Geller vs Ramey

Pamela Geller posted a video of a joint interview with Ibrahim Ramey, who said some things that must be rebutted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcF9XxyZ55A&feature=player_embedded#at=13

It goes sour for me right off the bat when Ibrahim Ramey is introduced as affiliated with the Muslim American Society. After seeing the results of Balkanization in Czechoslovakia & Yugoslavia, I am compelled to say that I am an American. If you are a hypenated-American, and you ain't happy here, then its time to go home. So, go.

Two and one half minutes into the video, Ramey says that 9/11 was a "criminal attack, not an Islamic attack". That malicious malarkey raises my blood pressure significantly. I am PO'd. It is a good thing I was not within reach of him when he said that, because it would have precipitated a criminal act. That attack was planned over a span of eight years, by Muslims, motivated by the damnable doctrines of conquest, terror and genocide enshrined in the Qur'an and exemplified in the sunnah of their damned Profit. That attack was carried out by Muslims, who pronounced the takbir while slitting the throats of the flight crews.

When some damned Muslim slits a pilot's throat in the name of Allah and you assert that his act was not Islamic, I need to reach out and wipe the smirk off your face. It is equivalent to saying that the conquest of India and genocide of the Hindus was not Islamic or that the Assyrian & Armenian genocides were not Islamic. The denial of obvious truth is malicious and malignant. It must be repudiated.

Next, Ramey says that Muslims have First Amendment rights, like other Americans, in terms of freedom of religion. Yes, they do, because the founders of this nation, in their haste & process of compromise, and not anticipating that Muslims might immigrate at some future time, neglected to include a definition of religion in the Bill of Rights. Legitimate religions have spiritual and benevolent missions, they do good, not harm. Islam has a mercenary mission and is responsible for the early deaths of 270*10⁶ people in the last 1400 years.

Is there a right to wage war upon us because we do not submit to your 'religion'? Is there a right to kill us, rape our widows, enslave our orphans and seize our property? All of those evils are inseverable parts of the practice of Islam and can neither be neglected nor expunged from it. If Jihad is possible in a given year, and is not performed, all who knew of the obligation are in sin.

If there is a right to practice Islam, then our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are voided because, as Moe said, our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims.

Next, he issued a denial of collective guilt. I did not hear Geller or anyone else assert that all Muslims are guilty of the Abomination. In my view, all who admired the act, who sympathized with its perpetrators, who celebrated or experienced schadenfreude share some the guilt. If you are a Muslim, and you disclaim that guilt, then in order to believe you I need to hear you sincerely abjure Surat al-Anfal, at-Taubah, al-Fath & as-Saff. You won't do that, because you can't do it and remain Muslim, so I will never believe you.

To add insult to injury, he asserts that Muslims are trying to establish a "new relationship with America" and "new relationships with the people of the United States. How can one discuss this without profanity? If they are Americans, then they are citizens of America and fellow citizens with us. No other relationship is possible. If they are Muslims, then they are predators and we are prey. Which are they???

He says that there are "numerous memorials" to the decedents. Show me an enumerated list, please; I believe that the politicians are still haggling over the design and execution of the Ground Zero Memorial, and the one in Pennsylvania is a crescent memorializing the ideology of the perpetrators, not the victims. He does not want to conflate the idea of a memorial into that of the right of Muslims to have a Mosque. When Muslims conquered India, they tore down the temples and replaced them with Mosques. They built two Mosques on the rubble of the Jewish Temple. They turned churches in Constantinople into Mosques. They build Mosques as a symbol of Islamic supremacy and that is exactly what the Cordoba House proposal is. They are rubbing our faces in the blood and decomposing flesh of the victims! If the insult does not bring you to the brink of incontinence, you may be taking too many tranquilizers.

Terrorist Incitement

The excrement comes from Marifah, an Islamic forum. Its authenticity is confirmed by MEMRI. In the articles, quoted from al-Qaeda's new web magazine, Abu Basir Nasir al-Wuhayshi and Anwar al awlaki, exhort Muslims living in America to take revenge for Everybody Draw Muhammad Day and other criticism of Moe.

Asked for his advice to Muslims residing in the West, Abu Basir Nasir al-Wuhayshi replied that they should arm and train themselves for violence.

My advise to my Muslim brothers in the West is to acquire weapons and learn methods of war. They are living in a place where they can cause great harm to the enemy and where they can support the Messenger of Allah.

Note the clause which I emphasized, it has a basis in the Qur'an.

9:120. It was not becoming of the people of Al-Madinah and the bedouins of the neighbourhood to remain behind Allah's Messenger (Muhammad SAW when fighting in Allah's Cause) and (it was not becoming of them) to prefer their own lives to his life. That is because they suffer neither thirst nor fatigue, nor hunger in the Cause of Allah, nor they take any step to raise the anger of disbelievers nor inflict any injury upon an enemy but is written to their credit as a deed of righteousness. Surely, Allah wastes not the reward of the Muhsinun

I added emphasis to one crucial clause in the penultimate sentence to make one point extremely clear: taking any step to anger or injure disbelievers is imputed to a Muslim's credit as righteousness. Causing "great harm to the enemy" is valuable to Muslims because Allah will weigh their good deeds against their sins; the balance will determine their eternal destination.

There is no meaning in life if the Messenger of Allah is cursed while they listen to and see such crimes being committed in front of their eyes. It is not enough to defend him, may my father and mother be sacrificed for him, to participate in demonstrations and protests because these methods would not stop the West which is already used to them. The successful means are through explosive devices and sacrficing souls. That is more pronounced and successful way of defending him and this is a practice started by the Taliban of Pakistan, Nidal Hassan, and 'Umar al-Faruq, may Allah release them and on this path are men who are coming to you by the will of Allah.

Life loses its meaning for a Muslim who does not kill someone who criticizes Moe. Bombing and shooting are effective remedies. ....

O Muslims rise up in defense of your Messenger: a man with his knife, a man with his gun, a man with his rifle, a man with his bomb, by learning how to design explosive devices, by burning down forests and buildings, or by running over them with your cars and trucks. The means of harming them are many so seek assistance from Allah and do not be weak and you will find a way. The rights of the Messenger of Allah upon us are great and it is nothing for all of us to die for his sake; may our mothers be bereaved of us if we do not defend him.

Moe, who has been dead for 1368 years, has a right to the death of his critics? Yeah, right. The message of Anwar al Awlaki is similar.

The medicine prescribed by the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) is the execution of those involved. A soul that is so debased, as to enjoy the ridicule of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), the mercy to makind; a soul that is so ungrateful towards its Lord that it defames the Prophet(pbuh) of the religion Allah has chosen for his creation does not deserve lfe, does not deserve to breathe the air created by Allah and enjoy a life provided for by Allah. Their proper abode is Hellfire.

Of course, the Imam cites precedent.

The Messenger of Allah(pbuh) called for assassination of Ka'b bin al-Ashraf and there are other incidents of his companions killing those who spoke against him. There was a blacklist of names of people in Makkah that were to be killed even if found hanging on to the clothes of al Ka'ba, the holiest site in Islam. This list included, among others, women who sang poetry defaming Muhamed(pbuh). Even though Muhammed(pbuh) prohibited the killing of women who are non-combatants, these women were an exception because of their unprecedented transgression.

Next, he complains that the system is supporting Moe's critics, making the entirety of Western Civilization in a state of war against Islam.

...The main elements in this system are the laws that make blasphemy legal. Because they are practicing a "right" that is defended by the law, they have the backing of the entire Western political system. This would make the attacking of any Western target legal from an Islamic viewpoint. The entire Western system is staunchly protecting and promoting the defamation of Muhammed (pbuh) and therefore, it is the entire Western system that is at war with Islam. Assassinations, bombings, and acts of arson are all legitimate forms of revenge against a system that relishes the sacrilege of Islam in the name of freedom.

We have the First Amendment because free speech is necessary for the preservation of liberty in a republican form of government. We must be able to criticize and question elected officials and candidates. We must also be free to criticize and question their policies & proposed legislation. Without free speech, our government could devolve into tyranny.

We must also be free to discuss inimical systems which threaten and attack us. Between 1787 and 1815, Muslim pirates attacked our shipping. President Jefferson gave them a lesson in civility, the effect of which has worn off.

According to Muslims, Moe is the greatest and best of men, a role model for everyone to emulate and his cult is the "right religion". How are we to judge those assertions without allowing the presentation of evidence? That requires free speech.

Allah selected as his ultimate messenger a man, who, after his selection as seal of the prophets, married the six year old daughter of his best friend and consummated the marriage when she was nine years old. According to Muslims, I just blasphemed Allah & his messenger. They say I should be killed for that.
I have evidence, from Islam's own cannon.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64:

Narrated 'Aisha:

that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

That is a muttawir hadith; there are other narrators who back it up. Go to http://www.islaam.net/main/hadithsearch.php and search for six years old. If it ain't true, why is it included in the most authentic of the hadith collections?

Allah's ultimate messenger ordered the murder of a critic.

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4436:

It has been narrated on the authority of Jabir that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Who will kill Ka'b b. Ashraf? He has maligned Allah, the Exalted, and His Messenger. Muhammad b. Maslama said: Messenger of Allah, do you wish that I should kill him? He said: Yes. He said: Permit me to talk (to him in the way I deem fit). He said: Talk (as you like). So, Muhammad b. Maslama came to Ka'b and talked to him, referred to the old friendship between them and said: This man (i. e. the Holy Prophet) has made up his mind to collect charity (from us) and this has put us to a great hardship. When be heard this, Ka'b said: By God, you will be put to more trouble by him. Muhammad b. Maslama said: No doubt, now we have become his followers and we do not like to forsake him until we see what turn his affairs will take. I want that you should give me a loan. He said: What will you mortgage? He said: What do you want? He said: Pledge me your women. He said: You are the most handsome of the Arabs; should we pledge our women to you? He said: Pledge me your children. He said: The son of one of us may abuse us saying that he was pledged for two wasqs of dates, but we can pledge you (cur) weapons. He said: All right. Then Muhammad b. Maslama promised that he would come to him with Harith, Abu 'Abs b. Jabr and Abbad b. Bishr. So they came and called upon him at night. He came down to them. Sufyan says that all the narrators except 'Amr have stated that his wife said: I hear a voice which sounds like the voice of murder. He said: It is only Muhammad b. Maslama and his foster-brother, Abu Na'ila. When a gentleman is called at night even it to be pierced with a spear, he should respond to the call. Muhammad said to his companions: As he comes down, I will extend my hands towards his head and when I hold him fast, you should do your job. So when he came down and he was holding his cloak under his arm, they said to him: We sense from you a very fine smell. He said: Yes, I have with me a mistress who is the most scented of the women of Arabia. He said: Allow me to smell (the scent on your head). He said: Yes, you may smell. So he caught it and smelt. Then he said: Allow me to do so (once again). He then held his head fast and said to his companions: Do your job. And they killed him.

Awlaki cited that hadith in his magazine article. Is it possible that a pedophile and murderer was a saint who brought us the right religion? "Who will kill Ka'b b. Ashraf? He has maligned Allah, the Exalted, and His Messenger." Allah, the most merciful? In a pig's anus!!!

Muslims bitterly kvetch about wrongly associating Islam with terrorism. That complaint is included in their UN resolutions demanding global blasphemy laws. I mustn't mention the fact that Allah said he would cast terror, Allah did cast terror, with consequences and Moe bragged about winning with terror because that would be "negative stereotyping". Kiss my foot.

It is time to pull your heads out of the sand and admit the fact that we need to be rid of Islam. Sign the International Qur'an Petition and exhort everyone you can hope to influence to sign it and induce others to follow suit.

While we wait for the World Court to enforce international human rights covenants against Islam, lets amend the Constitution to acknowledge the fact that Islam is a predatory war cult, not a religion so we can outlaw it. Sign the Outlaw Islam! petition and urge your friends to sign it.

Why Don't We Draft a Bill to Outlaw Islam ?

One signer of the International Qur'an Petition asked a question which deserves an answer.

If Islam is a terrorist org., and it is, than why don't we draft a bill to outlaw it from our country and encourage other countries to do the same. That is the real petition we should be getting out there. Richard Margarit

We can not outlaw Islam with an act of Congress because of the First Amendment. The free exercise clause forbids such legislation. Removing Islam from the penumbra of the free exercise clause requires an amendment to the Constitution. The amendment must recognize the fact that Islam is a predatory way of life with a religious component, not a religion in the normal sense of the word.

Such an amendment was proposed by Pedestrian Infidel in March of '07. That proposal inspired the Outlaw Islam!! petition. The first of this pair of links is to the body of the petition in html format including links to Islamic texts. The second link is to the petition's signature form. At present, it has 182 signatures.

Today, 37 people clicked through from Islam Exposed to Freedom Ain't Free and one more came from another source. Yesterday, the petition was viewed five times. Only one of those 43 readers clicked through to sign the petition. The total number of page views is 1,857.

It is up to us, Richard, to read & sign the petitions and share it with others. The list of on line petitions in the sidebar at Islam Exposed was one of the reasons cited by Pakistan's Ministry of Telecommunications for banning the blog.