Obamination: a Muslim Outed

I received an email from a fellow blogger. As soon as I opened it, I clicked the second link and became disgusted.

The Enemies Within... watch the video

See also "I am a Muslim," Obama Tells Egyptian Foreign Minister Gheit
Islamic Coup on the White House at Atlas Shrugs

I visited Atlas Shrugs and discovered a long blog post which quoted an article which alleges that President Obama told Egypt's Foreign Minister that he remains a Musim, in sympathy with the Muslim agenda. The President allegedly asked for patience on the part of Muslims until he gets certain domestic agenda items cleared up, then he would put the screws to Israel. Here is the red hot quote.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said he had a one-on-one meeting with Obama, in which President Obama told him that he was still a Muslim, the son of a Muslim father, the stepson of Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers in Kenya are Muslims, and that he was sympathetic towards the Muslim agenda.

`Atlas Shrugs listed two sources for the quote: Web Today, in which the quote is the 6^th item in an enumerated list and Israel Today, in which it appears on page 12, in an article entitled Obama and the Muslim Agenda. The two sources are essentially identical.


Several possibilities come to mind immediately.

1. The quote might be forged. Assuming that the initial source is Arabic language media, it would be difficult to track down and verify.
2. The quote might be valid, but Aboul Gheit might have lied. Why? Was he trying to get President Obama in domestic hot water? Was he trying to boost his own status? Or was he seeking to reduce international pressure applied to an ally?
3. Obama said it, Aboul Gheit repeated it, without considering the possible consequences or assuming that we would never hear of it.

I rate our chances of determining the truth with any real resolve as extremely poor. We need to evaluate this quote in the light of previously obtained evidence. Atlas Shrugs follows up with a long list of statements and events which point toward the most disturbing conclusion.

Recently, someone posted on Facebook a link to this video, which assembles several critical Obama quotes which point toward the obvious conclusion.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XE9mZCRX2mg

So what?

If President Obama is a closet Muslim, then he exploited a false claim of Christian conversion in order to win votes. In that case, nothing he says or does can be trusted. Did we elect a Nazi to lead us in the second world war? Why not, what would be wrong with that? Did we elect a Communist to lead us in the cold war? How is electing a Muslim after we were attacked by Muslims, motivated by the doctrines of Islam and chanting takbir as they slit the throats of flight crews any different? Our elected leaders can not bring themselves to acknowledge the fact that Islam is at war against us. Instead, they arrogantly deny the obvious. The Islamic agenda is total world conquest. Can we entrust our national security to someone in sympathy with that agenda?

If President Obama is a Christian, did he or did he not tell the Foreign Minister of Egypt that he is a Muslim? If he did, why did he lie, risking exposure and resulting anger and resentment among Muslims who he is trying to co-opt as supporters? If not, why did Aboul Gheit lie about it?


The following blog post was first published October 14 '08. I reproduce it now because it contains vital logic which has no less validity now than it had when first published.

Obama: Muslim or Christian; What’s the Difference?

Is he or ain’t he? Only Barack Hussein Obama knows for sure. Whats the difference?

If he is a genuine convert to Christianity, the threats he poses are limited to the consequences of his:

• Communist ideology
• alliances:
  • terrorists
    • Ayers
    • Khalidi
  • racists
    • Wright
  • racketeers
  • vote fraud practitioners
    • Acorn
• inexperience
• incompetence.

If his conversion from Islam to Christianity was a scam perpetrated for political expediency, then electing him is, in effect installing an enemy agent as Commander in Chief. Abysmal ignorance of the doctrines of Islam recorded in the Qur’an & Hadith prevents many members of the American Electorate from comprehending the adverse consequences of electing a Muslim to high office.

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).

The phrases highlighted in red above basically mean that a Muslim who obtains power will impose Sharia. The translator’s comment, highlighted in purple, confirms that fact. Do you really want to give that power to the enemy? A Muslim President would pack the court system with Muslims & Dhimmis, life time appointments that can not be rescinded.

24:55. Allâh has promised those among you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession to (the present rulers) in the earth, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will grant them the authority to practise their religion, that which He has chosen for them (i.e. Islâm). And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they (believers) worship Me and do not associate anything (in worship) with Me. But whoever disbelieved after this, they are the Fâsiqûn (rebellious, disobedient to Allâh).

(And those who believe and do righteous good deeds,) meaning, their hearts were truthful and their limbs obedient with the righteous acts they were commanded, [The Reward of Righteous Believers]

Righteous good deeds: code words for Jihad. What righteous acts were they commanded to perform? 8:39, 9:29. They intend to take power, by force or by stealth; why should we give it to them? Why should we yield our hard won liberties? How will we ever recover our hard won liberties when the enemy has taken control of our armed forces?

12:40. “You do not worship besides Him but only names which you have named (forged), you and your fathers, for which Allâh has sent down no authority. The command (or the judgement) is for none but Allâh. He has commanded that you worship none but Him (i.e. His Monotheism), that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not.

Only Islam’s demon has the right to rule. Legislation contrary to his Qur’an or Moe’s sunnah is not allowed.

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.

Allah rules. His Messenger and his Caliphs decide and that is the end of the matter. That is not how our Constitution works. Why do you want to risk losing our Constitution? Why are you willing to risk imposition of Islamic theocratic tyranny?

Under Islamic law, any child born to a Muslim father is Muslim. Renouncing Islam and converting to a real religion is a capital offense. Apostates must be killed if they do not recant & revert. Why then do Muslims; even Islamic terrorists, want Barack Hussein Obama to be elected? Why aren’t they issuing and attempting to carry out fatwas against him? Obviously, they believe that his conversion was a sham. Obviously, they believe that his policies will be favorable to them.

They may be right. We can’t take that chance. If Barack Hussein Obama truly abandoned Islam and converted to Christianity, let him curse and condemn the damnable doctrines of Islam which sanctify & mandate aggressive conquest against Pagans & ‘people of the book’, genocide & terrorism.

If he is a closet Muslim, he won’t abjure those doctrines because he believes them. In that case, we don’t want him. If he is a Christian, but unwilling to offend Muslims by telling the truth about their curse worthy doctrines & practices, then he has no salt or savor, and is unworthy of high office.

In either case, Barack Hussein Obama must be rejected because he can not be trusted with the high office he seeks.

The following blog post was first published January 12 '08. It challenged Senator Barack Hussein Obama, then a candidate for the democrat Presidential nomination, to abjure the damnable doctrines which make Islam intolerable. To the best of my knowledge, he has never responded to this challenge.

Specifically Senator

According to Newsmax, Senator Barack Obama declares himself to be a Christian, not a Muslim.

“I’ve been to the same church — the same Christian church — for almost 20 years,” Obama said, stressing the word Christian and drawing cheers from the faithful in reply. “I was sworn in with my hand on the family Bible. Whenever I’m in the United States Senate, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. So if you get some silly e-mail . . . send it back to whoever sent it and tell them this is all crazy. Educate.”

Senator, do you, as a Christian, endorse the Nicene Creed, specifically the clauses reproduced below?

[...]And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven[...]

Do you specifically & explicitly reject & renounce the following listed Islamic doctrines concerning Jesus Christ?

1. Jesus was not crucified, did not die and was not resurrected:
   

   4:157. And because of their saying (in boast), “We killed Messiah ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allâh,” – but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of ‘Iesa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) ]:

   4:158. But Allâh raised him ['Iesa (Jesus)] up (with his body and soul) unto Himself (and he is in the heavens). And Allâh is Ever All­Powerful, All­Wise.

2. Jesus is not the son of God.
   

   4:159. And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allâh and a human being], before his ['Iesa (Jesus) or a Jew's or a Christian's] death (at the time of the appearance of the angel of death). And on the Day of Resurrection, he ['Iesa (Jesus)] will be a witness against them.

   23:91. No son (or offspring or children) did Allâh beget, nor is there any ilâh (god) along with Him; (if there had been many gods), behold, each god would have taken away what he had created, and some would have tried to overcome others! Glorified be Allâh above all that they attribute to Him!

3. Jesus is inferior to Muhammad.
   

   Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 3:
   [...]Jesus will say, ‘I am not fit for this undertaking, go to Muhammad the Slave of Allah whose past and future sins were forgiven by Allah.’[...]

Do you specifically & explicitly reject & renounce the following listed Islamic doctrines concerning conquest, terrorism & genocide?

1. Muslims are obligated to fight, Jihad is mandatory, not optional.
   

   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.

2. Muslims are commanded to fight Pagans until only Allah is worshiped.
   

   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.

3. Muslims are commanded to fight ”people of the book” until they are subjugated and pay extortion.
   

   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.

4. Our lives and property are not sacred to Muslims until we become Muslims.
   

   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.“[...]

5. Muslims obtain salvation; escape from Hellfire and obtain admission to Paradise by participating in Jihad.
   

   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.

6. Muhammad’s admission to Paradise was dependent on genocide: making a great slaughter.
   

   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.

7. Allah sanctified, commanded and Muhammad practiced and bragged about terrorism.
   

   3:151. We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they joined others in worship with Allâh, for which He had sent no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong­doers).

   8:12. (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”

   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.

   Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:

   Narrated Abu Huraira:

   Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings,C and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy)
   [...]

When we assemble the evidence of pro-Islamic sentiment on Obama's part, the statements he has made, his policies, and the report of his alleged statement to Aboul Gheit, the balance swings heavily to the side of Mekkan candidate. Because Obama refuses to abjure the damnable doctrines which sanctify jihad against us, we are forced to assume the obvious. In this case, we have no recourse but to demand his immediate resignation as Major General Paul Vallely has done.

While the retired General calls for a new election, I believe that Article 2, Section 1 as amended by the Amendments 20 & 25 appear to rule out that option. I regard such a resignation as highly unlikely and a special election impossible. Our recourse is to purge the House & Senate of persons likely to approve Obama's agenda. We can begin that process November 2, '10. by replacing the House and one third of the Senate.

Lieberman Attacks First Amendment

Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010

Cnet reports that Senator Joe Lieberman has announced a 197 page bill (PDF) which would give the President broad power over the internet.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010’’.

First, "cyberspace" is a concept invented to describe a network of interconnected computers. There is no such place. You clicked a link, which was translated into a number, which connected your computer to a server which downloaded a file which you are reading. The internet is basically a telephone switching system that transfers digital data instead of voices.

The servers and infrastructure connecting them are privately owned. They are not national assets, they are private assets.

"For all of its 'user-friendly' allure, the Internet can also be a dangerous place with electronic pipelines that run directly into everything from our personal bank accounts to key infrastructure to government and industrial secrets," he said. "Our economic security, national security and public safety are now all at risk from new kinds of enemies--cyber-warriors, cyber-spies, cyber-terrorists and cyber-criminals."

Anyone who is rational and informed will have firewalls, anti-virus software and other protection against hijacking his computer or network. Only a damn fool would put vital security information in a readily accessible database.

Common sense dictates that ladder logic systems vital to safety and productivity, whether it be cnc tools, water pumps, chemical mixing, refineries or electric grids not be accessible to everyone with a modem. You put them on a private network isolated from the internet if you have any sense. And you use the best security software available.

Because some Chink or Ruski is pinging the Pentagon we should shut down the whole internet? Prevent all access to blogs, web sites, search engines, VOIP, etc. when cutting off or firewalling one node is sufficient to solve the problem? Lieberman & co. are either incompetent or dishonest. In either case, they should be removed from office in their next election cycle.

Has anyone considered the possibility that routers, hardware firewalls and servers should be designed and built domestically, not somewhere in Asia where the staff may include Communists, Muslims or common criminals whose interests are inimical to ours? Where is the firmware being written, and by whom?

The President may issue a
13 declaration of a national cyber emergency to covered
14 critical infrastructure. Any declaration under this
15 section shall specify the covered critical infrastruc-
16 ture subject to the national cyber emergency.

‘‘(A) immediately direct the owners and
2 operators of covered critical infrastructure sub3
ject to the declaration under paragraph (1) to
4 implement response plans required under sec-
5 tion 248(b)(2)(C);

It is too broad and too bureaucratic. Exactly what is in the response plans? Would that include cutting off access to the Drudge Report & World Net Daily? Obama would like nothing better than to silence his critics. The First Amendment is intended to prevent that sort of usurpation.

We have a First Amendment because the founders remembered the Stamp Act. They knew that the right to publish and distribute pamphlets & broadsides was essential to maintaining an informed electorate. In modern times, new technology is performing the same essential function and must be protected for the same reason.

Now is the time to visit http://www.congress.org/ and tell your Representative & Senators to vote no on the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010 and any similar proposal to seize power over the internet.

We are being Screwed!

The Free Enterprise Nation reports that President Obama signed Executive Order 13495 January 30' 09. I do not recall any prior information about this order.

Examine the President's rationale.

When a service contract expires, and a follow-on contract is awarded for the same service, at the same location, the successor contractor or its subcontractors often hires the majority of the predecessor's employees. On some occasions, however, a successor contractor or its subcontractors hires a new work force, thus displacing the predecessor's employees.

The Federal Government's procurement interests in economy and efficiency are served when the successor contractor hires the predecessor's employees. A carryover work force reduces disruption to the delivery of services during the period of transition between contractors and provides the Federal Government the benefits of an experienced and trained work force that is familiar with the Federal Government's personnel, facilities, and requirements.

Paying more for services because of union extortion is not consistent with economy & efficiency. When government and unions gang up on us, the government wastes money, paying higher than market costs for goods and services, while the wages and benefits extorted by unions create an economic imbalance, reducing our buying power.

In effect, President Obama is greasing the palms of the union bosses who helped to finance his election campaign. Union members pay dues, which are used to elect their democrat patrons as well as provide luxurious wages and perks for the union bosses. The bottom line: corruption; political patronage at its worst.

Freedom of association includes the freedom not to associate. When the government coerces union membership, it steals a precious right as well as money from its victims. it also solidifies its grasp on power. That is the intent of the "The Employee Free Choice Act", which greases the skids for coerced union membership.

We must bear these issues in mind when we go to the polls, both in the primaries and November second. Let this be a warning to you; be careful when voting and make no mistakes. Investigate the candidate's associates, read their writings, listen to their speeches and check their criminal records. Find out who is financing their campaigns. Know who you are voting for!

Brits: Ignorant, Gullible Morons

A British tv station sent undercover agents into British Mosques to record what happens there. Channel 4, after seeing and hearing the preaching in "moderate" Mosques, highly praised as bastions of peaceful multiculturalism by the British government, still falls pray to the false dichotomy of radicalism and moderation.

They listened to preachers, they watched dvds, they visited web sites. They said that hatred, jihad, and everything bad about Islam comes from Saudi Wahhabism. Did it ever occur to those morons that Saudi Arabia is the origin of Islam? Did it ever occur to them to read the Qur'an & hadith to see what Islam really is? Of course not. Instead, they believe the false narrative of the "religion of peace" even after discovering that Muslims say one thing in public and another in private when they think there are no kuffar present.

This informative video has a 48 minute run time. It is a sample of what is preached in every Mosque. That preaching is derived from the Qur'an & hadith. For the short course, containing numerous quotes from Islam's canon of scripture, tradition, exegeses & jurisprudence, read What's Wrong With Islam/Muslims? For a good study on Jihad, read Jihad: The Islamic Doctrine of Permanent War. If you are deeply curious and willing to read a 1000 page book, turn to The Prophet of Doom.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2515587181120245843&hl=en#Please



After watching the video, download this ebook compiled from 13 fact packed blog posts: Know Thine Enemy.chm. It contains copious quotes from the Qur'an & hadith, each linked to source so that you can verify it and explore the context.

Papal Malarkey

9 News carried an article about Pope Benedict XVI calling for an end to violence in the Mid East. These quotes were gleaned from that article.

"Christians have a special contribution to make in the area of justice and peace by courageously denouncing violence, no matter what its origin, and suggest solutions which can only be achieved through dialogue.

Denouncing violence "no matter what its origin" is problematic to me because it implies condemnation of Israel's self defense. That position inverts morality, common sense and international law.

"The Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is creating difficulties in everyday life, inhibiting freedom of movement, the economy and religious life," with access to holy sites dependent on military permission.

Once again, the Pope, like so many other authority figures, inverts history and morality. Israel is occupied, not occupying. Jews have a 4000 year history on that land. Muslims invaded it in 638 and snatched it again in 1948. The malignant Muslim narrative is offensive to a thinking mind. It is no more acceptable when parroted by the Pope.

Jews and Christians are barred from the Temple Mount most of the week, able to visit for a few hours on a few days, never on holidays. They are not allowed to pray there. Most Muslims have far more access to that site. When rioting occurs, young Muslims are barred from the site, for security reasons.

Moreover, "certain Christian fundamentalist theologies used sacred scripture to justify Israel's occupation of Palestine, making the position of Christian Arabs an even more sensitive issue".

Christian Arabs are dhimmis, subject to extortion, expropriation, assault and murder. They are oppressed by Muslims, not by Israel. Once again, the Pope parrots the malignant narrative of occupation. Israel was occupied by the Byzantine Empire when Caliph Umar invaded. Israel is Jewish, not Muslim land. The Ottoman Empire fought on the wrong side of the first world war and lost the desert. Get over it already!

Provocative Quotes from OIC

One of my Google Alerts triggered on a post at tree hugger. The article consisted of a list of OIC statements whose source was listed as CNS News.
When I followed the link, I found an article dated May 24 and titled "Islamic Nations Praise Obama’s Outreach and U.S. Plans to Close ‘Islamophobia Prison’ at Guantanamo".

It appears that the source of the guff is the OIC's annual Islamophobia Report. I confess that I had only skimmed it, without giving it close attention. The report is a 74 page pdf file.

The first provocative quote comes from page 27 of the report.

Defamation of Islam as well as personalities and symbols sacred to Islam and Muslims as well as other religions is a matter of grave concern to the OIC.

As if they are poised on the edge of the grave, ready to fall in. Muslim rulers are concerned about criticism of Islam because they know that that the cult is false, contrived for a mercenary purpose, contrary to right religion, logic and human rights. If Islam is fully exposed, resulting in mass apostasy, their satrapies and their lives would be at risk.

Gratuitous inclusion of personalities sacred to other religions adds immeasurably to the insult. Islam denies the paternity, deity, crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. To cap it off, Islam co-opts Jesus as a genocidal warlord who will "fight the people for the cause of Islam". When Islam points a finger at their critics, four fingers point back at Islam.

On page 27, they expose their intentions.

OIC believes that the International Human Rights Law is not static but evolutionary in nature.
The existing international legal infrastructure, therefore, needs to be evaluated and evolved in
the interest of combating Islamophobia and defamation of all religions in an effective manner.

How can immunity from criticism for Islam be a human right? Human rights apply to individuals, not to groups; not to ideologies. Phobia implies irrational fear. Is it irrational to fear a war cult that has slaughtered 270*10⁶ people in the last 1387 years?

The OIC also appeals to argumentum ad numerum, a logical fallacy.

The safe-passage of the resolution, voted by a majority of states beyond the OIC membership, at each of the three venues
lends international legitimacy to the concept of defamation of religions.

Examine the recent trend in HRC votes on the annual resolutions. If the number of votes conferred legitimacy, it would seem to be declining.



Taking on Islamophobia from another angle, they corrupt our language.

It is indeed a contemporary form of racism whereby the faith and beliefs of
Muslims are denigrated and demonized with all that it entails in terms of adverse impact on
their dignity and identity.

Islam is a war cult, a predatory way of life, not a race. It originated in Arabia, but was spread by the sword into Africa, Asia and Europe. Our objection to Islam is not based on race, it is based on Islam's assertion of a divine right and mandate to rape, pillage, plunder and enslave us until we join them. For the doubters & dissenters, I offer a piece of evidence similar to the barbarian response to Jefferson & Adams when they asked by what right the Barbary Pirates attacked us.

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." Sahih Bukhari 4.53.386

Take a look at what they say on page 15 about our government's policy.

At the policy level – with more substantive implications in terms of the international discourse
on combating Islamophobia – the criticism leveled by the US Administration on the OIC
proposed legally binding instrument was not in line with the expectations raised by promise of
engagement in the Cairo speech by President Obama. In October 26, 2009 the U.S. State
Department released its Annual Report on International Religious Freedom. It was critical of what
it said were international efforts to limit free speech in the name of combating defamation of
religion, criticizing the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) for pushing such antidefamation
measures in U.N. bodies. It said the broad anti-defamation measures being sought by
the OIC would have the effect of curbing debate about religious issues and should be discarded
in favor of outreach and government defense of religious freedom and free speech. In its
Executive Summary10, the Report stated: “…the wide spectrum of efforts to undermine the right to
religious freedom extends to multilateral, regional, and global fora. For instance, over the past
decade, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC)…has worked through the United Nations
(UN) to advance the concept of "defamation of religions"…the United States…do not agree with the
"defamation of religions" concept because it is inconsistent with the freedoms of religion and
expression.”

A positive response by the US to the OIC’s call for engagement towards evaluating and evolving
norms towards combating Islamophobia – with particular reference to defamation of religions –
would constitute a positive step forward in terms of backing President Obama’s words with
action.

It appears that President Obama's obeisance created false expectations. Our Constitution forbids the making of any law abridging the freedom of speech. The reason for that amendment should be obvious to everyone. Free speech is necessary to preserve freedom. We must be able to criticize corrupt or ineffective government. We must be free to criticize proposed legislation. We must also be free to identify and discuss threats to our lives and liberties.

Islam is a real, proximate and continuing existential threat. An Islamic attack on our soil nine years ago killed 3000 people and caused billions of dollars in economic loss. Because of our First Amendment, we can not be arrested, fined and imprisoned for revealing the damnable doctrines of Islam. We need to preserve our First Amendment rights.

Obamination: High Treason

President Obama met with the "President Abbas" June 9, 2010 and held a joint press conference, which he refused to do with Prime Minister Netanyahu. The White House provided a transcript. My intention is to expose the arrogant traitor by contrasting his clever lies with the truth.

Bare Naked Islam posted a video of the press conference. Watch it, but be careful to avoid vomiting on your keyboard.

I just want to thank President Abbas for being here, and his delegation. We just concluded some very productive discussions on this issue. I commended President Abbas for the excellent work that he and Prime Minister Fayyad have been engaged in over the last several years in strengthening the security as well as improving the economic situation for his people. He’s done so through hard work and dedication, and I think the whole world has noticed the significant improvements that we've seen as a consequence of his good administration.

Exactly what did those discussions produce? Did Abbas do anything about official incitement? Did he do anything about the inculcation of hatred in his schools and summer camps? Did he discard the practice of honoring terrorists by naming streets, plazas, institutions and events after them? We know blessed well that he did not and will not do any of those things.

Exactly what substantive action did Abbas take to enhance the security of his people? Did he do anything to curb provocations against Israel, which generate the greatest threat to their welfare when Israel is forced to retaliate? Did he do anything effective to curb the rival gangs whose fights often entrap "innocent civilians" ? We know blessed well that he did not and will not do any of those things.

Exactly what did Abbas do to improve the economic situation of his people? Did he stop wasting money on weapons and terrorists? Did he curb corruption? Did he recover any of the foreign aid diverted by Arafat ? We know blessed well that he has not done and will not do any of those things.

Exactly what improvements has he made? How extensive and how permanent are they?

But obviously there is a lot of work that remains to be done so that we can create a two-state solution in the Middle East in which we have an Israel that is secure and fully accepted by its neighbors, and a Palestinian people that have their own state, self-determination, and the ability to chart their own destiny.

Creating a Falestinian state is not a solution. No quantity of work will enable the creation of a stable, self supporting, anodyne Falestinian state. The difference between a Falestinian state and the Falestinian Authority is statehood. That is an artificial legal concept which has no effect whatsoever on objective factual reality.

They had an opportunity to have their own state, unjustly carved out of the territory mandated for Israel, just as Trans-Jordan was stolen from Israel's patrimony. Instead, they chose war, preferring attempted politicide & genocide to a state of their own. Statehood would not make any improvement.

Israel will never be secure, nor will it be accepted by its neighbors so long as its neighbors are slaves of Allah. Allah hates Jews, he wants them all dead. He commanded Muslims to wage war against them until all the Jews are subjugated and submit to extortion. He established the final genocide of the Jews as a prerequisite for the opening of the gates of Paradise. Who will Allah send to torment the Jews? [Emphasis added.]

7:167. And (remember) when your Lord declared that He would certainly keep on sending against them (i.e. the Jews), till the Day of Resurrection, those who would afflict them with a humiliating torment. Verily, your Lord is Quick in Retribution (for the disobedient, wicked) and certainly He is Oft­Forgiving, Most Merciful (for the obedient and those who beg Allâh's Forgiveness).

There is a reason why Muslims will never accept the existence of Israel. Nobody in a position of power and authority will reveal it to you. Since I am not in a position of power or authority and do not make a living from public speaking or writing, I am able and willing to reveal it. Israel is living proof of the fact that Allah is an impotent idol. Islam is a lie, Muslims are liars, and Israel stands as living proof of that fact. Her existence is the ultimate blasphemy to Muslims.

When Muslims conquer a territory, it becomes waqf, in perpetual trust for Allah. Allah will never relinquish it; it is impossible for conquered kuffar to recover their land and rule over its Muslim occupiers.

Allah promised Muslims victory in the Qur'an: 3:125, 5:52, 14:15, 17:6, 29:10. He said "We gradually reduce the land (of disbelievers, by giving it to the believers, in war victories) from its outlying borders. in 13:41 ". Allah promised in 8:65, a ten to one kill ratio, reducing it to two to one in the next verse.

If Allah were the deity and his promises valid, Israel would have been annihilated in 1948 or any of the latter attempts at genocide. Only ignorant fools believe that peaceful coexistence with Islam is possible. Only traitors pretend that it is possible.

Now, we've just gone through a difficult period in the region. We saw the tragedy with the flotillas, something that I think has drawn attention all around the world to the ongoing problems in Gaza. As part of the United Nations Security Council, we were very clear in condemning the acts that led to this crisis and have called for a full investigation. And it is important that we get all the facts out. But what we also know is that the situation in Gaza is unsustainable. I think increasingly you're seeing debates within Israel, recognizing the problems with the status quo. And so President Abbas and I had very extensive discussions about how we could help to promote a better approach to Gaza.

Tragedy with the flotillas? Malignant malarkey! The flotillas were a planned provocation, intended to produce bodies to be paraded before the t.v. cameras. The Muslims set up a lose/lose situation for Israel. Israel had two options, neither of them good. She could let the flotillas through, ending the blockade and insuring the delivery of larger, more powerful missiles from Iran -- missiles which would do devastating damage to her cities. Or she could seize the ships, and be forced to kill terrorists, posing as humanitarian aid workers in the process. Give them a military victory or a propaganda victory. Israel wisely chose the latter.

The Jews landed on the ship armed with paint ball guns. They were besieged by terrorists swinging steel bars and plunging knives into them. The Jews were forced to use their side arms. For this, the hypocrites condemn Israel.

The Security Council condemned Israel for defending herself. If we had a President instead of a traitor, that resolution would have been vetoed. Anyone with a scintilla of morality would condemn the Muslims for perpetrating their provocation.

The facts are out. We saw video coverage of the swinging bars. We saw pictures of bloodied Jews with stab wounds. We saw the terrorists chanting Kaibar, the name of an Oasis where Moe had the village chief tortured to death and took his widow as a sex slave. We heard one of them say that they would obtain one of two good outcomes: "Gaza or martyrdom". Why waste time and treasure on an a biased investigation with a predetermined unjust outcome?

The only rational approach to Gaza and the West Bank is to remove the illegal occupiers. Get those Muslims out of there immediately!

We agree that Israelis have the right to prevent arms from entering into Gaza that can be used to launch attacks into Israeli territory. But we also think that it is important for us to explore new mechanisms so that we can have goods and services, and economic development, and the ability of people to start their own businesses, and to grow the economy and provide opportunity within Gaza.

When they put saltpeter in bags labeled "sugar", they make trust impossible. Israel can not afford to allow them to import the raw material for rocket fuel. Every item in every load must be inspected for dual use materials. Anything less is suicidal. Falestinians must abandon their quest for genocide or suffer the consequences. Our politicians must quit blaming Israel for the faults of her enemy. If you want economic development in Gaza, get the Muslims out of there and replace them with Jews.

And so we are going to be working hand in hand to make sure that we come up with a better approach, and urge Israel to work with all parties involved -- Egypt, the Palestinian Authority, and the international community -- to find a resolution to this issue.

Israel can only resolve this issue by doing to her enemies what they are trying to do to her. The only rational alternative to break their bond of slavery to Allah, and nobody has the guts to approach that problem.

In the meantime, the United States -- which is already the biggest humanitarian aid donor in Gaza -- is going to be announcing an additional $400 million in assistance for housing, school construction, business development -- not only in Gaza, but also in the West Bank, because we think it’s important for us to reaffirm once again our commitment to improving the day-to-day lives of ordinary Palestinians.

The ultimate fool's errand: give the enemy money for infrastructure construction, money that will be siphoned off to buy rocket fuel & explosives. Then, the Jews will retaliate, destroying the new infrastructure. While we are up to our eyeballs in national debt, Obama throws $400 million down the sewer. We should flush him instead.

Now, what we also discussed, though, and what we will continue to work on over the next several months is the fact that not only is the status quo with respect to Gaza unsustainable, the status quo with respect to the Middle East is unsustainable. It is time for us to go ahead and move forward on a two-state solution that will affirm the needs of Israeli citizens and will affirm the needs of Palestinian -- Palestinians who are desperate for a homeland.

"Palestinian" means Jew. "Palestine" is a linguistic corruption of a name imposed on Israel & Judea by the Roman Empire after a rebellion in ad 70. Israel is the Jewish homeland, not Arab homeland. Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, not of some imaginary "Palestine". Those so called "Palestinians" are undifferentiated Arabs, nothing special. They have no special rights and Israel owes them nothing whatsoever. They do not want a homeland, they want the destruction of Israel. I tire of the repetition of the false narrative of Falestine.

We have had very productive proximity talks. Senator Mitchell -- who is here, I think standing in the back -- has been very active, working with both the Palestinians and the Israelis to try to start moving this process forward. And I want to thank President Abbas for participating in these proximity talks even under some difficult circumstances. He has shown courage and tenacity in wanting to resolve this issue. And we believe that with Israelis and the Palestinian Authority coming together, making clear that a peaceful, non-violent solution that recognizes both the security needs of Israel as well as the legitimate aspirations of Palestinians is the right way to go, can yield real progress in the coming months.

Remember Oslo? What was gained? What part of their obligations did the Falestinians fulfill? Remember Wye River ? What was gained? And the Roadmap to Hell, what good has it accomplished?

There is nothing to discuss except the time of the Muslim's departure from Israel and whether they are going home or to Hell. Thank Abbas for talking, after his refusal to concede anything and his ever escalating demands?

There is no peaceful non-violent solution to genocidal aggression. There are no "legitimate aspirations" of Falestinians. They aspire only to genocide, politicide and complete world conquest.

It’s important that we understand the sense of urgency that the Palestinian people feel in this process. Obviously you’ve got organizations like Hamas that have not recognized Israel, have not renounced violence, who are calling for a different approach. And we think it’s important that, given President Abbas’s commitment to a peaceful diplomatic solution to these issues, and I think the desire of people both in Israel and Palestine -- Palestinian Territories for a peaceful solution, that we move forward. And the United States is going to put its full weight behind those efforts.

There never was, is not now and never will be any such commitment to "a peaceful diplomatic solution". The United States, under the treason of Barack Hussein Obama, is putting its full weight behind the drive to destroy Israel and exterminate the Jews.

I did share with President Abbas, in order for us to be successful in these next several months, that both sides have to create an environment, a climate, that is going to be conducive to an actual breakthrough. And that means on the Israeli side, curbing settlement activity and recognizing some of the progress that has been made by the Palestinian Authority when it comes to issues like security. It means on the Palestinian side -- and I was very frank with President Abbas that we have to continue to make more progress on both security as well as incitement issues.

The English language does not contain any execrations sufficient to communicate the dimensions and intensity of my outrage; my contempt and detestation for the imbecillic spew of lies from that conniving traitor. Jewish settlements in the Jewish homeland are not the obstacle to peace. Islamic doctrine is the obstacle to peace. There is no progress to recognize; never was and never will be. Abbas will never do anything effective to curb missile launches & suicide bombings. Abbas will never stop the incitement and inculcation of hatred. Only a damn fool has such expectations. Only a traitor pretends that they are realistic.

And if we can over the next several months try to lift up what are the honest and legitimate concerns of both sides and if both Palestinians and Israelis can recognize that they have a common interest in moving off of what has been this dead end, then I believe that potentially we can make significant progress before the end of the year.

God help us, we elected a traitor! No truth can pass his lips. Only Israel has "honest and legitimate concerns".

Pamela Geller vs Lying Muslim

Bare Naked Islam embedded this video in an article about the Stop The Mosque Rally in NYC, this video illustrates media bias in favor of Islam. The interviewer frequently interrupted Pam Geller rather than allow her to complete her statements. Due to the soft and rapid speech of the interviewer I was not able to get the name of the lying Muslim. This is from the Faces of Faith feature on CNN.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_wqt9edqOQ&feature=player_embedded

The interview with Pamela Geller begins approximately two minutes into this 12: 52 video. This is one of those videos that must be seen to be appreciated fully. Watch the interviewer's facial expressions. It is obvious from her expression and tone of voice that she is adversarial toward Geller. She interrupts before Geller can complete her answers. I believe that the interviewer succeeded in rattling Geller, pushing her off balance so that she was not able to make her usual articulate presentation. I will emphasize the questions with bold face, block quoting the answers and leaving my comments full width. Due to rapid speech, cross talk and poor typing skills, this transcript may contain errors, it will not be word for word perfect.

Bold underlined text is linked to my sources. Links will open in a new tab or window.

We understand that there is a protest today that you are leading, what exactly does your group hope to accomplish today and why are you against the building of Cordoba House, this Muslim and cultural community center?

Well, Ground Zero is a war memorial, its a burial ground, and this Mosque is offensive; its humiliating, its demeaning to the three thousand innocent victims who lost their lives. Without Islam this attack would never have happened. And we are rallying at Ground Zero, at the corner of Liberty and and Church to show the public outcry and we are asking that they be sensitive and tolerant and responsive to this overwhelming ah dissent to this Mosque. the latest polls show that America is against this Mosque. to build a shrine to the ideology which inspired this jihadist attack is insulting, it is...

At this point the interviewer made her first interruption to insert a canned response from the Imam of Cordoba Housed. The Cordoba House project is a symbol of Islamic supremacy. Muslims built a Mosque on Jerusalem's Temple Mount, and deny that the Temples ever existed there, claiming the site for themselves exclusively. Their attitude is supremacism, it is arrogant AssWholliness, totally unacceptable to civilized people. Recent riots were caused by similar conflicting claims over holy sites. You might remember hearing about Ayodhya. The Wikipedia entry will refresh your memory.


One remark is particularly telling: "Without Islam this attack would never have happened." The accursed abomination is a function of orthodox Islamic doctrine. It flows directly from Surah Al-Anfal 39 & Surah At-Taubah 29; from Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387 and from Reliance of the Traveller Book O, Chapter 9, which codifies them. [http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-8.html http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-9.html]

Another clause needs to be brought forward: "we are asking that they be sensitive and tolerant and responsive". Geller is sticking it in the left winger's eye. Islam is intolerant and unresponsive. In the Muslim world view, we must tolerate Islam, Muslims are privileged to kill us.

I want to read a response here from the Imam of the Mosque and cultural center because they put this out here and they want people like you and others who are criticizing them to understand what is going to take place in this facility. And they say that the Cordoba House seeks to create a community center where all people, Muslims, Jews, Christians and those of every faith can gather in a spirit of honor, respect and peaceful coexistence. And they go on to say that We cannot think of a better expression to promote the peaceful values of our faith than the Cordoba House, where American Muslims stand together with fellow citizens to condemn extremism and terror. It is a project to honor those people who were harmed on September 11th. Why do you object when they say you know, that's not correct what you are saying, this center is not about promoting some sort of hateful ideology, its quite the opposite?

First of all, that statement is deception because it is a Mosque, and only Muslims can pray ...

What's wrong with that?

It is a Mosque, and only Muslims can pray in a Mosque. The only time non-Muslims are allowed in a Mosque is if perhaps they would be able to convert. There is no plurality, there is no tolerance here...

Well thats not true because the Imam says that they would actually welcome people of various faiths to go and check this out and you can, as a non-Muslim, I'm a non-Muslim, I've been to a Mosque before - if you are invited as a guest to go as long as you are respectful...

Right--you're invited to go for proselytizing but it is not-there is no plurality in a Mosque . My question is: why there? How can it possibly be seen as outreach to build a Mosque at the war memorial that is Ground Zero, how ? How could that be perceived, that is a kick in the head, I don't understand how it can be turned into this idea of outreach when it is the opposite .
It is a triumph it is triumphal, we know that the Islamic pattern is to build gigantic Mosques on the cherished sites of conquered lands. We know that this is Islamic history...

Geller is trying to reinforce the concept of Mosques supplanting temples after becoming rattled and selecting the wrong word to inform us that Muslims invite us to Mosques in order to pull the wool over our eyes and, if possible, begin the process of converting us. Once again, the interviewer jumps in to prevent the completion of the thought.

Miss Geller, I'd like to ask you I'd like to ask you there are obviously Muslims scholars and Muslims who disagree with you but also President Bush who made this point time and time again when he reached out andsaid "look we've gotta go after those who attacked Americans on 9/11 --Al-Qaeda " certainly not moderate Muslims and not the faith of Islam, that there is a distinction, there is a difference and if people don't understand it its out of ignorance or misunderstanding. How do you counter that point if even President Bush said that what you're saying is not true?

Shrub said that "Islam is a great religion of peace". What makes him an expert? Who died and made him god? In fact, like Clinton & Obama, he is a damn liar. Peace, to Islam, is the condition of the world after they have finished conquering it. Only those who read Islam's canon know that peace and justice are fruits of conquest. Fitna prevails until Islam rules the world. Muslims attack kuffar because Moe told them that Allah commanded them to, promising eternal bliss in the celestial carnal house and threatening eternal torment in the fire of Hell as his carrot and stick incentives. Geller can't answer this way, if she did it would be her last interview, but look what she said.

I counter that point by saying: read the Qur'an, read the hadith, read the sira, there are some fifteen thousand...

Well, they have countered that as well and say that Islam ...its a perversion of Islam ... its a faith of peace?

Those who say that are Gd'd liars! There is no truth in there false assertions of passivity & perversion. They can not explain why the "religion of peace" has, in its scripture, sanctification of conquest, genocide & terrorism nor why it has rules for distributing spoils of war. They'd black ball Geller if she responded as I do.

Yes, I understand but the prime Minister of Turkey said "there is no extreme Islam, there is no moderate Islam, Islam is Islam. there have been fifteen thousand Islamic attacks since 9/11 and it is inspired by the threat doctrine. We have to deal with it. Clearly a better idea would be to build a center dedicated to expunging the Qur'an of the violent texts that inspire Jihad. Every jihadist attack has the imprimatur of a Muslim cleric, I mean, this is a fact. We can't re-write reality, we have to see what is, have to deal with whats in front of us or how are you going to change things ? ...

This is what happens when they get you po'd, anger interferes with clear, concise expression. Threat doctrine is a military term, it really does not belong in this context. Islamic aggression is primarily inspired by the Qur'an's Surah Al-Anfal & Surah At-Taubah. The hadith which confirm and exemplify them are codified and explained in Riyad us-Saliheen Book 11, Chapter 234. Wasn't there something Geller said you should read?

Miss Geller, how do you counter the reality that there are thousands of Mosques across the United States and they are not points or symbols of jihad or hate?

We know from research done by SANE that four out of five Mosques preach hate and preach incitement to violence, we know this--as I said, its part of the Qur'anic text. And I think it is deeply offensive to build a Mosque on the sacred grounds of 9/11. There is a piece of the plane in that building and I think what we need to do- we are going to file a suit with the federal government to designate that building as a war memorial as a historic landmark, like Gettysburg, like Pearl Harbor . There is a piece of that plane in that building and to pray next to that is repugnant to any decent American, any Muslim of conscience, let me tell you something, I received emails from Muslims who don't believe a Mosque should be there.

It ain't the act of prayer, Pamela, its what they are praying to: the demon whose imperatives inspired the accursed abomination.

We're going to talk to a Muslim who has another point of view, but before you go, have you read the Qur'an ?

Yes I have and I strongly recommend Robert Spencer's The Infidel's guide to the Qur'an and Ibn Warraq and Wafa Sultan and Noni Darwish, these are books from former Muslims that must be read by the American people to understand what it is they are facing. They just arrested two more jihadis they were US citizens, they were arrested at JFK Airport. You have to understand the threat doctrine if you are going to address the threat.

---

Is there a portion-are there passages in the Qur'an that promotes what we saw al-Qaeda do on 9/11?

There are, but that Muslim won't admit it. I provided links to the most important such verses within my comments on the interview with Pamela Geller above.

Well first let me thank you for having me on and letting me provide what I call a Muslim perspective. Number one- a few points I want to make real quick. Unfortunately, there is a lot of erroneous translations that are out there. What we have to do is ask ourselves what do they hope to accomplish with this protest today against the Mosque? Asking the government to stop it--well that would be wholly unconstitutional its one of the first things I learned in law school, because it would be a violation of equal protection number one and number two, of the establishment clause of the First Amendment, something I learned in kindergarten as well. In America we have freedom of religion. Point number two, this is a fringe group. A lot of family members of 9/11 as well as public officials and regular Americans who understand American ideals support this initiative because they understand two crucial points: fringe groups like Pamela's- what they're doing number one- spreading the erroneous misinterpretation that the terrorists like al-Qaeda want to spread about Islam and number two: they're simultaneously feeding the propaganda that al-Qaeda uses to recruit which is that America is anti-Muslim. now Miss Geller and her group may be anti-Muslim, but the rest of America for the most part, is not. As far as where it says

http://www.quranbrowser.com/ displays a table of ten parallel translations for easy comparison. The words vary, with the exception of one polemical translation, the meanings do not. http://www.openburhan.net/ will display eighteen English translations if you click the ayeh number. It also displays a word by word breakdown, with links to an Arabic/Engish dictionary.

Besides al-taqiyya and kitman, as a lawyer, he should know that government interference would be blocked by the free exercise clause, not the establishment clause. He should also know that Islam is a standing violation of the establishment clause because it demands that temporal and spiritual power be in the same hands. Islam does not recognize separation of church and state. Islam is a lie. Muslims are liars. This is a wake up call.

What part is Miss Geller not understanding here because she clearly has a point of view here that she feels threatened and she feels that this is going to be dangerous to have this Mosque in that area. What do you want to say to her ?

Well, lets examine why she's threatened. Number one, she's talking about what the Qur'an teaches. There's 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, now there is admittedly probably tens of thousands of al-Qaeda members or members of other terrorist organizations; they have nothing to do with the teachings of Islam. She keeps equating al-Qaeda and their attack against this country to what Islam teaches. I'll take her to my family in Egypt, they'll fill her with food and take her shopping and they'll show her that the vast majority of Muslims around the word and not just in this country follow the teachings of the Qur'an, which state for example, in Chapter 5, verse 32: killing one innocent person is like killing all people saving one innocent life is like saving all people. or another verse that says let there be no compulsion in religion . Another verse that says let there be no tyranny, this is what Islam really teaches when you look at the accurate majority translations that are out there. There are thousands of Mosques already in this country. These are the teachings of Jesus and Abraham and Muhammad That they teach in Sunday schools, its what I learned in Sunday school growing up. So this Mosque that they're going to be building two blocks away from the World Trade Center- lets remember that number one, a lot of Muslims died at the World Trade Center Number two, this is going to be interfaith and open to a lot of non-Muslims to use the pool, use the exhibit facilities, to engage in dialog, just like a YMCA would, and yes, Muslims are going to go pray there because there are over a thousand Muslims who work down town who need a place to pray.

The Qur'an does not teach Jihad, it commands it! Get that straight for once. By the way, argumentum ad numerum and argumentum ad populum are logical fallacies, a lawyer should know that and avoid using them.

"Nothing to do with the teachings of Islam"? How about Allah's imperatives: "fight them until...only Allah is worshiped", "fight those who", "kill them wherever you find them", "I will cast terror", "Allah cast terror" Nothing at all to do with terrorism, nothing at all. Yeah, right. Snake feces!

He quotes 5:32, but not 5:33, why is that? Only because the latter verse details the punishment prescribed for those who "wage war against Allah". Ibn Kathir defines "wage war" as including disbelief. Got a clue yet? If you don't believe in Allah they can crucify you. Islam is a lie. Muslims are liars. Kitman is lying by obfuscation. These apologists for Islam are quick, slick & glib and they leave behind a lump of snake excrement. When you believe what they say, you eat that excrement.

2:256 says there is no compulsion in religion. 8:39 says "Fight them until...only Allah is worshiped.". Such conflicts are solved by naskh. Later revelations abrogate earlier revelations. The eighth surah was revealed later, 8:39 abrogates 2:256. There is something else the slick lawyer concealed from you. 3:110 says that Muslims are " the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind". That ayeh is explained by Sahih Buhari 6.60.80 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.

So there is no tyranny in Islam? That word is not found in the Hilali & Khan translation, but this is, in 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.

"A lot of Muslims died at the World Trade Center", 23 out of more than 2700; How is that relevant to the fact that the accursed abomination was inspired by the Qur'an & hadith?

Let me ask you this, she makes the point, she says that this'll be a very important symbol to those who would want to do harm because its close to ground zero do you think that she has any kind of is this point valid at all?

Not at all. The more she talks the more its clear that she does not know what she's talking about. This Mosque is a symbol of the 1.5 billion who respect peace I mean, remember that people go around in the Muslim world saying "peace be unto you" as hello and goodbye. Let alone the Millions of Muslim Americans who including myself, including my brother in law who is an officer in the Air Force stationed in Iraq right now, teachers, doctors, these are peace loving American people, their relatives overseas are peace loving Muslims, This Mosque will provide a place to pray just like several other Mosques in New York City does, for her to say that its offensive is what's offensive to us because there is nothing offensive about our religion, Mosques are no different from synagogues and churches and nowhere in this country would someone go out there and fight against the creation of a church in downtown Manhattan so I mean its really just offensive and there's a lot of ignorance out there and the days when she can go out there and make these untrue statements about the religion are over. We now have native born, English speaking American citizens just like my self with law degrees who can finally go out there on shows like yours that are nice enough to give us an opportunity to respond and say that she's on the wrong side of history where .....

I know what Geller was talking about because I have read the Qur'an & hadith and a significant sample of Islamic exegeses & jurisprudence. Geller knows what she was talking about, so does that lying Muslim.

If Muslims respect peace, it is as the outcome of Islamic conquest. Islam divides the world into two camps: Dar ul-Islam and Dar ul-harb. Dar ul-harb is the house of war, it is wherever Islam is not yet in control. If you harbor any doubt about this, read 13:41.

The Mosque is a symbol of Islamic supremacy. Where Allah's writ runs, dhimmis are not allowed to build higher than Muslim structures and they are not permitted to build new churches. .

"Peace be upon you", ain't that sweet. Moe said something about greeting Jews & Christians, it is in Sahih Muslim 26.5389: "Do not greet the Jews and the Christians before they greet you and when you meet any one of them on the roads force him to go to the narrowest part of it".

"Because there is nothing offensive about our religion"? Islamic law says that:

The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9.29),

But there is nothing offensive about Islam, no, nothing at all. Islam is a lie. Muslims are liars. Wake up, wise up and rise up!