. [...] None can change His Words, and none will you find as a refuge other than Him. 30:30. [...] No change let there be in Khalqillâh (i.e. the Religion of Allâh Islâmic Monotheism), that is the straight religion, but most of men know not. [Tafsir AtTabarî, Vol 21, Page 41] Sahih Bukhari 8.76.585 [...] 'I will say: They are of me (i.e. my followers). It will be said, 'You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you left'. I will say, 'Far removed, far removed (from mercy), those who changed (their religion) after me." Abu Huraira narrated that the Prophet said, "On the Day of Resurrection a group of companions will come to me, but will be driven away from the Lake-Fount, and I will say, 'O Lord (those are) my companions!' It will be said, 'You have no knowledge as to what they innovated after you left; they turned apostate as renegades (reverted from Islam)."
depends entirely on the person
Is the person a Muslim in name only, or is he a zealous Muslim concealing what he believes to avoid offending potential voters? In one of his books, President Obama said that the would "side with the Muslims" if things turned ugly. Who did he side with in the "Arab spring"? Who is he siding with on the issue of censoring critic8ism of Islam? Is he exemplifying his belief or is he practicing al-Taqiyya?
3:28. Let not the believers take the disbelievers as Auliyâ (supporters, helpers, etc.) instead of the believers, and whoever does that will never be helped by Allâh in any way, except if you indeed fear a danger from them. And Allâh warns you against Himself (His Punishment), and to Allâh is the final return. The Prohibition of Supporting the Disbelievers [...](unless you indeed fear a danger from them) meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' Al-Bukhari said that Al-Hasan said, "The Tuqyah is allowed until the Day of Resurrection.'' [...]
A Muslim's oath of office can not be trusted. 66:2 is in the context of marital disputes and 9:1 is in the context of breaking the hudna with Mecca to facilitate conquest. But the hadith collected by Muslim shows us that Muslims have a break your oath free card from Moe. This dispensation vitiates a Muslim's oath.
66:2. Allâh has already ordained for you (O men), the dissolution of your oaths. And Allâh is your Maula (Lord, or Master, or Protector, etc.) and He is the All-Knower, the All-Wise. 9:1. Freedom from (all) obligations (is declared) from Allâh and His Messenger () to those of the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh), with whom you made a treaty. 9:3. And a declaration from Allâh and His Messenger to mankind on the greatest day (the 10th of Dhul-Hijjah - the 12th month of Islâmic calendar) that Allâh is free from (all) obligations to the Mushrikûn (see V.2:105) and so is His Messenger. So if you (Mushrikûn) repent, it is better for you, but if you turn away, then know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allâh. And give tidings (O Muhammad ) of a painful torment to those who disbelieve. 9:4. Except those of the Mushrikûn with whom you have a treaty, and who have not subsequently failed you in aught,nor have supported anyone against you. So fulfill their treaty to them to the end of their term. Surely Allâh loves Al- Mattaqûn (the pious - see V.2:2). Sahih Muslim Book 015, Number 4052:
Abu Huraira reported: A person sat late in the night with Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him), and then came to his family and found that his children had gone to sleep. His wife brought food for him. but he took an oath that he would not eat because of his children (having gone to sleep without food) He then gave precedence (of breaking the vow and then expiating it) and ate the food He then came to Allah s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and made mention of that to him, whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace he upon him) said: He who took an oath and (later on) found something betterthan that should do that, and expiate for (breaking) his vow.
Yes, we need a truthful President. First, we must find truthful candidates who will acknowledge the fact that Islam is the existential & irreconcilable enemy, with whom negotiation is fruitless. It is Islam, not Wahhabism, 'radicalism' or 'extremism'. Islam's perpetual enmity and aggression are functions of the core doctrines of Islam, having nothing to do with nationality or sect.
modern Muslim
There is no moderate Islam. There is no modern Islam. Islam is what Moe preached and practiced 1400 years ago, not what you wish it to be. Islam is defined by the Qur'an, which is immutable because the text forbids editing and Moe's sunnah, which does not change because he is dead.
Shari'ah
If Allah or Moe said it or did it, it is Shari'ah. A Muslim who abjures Shari'ah signs his death warrant for believers to execute. Because Shari'ah is primarily derived from the Qur'an, it is impossible to abjure it without abjuring Islam.
mortal threat
If one is a Muslim believer, one is a mortal threat to every person who is not a Muslim. Exactly what part of Islam do you not comprehend?
8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do. 9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. 9:111. Verily, Allâh has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allâh's Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. It is a promise in truth which is binding on Him in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur'ân. And who is truer to his covenant than Allâh? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is the supreme success .
if HAMAS would recognize Israel
If pigs grew wings they could fly. HAMAS is Islam. Allah promised Muslims that they would conquer the world, irreversibly. Allah's judgment is final, there is none to put it back, but Israel recovered some of her territory stolen by Muslims in 638 & 1948. That recovery of territory is the ultimate blasphemy; empirical proof of the fact that Allah is an impotent idol. If you expect Muslims to tolerate that, you need a brain transplant. It has not happened in 63 years, and it will never happen because it ain't possible.
throw out the folks
Brilliant idea, Newt, you found the solution! Expel the Muslims from Israel, including Judea & Samaria. But you must also push them back beyond rocket range.
When South Carolina and Florida go to the polls, it is likely that candidates who trail in the polls will drop out of the race. The Iowa Caucuses already eliminated two of my choices.
If Rick Santorum is eliminated, I will have no choice but to hold my nose and vote for Gingrich Feb. 28. If Gingrich and Santorum are both eliminated, I may as well stay home because I absolutely will not vote for Huntsman, Perry or Romney. In my opinion, the time has come to consider standardizing the Primaries, on a common day, giving citizens of every state equal opportunity to participate in the candidate selection process. It is time to put an end to the petty fussing over who votes first the rules are arcane and idiotic. lets switch to a two stage ballot: let every voter make a first, second and third choice. If no candidate obtains a majority of the first choice ballots, add in the second, and if necessary, third choice votes until a majority is obtained. If there is no majority using all three ballots, let the convention system make the final choice the old fashioned way. While we are at it, lets close the primaries, there is justification for allowing Democrats and Morons to interfere in the selection of the Republican nominee.
When South Carolina and Florida go to the polls, it is likely that candidates who trail in the polls will drop out of the race. The Iowa Caucuses already eliminated two of my choices.
If Rick Santorum is eliminated, I will have no choice but to hold my nose and vote for Gingrich Feb. 28. If Gingrich and Santorum are both eliminated, I may as well stay home because I absolutely will not vote for Huntsman, Perry or Romney. In my opinion, the time has come to consider standardizing the Primaries, on a common day, giving citizens of every state equal opportunity to participate in the candidate selection process. It is time to put an end to the petty fussing over who votes first the rules are arcane and idiotic. lets switch to a two stage ballot: let every voter make a first, second and third choice. If no candidate obtains a majority of the first choice ballots, add in the second, and if necessary, third choice votes until a majority is obtained. If there is no majority using all three ballots, let the convention system make the final choice the old fashioned way. While we are at it, lets close the primaries, there is justification for allowing Democrats and Morons to interfere in the selection of the Republican nominee.
While urinating on the corpses of enemy combatants may technically violate the Geneva Accords, the enemy is not a signatory. The act also violated the letter and spirit of Marine Core regulations. The men involved should have been smart enough not to allow the act to be photographed. Maintenance of discipline may require punishment, but I agree with Rep. West; their punishment should be minimal.
Urinating on dead Taliban has no effect on 'peace talks' . Anyone who believes that talking with Muslims can result in peace needs to take care in passing gas & wiping to avoid brain damage. Nothing can make Muslims hate us more than they already do, either. Muslims hate us because we are not Muslims, no provocation is required. The conflict with Islam is existential: it can only end in the extinction of one side or the other. Either Islam goes to Hell or Western Civilization goes, no other outcome is possible. Both the electorate and our Congressmen & President need to know the fatal facts of Islam. Allah commands Muslims to wage war against disbelievers. The jihad imperatives are expressed as fight ... until loops.
8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.
9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387: Narrated Anas bin Malik: Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."
33:21. Indeed in the Messenger of Allâh (Muhammad ) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allâh and the Last Day and remembers Allâh much.
Sunan Abu Dawud Book 14, Number 2526 Narrated Anas ibn Malik: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist). The tyranny of any tyrant and the justice of any just (ruler) will not invalidate it. One must have faith in Divine decree.
47:35. So be not weak and ask not for peace (from the enemies of Islâm), while you are having the upper hand. Allâh is with you, and will never decrease the reward of your good deeds.
Having presented a link to the article, I will post only a few paragraphs that bear directly on the issue. Links in the quotes are original, the highlighting is mine.
In the first paragraph, the author suggests that “incitement to imminent violence” – an act that the resolution recommends be criminalized – could mean anything. This is a harmful misconception that serves as a crux of the opposition to this resolution. The author doesn’t directly dispute a quote from a recent Human Rights First blog on Myth vs. Reality on US Engagement with Islamic States that “the only limitation on speech that is in the operative part of the resolution is incitement to ‘imminent violence,’ which is in accordance with US law.” Yet at the same time the author states that opponents of the resolution “rightly find [this measure] distressing.” How could one be distressed by a provision that recommends the criminalization of only those instances of incitement that are considered criminal under the U.S. Constitution, the highest standard of free speech in the world?
As the UN documents are fond of saying, read "inter alia". HRC RES 16/18 is based on UN standards, not Constitutional standards. "Incitement to imminent violence" means what they want it to mean, not what we want it to mean. Islam practices Orwellian double speak.
Through her examples, the author seems to indicate that speech could be considered “incitement to imminent violence” simply because an individual or group of individuals react violently to it. This is an incorrect understanding of the legal concept of “incitement” as it is used in U.S. law, the standard on which this part of the resolution was based.
2. Expresses its concern that incidents of religious intolerance, discrimination and related violence, as well as of negative stereotyping of individuals on the basis of religion or belief, continue to rise around the world, and condemns, in this context, any advocacy of religious hatred against individuals that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, and urges States to take effective measures, as set forth in the present resolution, consistent with their obligations under international human rights law, to address and combat such incidents; 3. Condemns any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print, audio-visual or electronic media or any other means;
5. Notes the speech given by Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference at the fifteenth session of the Human Rights Council, and draws on his call on States to take the following actions to foster a domestic environment of religious tolerance, peace and respect, by:
The new session of Council is also coincident with regrettable events that are deliberately meant to defame religions as well incite hatred, xenophobia, discrimination and violence against religions, in particular, Islam. The increasing incidents of violence and discrimination on the basis of religion must not be ignored. We hope that this and other related issues remain an important priority in the work of the Council. The most recent and unfortunate in the series of such events was the announcement pertaining to Burn a Koran Day.
On the next page, Ishanoglu lists campaigns that incite hatred, including Burn a Koran Day, and informs us that they threaten global peace & security. In the short form: they incite violence.
In this regard all xenophobic campaigns of fear mongering and discriminatory measures - both in policy md practice - which restrict, prohibit or discriminate against of any religion such as ban on the construction of minarets, organization of events that incite hatred like Burn a Koran Day, and other discriminatory measures must be strongly condemned by the international community. A recurrence of such events substantiate OIC's call for a normative approach to deal with this menace that continues to pose a clear 'and present danger to peace, security 'and stability in the regional as well as the global context.
Lets clarify the issue of "clear and present danger to peace"; in essence: violence, by breaking down the conjunctive clause.
Other instances of Islamophobia in the US recorded in the report include the agenda of the Tea Party Movement, which openly advocated hatred against Muslims, the proposed “ban on Sharia” which succeeded within the State of Oklahoma, and the congressional hearings on the “radicalization of the American Muslim Community” initiated by Rep. Peter King, Chairman of the US House Committee on Homeland Security. The hearings launched a debate built on prejudiced and biased premises that Muslims were potential terrorists who, in his opinion, ostensibly refused to cooperate with the Nation’s “war on terror”. Such a debate, regardless of the outcome, would contribute to a climate of fear and distrust towards the Muslim community.
The United States of America – a country long admired for its embracement of diversity – recorded the highest intensity of hostility and prejudice towards Muslims during the period under review. The infamous “Burn A Quran Day” by a hitherto non-entity Florida Pastor Terry Jones and his subsequent actions at hate mongering, the Congressional hearings by the Chairman of the US House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security on the “radicalization of American Muslims” in Washington DC on March 11, 2011 and his statement that “We (the US) are under siege by Muslim terrorists”1 along with other anti Muslim events, were ominous signs of Islamophobia taking roots in the USA. The fact that such incidents cast a shadow on the US image of tolerance frustrating the optimism generated, throughout the Muslim world, by President Obama’s speech in Cairo in June 2009, may not be discounted.
Tea Party Platform
Qur'an burning
Radicalization Hearings
Lets gild the lilly by bringing in two more important sources which confirm the obvious, from the initial meeting of the Istanbul Process . OIC Journal June-August '11 http://issuu.com/oic-journal/docs/journal_issue18_english?mode=window&pageNumber=7 Ambassador Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe, US Representative to the Human Rights Council,
In response to OIC Journal query on defining what would constitute incitement to hate, she clarified that in the US there is a single case where freedom of expression can be restricted or prohibited by the State, and that is when “incitement to eminent violence”. In this context, she pointed out that the President, the Secretary of State and several public officials went out on a limb to publically condemn ‘Burn the Quran Day’ to show that such abominable acts are not accepted. “When you have the President, the Secretary of State and public figures jointly condemning that, it will be more effective than throwing that pastor in jail. I believe the same is true for the hateful cartoons (of the Prophet). We should all be joining together in conveying our disgust with such intolerance.”
Ambassador Zamir Akram, Permanent Representative of Pakistan on behalf of the OIC at the HRC, told the OIC Journal that both sides – the OIC countries and the western countries – made important concessions to each other to reach a compromise on the resolution. What is important for the OIC point of view is that it would not compromise on three things: anything against the Quran, anything against the Prophet (PBUH), and anything against Muslim community in terms of discrimination.
According to our HRC Ambassador, Burn the Qur'an Day was abominable intolerance. According to Pakistan's Ambassador, the OIC will not compromise on anything against the Qur'an or Moe. Now it is time to go right to the top, to obtain the working definition of incitement to violence from the Secretary General of the United Nations.
Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:"There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence," Ban said in a statement. "The right of free expression is not at stake here."
According to Ban, the short documentary by Geert Wilders, combining verses from the Qur'an & hadith with sermons from Friday prayers and images of the ensuing violence, is incitement to violence. In reality, Fitna exposes incitement, it does not constitute incitement. Having examined the operative definition of incitement, lets take a look at the Islamic law behind the whole operation. What Moe preached is law, what he practiced is exemplary, together, his preaching and practice form the basis of Islamic law. Moe had critics murdered. Because of that exemplary conduct, the penalty for criticizing Islam is death.
08.1 When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.
08.7 (0: Among the things that entail apostasy from Islam (may Allah protect us from them) are:
(4) to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);
(5) to deny the existence of Allah, His beginningless eternality, His endless eternaIity, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him (dis: vI);
(6) to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat;
(7) to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belong
(15) to hold that any of Allah's messengers or prophets are liars, or to deny their bcing sent; (n: 'Ala' ai-Din 'Abidin adds the following:
(16) to revile the religion of Islam; (17) to believe that things in themselves or by their own nature have any causal influence independent of the will of Allah;
(18) to deny the existence of angels or jinn (def: w22), or the heavens;
(19) to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law; (20) or to deny that Allah intended the Prophet's message (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be the religion followed by the entire world (dis: w4.3--4) (al-Hadiyya al-'Ala'iyya (y4), 423-24).)
011. IO The agreement is also violated (A: with respect to the offender alone) if the state has stipulated that any of the following things break it, and one of the suhjects does so anyway. though if the state has not stipulated that these break the agreement, then they do not; namely, if one of the subject people:
(5) or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam.
011.11 When a subject's agreement with the state has been viOlated, the caliph chooses between the four alternatives mentioned above in connection with prisoners of war (09.14).
O9.14 When an adult male is taken captive, the caliph (def: 025) considers the interests (0: of Islam and the Muslims) and decides between the prisoner's death, slavery, release without paying anything, or ransoming himself in exchange for money or for a Muslim captive held by the enemy. If the prisoner becomes a Muslim (0: before the caliph chooses any of the four alternatives) then he may not be killed, and one of the other three alternatives is chosen.
The restraint was short lived and on 20 March 2011 the controversial Florida Pastor Terry Jones oversaw24 the burning of a copy of the Koran, carried out by Pastor Wayne Sapp, in his small church. The incident was presented as a trial of the book in which the Koran was found “guilty” and “executed”. The event was open to the public. Fewer than 30 people attended but widespread media coverage attracted by the event somewhat served the nefarious designs and the extremist philosophy behind the outrageous act. After the unfortunate incident, the OIC Secretary General issued a statement expressing his deep disappointment, and warned against unforeseen and volatile consequences of such outrageous and irresponsible acts that could hurt the deep seated religious sentiments of over 1.5 billion Muslims around the world. He characterized the unfortunate incident as “the worst example of extremism” that the international community had been consistent in condemning.
Approaches like applying the ‘test of consequences’ were useful and would have to be explored/refined further in an objective fashion towards evolving a consensus with regard to effectively addressing the matter; and As regards the issue of freedom of opinion and expression, the OIC could with the views of Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and expression with regard to making “very few exceptions” but the contours of such exceptions would have to be identified. OIC believed that unfortunate and outrageous episodes like the caricatures and the burning of holy Quran merited the grant of such exceptions;
For those too stupid or indolent to connect the dots: if the resolution had been implemented a year ago, Pastors Jones & Sapp would be persecuted criminally & sued civil court for the "consequences" of their trial and execution of the Qur'an. Holding them responsible for the acts of a Muslim rabble roused by kutbah at Jumah Salat is not just, nor is it rational. Jones & Sapp did not incite anyone to violence. Asian Imams did. It becomes obvious that the plan is to compel self-censorship through legal intimidation. It is equally obvious that Human Rights first is so heavily invested in the Istanbul Process that they are blinded to objective factual reality.
Your answer to a question about national security issues involving Afghanistan exposes a vital element of truth on the surface, while an unpleasant stream of hypocrisy flows beneath the surface. Thanks and a tip of the hat to Paul Hoffman, whose Facebook post brought to my attention Robert Spencer's post, where I found this video clip.
How long do you want to wait? Until the security of our country is ensured, that's what the job of the commander of chief is and you make that decision, not the generals--you make that decision based on an analysis of how virulent the threat of radical Islam is and you confront that threat not just militarily, and importantly, not just militarily, you confront it first by being honest with the American public about what this threat is. This President has sanitized every defense document, everything, the word radical Islam does not appear anywhere , why? because we are fighting political correct -- we are trying to fight this politically correct war and not being honest with the American public as to who the enemy is, how virulently they are and why they hate us and what we must do to stop...
how long ?
The question of the duration of our occupation of Afghanistan can not be answered with a clock, calendar or time table.
strategic objectives
national security
If the strategic objective is to permanently end Afghanistan's membership in the set of state sponsors of terrorism and prevent Afghanistan from being used as a training ground and staging area for terrorists, then the eradication of Islam from Afghanistan is the criteria for ending the occupation. We bring the troops home when the population of Afghanistan and their government are totally free from the influence of the damnable doctrines of Islam which inculcate hatred and enjoin genocidal conquest which is won by casting terror.
In that case, you remove our troops from Afghanistan when its population is either apostatized or converted and its government is able and willing to secure its borders against infiltration from neighboring countries infested with Muslims.
free, democratic & secure
If the strategic objective is, as Shrub stated, a free, democratic, secure & prosperous Afghanistan with a stable government which respects human equality, dignity & rights, then cleansing Afghanistan from the infestation of Islam is insufficient. In this case, Afghanistan must be cleansed from its long tradition of tribalism and its honor/shame culture as well. Good luck with that; measure the occupation in millenia, not centuries.
how virulent
how infectious
Islam spread from Mecca & Medina to infect all of Arabia, North Africa, the Levant, nearly half of Asia and South East Europe in a few centuries. Infected persons now infest Western Europe and America and are spreading the infection through our prisons and inner cities.
Were the founders fighting 'radical' Englishmen in the Revolution against King George or were they fighting his army?
radical Nazis
Was the greatest generation in combat against 'radical' Nazis ? Were those 'radicals' a tiny minority of Nazis? Was there a peaceful majority of Nazis who did not want to participate in world conquest?
radical Communism
Did millions die of starvation at the hands of Stalin, Mao & Pot because of an extraordinary, 'radical' variant of International Communism? Was the Cold War fought against 'radcal' Communism or the real thing?
radical Muslims
Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to relive it. I quote from Wikipedia's entry on the First Barbary War: "On October 11, 1784, Moroccan pirates seized the brigantineBetsey.[2] "... "Algeria began piracy against the U.S. on July 25, 1785 with the capture of the schoonerMariaand theDauphina week later.[5]"
Where the Barbary Pirates 'radicals', 'perverting', 'distorting' and 'twisting' normative Islamic doctrine into a perverted form, or were they acting in obedience to Allah; emulating their Prophet? Thomas Jefferson and John Adams put the question to Tripoli's Ambassador in 1785. His reply is a clue for you.
It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once.[12]
Koran
Is that true? Is it really written in their Koran that they have a right and duty to plunder and enslave?
right & duty
2:216. Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know. 8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do. 9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Ordained means it is Allah's law. "fight ... until" makes the statements imperative. The Koran commands Muslims to wage perpetual war against disbelievers.
plunder
8:1. They ask you (O Muhammad ) about the spoils of war. Say: "The spoils are for Allâh and the Messenger." So fear Allâh and adjust all matters of difference among you, and obey Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad ), if you are believers. 8:41. And know that whatever of war-booty that you may gain, verily one-fifth (1/5th) of it is assigned to Allâh, and to the Messenger, and to the near relatives [of the Messenger (Muhammad )], (and also) the orphans, Al-Masâkin (the poor) and the wayfarer, if you have believed in Allâh and in that which We sent down to Our slave (Muhammad ) on the Day of criterion (between right and wrong), the Day when the two forces met (the battle of Badr) - And Allâh is Able to do all things. 8:67. It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allâh desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise. 33:26. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives. 33:27. And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches, and a land which you had not trodden (before). And Allâh is Able to do all things. 48:19. And abundant spoils that they will capture. And Allâh is Ever All-Mighty, All-Wise.
Isn't that special: the Koran has rules for distribution of spoils, in anticipation of offensive warfare. Moe got the top 205, first pick of the spoils. And as a Prophet, Moe was not allowed to ransom prisoners until he had made great slaughter. We learned that Moe's motivation was mercenary and Allah's is blood lust.
Moe besieged a local Jewish settlement, overcame them with terrorism and seized their property, enslaving their widows & orphans. Allah promised the Muslims "abundant spoils".
Paradise
9:38. O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that when you are asked to march forth in the Cause of Allâh (i.e. Jihâd) you cling heavily to the earth? Are you pleased with the life of this world rather than the Hereafter? But little is the enjoyment of the life of this world as compared with the Hereafter. 9:39. If you march not forth, He will punish you with a painful torment and will replace you by another people, and you cannot harm Him at all, and Allâh is Able to do all things. 48:17. No blame or sin is there upon the blind, nor is there blame or sin upon the lame, nor is there blame or sin upon the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whosoever obeys Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad ), He will admit him to Gardens beneath which rivers flow (Paradise); and whosoever turns back, He will punish him with a painful torment. 61:10. O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. 61:11. That you believe in Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! 61:12. (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success.
If Muslims do not join the jihad, they will go to Hell; if the fight, they will go to There is a long and esoteric hadith about Umar's sending the army to fight the great nations, in which a Muslim General is quoted as explaining things to a Persian General in similar terms. Sahih Bukhari 4.53.386
Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."
.
"Its Islam, stupid!"
What Allah commanded and Moe exemplified is Islam, the real thing, not a distortion, twisting or perversion of Islam. There is no such thing as radical Islam. Islam is what Moe preached & practiced, not the anodyne, passive & benevolent religion you wish it would be.
not just militarily
Islam can not be defeated militarily short of wholesale extermination. If you are unable or unwilling to kill every Muslim on the face of the earth, then you must break their faith, you must induce mass apostasy.
expose Allah
Effectively combating Islam requires inducing mass apostasy by introducing the Ummah to the reality of Allah and his Messenger, their true character and works. You must effectively discredit Moe, and thereby descredit Allah. You must expose the fallacy of Allah's promises.
war of ideas
If you would win this war, list the ideas of Islam and the ideas of Western Civilization and prove our ideas to be superior to theirs, in intrinsic merit as well as empirical results.
honest about the threat
When you add adjectives or modifiers to the name of the enemy, you are not being honest. The enemy is Islam, not 'radical Islam'. In the long run, the threat is existential; Islam is Hellbent on global conquest. In the short run, the threat is continued and escalating attacks, large and small, against civilian targets. Once Iran obtains a nuke and couples it with a delivery system, our cities will be in grave danger.
politically correct
President Bush called Islam a "great religion of peace" because he knew that, if the public knew the truth, there would be a massive popular demand for the eradication of the enemy. President Obama repeats the same lie and declares that we are not at war against Islam because he is a traitor, one of them, not one of us.
sanitized
President Obama has removed all reference to the false meme which has been substituted for the name of the enemy because he is politically correct, not factually correct.
In order to win, we need to identify and truthfully describe the enemy, its intentions and capacity. The traitor in the White House has no desire to defeat the enemy because he is one of them, at the head of the enemy's fifth column. Removing all acknowledgment of the nexus between Islamic doctrine and terrorism is in compliance with the demands of Islam and the United Nations.
Because we are not Muslims. Disbelief is a status offense, called Kufr: rebellion against Allah, the punishment for which is described in 5:33 and the definition of which is found in Tafsir Ibn Kathir.
what we must do
Either cause Muslims to quit believing in Allah, his threat & promise, breaking his yoke of slavery or cause them to quit living. That should be an easy choice.
I want you to:
Take your own advice, be honest about the identity of the enemy, its character, ability & intentions and what we must do to win this war and restore peace 7 security. First and foremost: quit adding adjectives to the name of the enemy.
