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.

Veteran's Suicide Hot Line Number!

1-800-273-TALK (8255) Call this number if you need help!!

A Vast Collection Of Buzzings At Memeorandum

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.

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Big Lie: "UN drops call to outlaw 'defamation of religions'

 There is a sucker born every minute, because if we did not suck, we would not survive. Unfortunately, there is a surplus of adult bottom feeders who will cheerfully take and run with any bait.  A Google search for UN + "Defamation of Religions" turned up several news articles in addition to those in yesterday's alert.

The US Is Not Opening The Door To Limiting Freedom of Speech

Human Rights First - ‎5 hours ago‎
Human Rights First has worked for years to reverse the tide of defamation of religions at the UN , and has welcomed HRC resolution 16/18 as well as this most recent General Assembly resolution. We believe it is important for governments to now...

  • Turkey and America

    The Cutting Edge - ‎Dec 18, 2011‎
    [will] help in enacting domestic laws for the countries involved in the issue, as well as formulating international laws preventing inciting hatred resulting from the continued defamation of religions." It unfairly held up the American experience for ...
  • Free speech is in the cross hairs

    Prospectus - ‎Dec 18, 2011‎
    Although the latest resolution refers to "incitement" rather than "defamationof religion (which appeared in the 2005 resolution), it continues the disingenuous effort to justify crackdowns on religious critics in the name of human rights law. ...

Speak Not of Evil

Canada Free Press - ‎Dec 19, 2011‎
The Obama administration started down this ill-advised road by cosponsoring in 2009 an OIC-drafted resolution in the UNHuman Rights Council that condemned “defamation of religion” – read, Islam. That initiative helped advance the Islamists' ...

UN drops call to outlaw 'defamation of religions'
msnbc.com
AP The call on countries to prohibit "defamation" had been included in a ... decisive break from the polarizing focus in the past on defamation of religions."
UN General Assembly Abandons Dangerous “Defamation of Religion ...
Human Rights First
“Today's unanimous vote marks a decisive break from the polarizing focus in the past on defamation of religions.” said Human Rights First's Tad Stahnke. ...
UN condemns religious intolerance, drops 'defamation'
Reuters Africa
... religious intolerance without urging states to outlaw "defamation of religions," an appeal critics said opened the door to abusive "blasphemy" laws. ...
UN condemns religious intolerance, drops 'defamation'
Reuters India
L had won majority approval in UN rights bodies in Geneva and at the UN General Assembly for annual resolutions on "combating defamation of religions. ...

 

Blogs 1 new result for "Defamation of Religions"
 
UN condemns religious intolerance, drops 'defamation' line for first ...
By Louis Charbonneau
For the first time in more than a decade, the U.N. General Assembly on Monday condemned religious intolerance without urging states to outlaw defamation of religions, an appeal critics said opened the door to abusive blasphemy laws.
FaithWorld

 

Web 3 new results for "Defamation of Religions"
 
UN drops call to outlaw 'defamation of religions' - Beverly Hills ...
Teen BHEF met Tuesday to approve their revised by-laws and present awards of appreciation to Sandy West of The Beverly Hilton and Corrine Verdery of Oasis ...
www.bhcourier.com/article/World/World/UN.../83854
UN drops call to outlaw 'defamation of religions' - TODAY News ...
The U.N. General Assembly on Monday condemned religious intolerance without urging states to outlaw "defamation of religions."
today.msnbc.msn.com/id/45726263/
UN drops call to outlaw 'defamation of religions' - Newsvine
'Governments should now focus on concrete measures to fight religiously motivated violence ... while recognizing the importance of freedom of expression,' ...
world-news.polls.newsvine.com/_.../9561504-un-drops-call-to...

Only two out of twelve articles reflect objective factual reality, the rest swallow the bait.  That is not a good sign.  Lets sneak around the gate of the defamation meme and examine the core issue. Words have meanings, but Muslims assign their own meanings to common words.We must not assume that those words mean what they say when spoken by Muslims.

    The opening of the 15th session of the Human Rights Council was marked by an address from Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General of the OIC.

The new session of the Council is also coincides with  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 Bum a Koran Day. It was highly provocative towards the religious sentiments
of Muslims everywhere in the world and must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.
On August 24,2010 I issued a cautionary statement on the plan to burn the Holy Qur'an and
urged the American people as a whole as well as the world community to reject the call of the
Gainesville Church pastor[....]

    In this regard all xenophobic campaigns of fear mongering and discriminatory
measures - both in policy and practice - which restrict, prohibit or discriminate against of any
religion such as ban on the constriction 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. Such acts fuel
discrimination, extremism and mis-perception leading to polarization and fragmentation with
dangerous unintendecl ancl unforeseen consequences.[...]

[...]such events which endanger peaceful coexistence
between nations and create an environment conducive to violence



    The first three sentences quoted above are loaded with meaning which must be dissected and examined.

regrettable events

    In this case, one event: International Burn The Qur'an Day, which was scheduled for 09/11/10 to commemorate  the accursed abomination by highlighting the Qur'an verses which inspired it.  The event was called off under intense government pressure.

deliberately meant to

    How does anyone know the intention of the event unless it is clearly stated? The stated purpose of the event was to foster awareness of Islamic doctrines and their real world consequences. But Ihsanoglu assigns other intentions which he projects onto the event from afar.

defame religions

    Defamation is false and malicious.  What is false about connecting the dots; Allah's sanctification of terror, his casting terror resulting in death, captivity & dispossession, Moe's bragging about terror making him victorious and the abominable act motivated by Allah's imperative, threat and promise?

incite

    Pastor Jones was not inciting anyone to do anything more than incinerate the book which inspired the "Magnificent 19". Nothing was to be said, implied or illustrate to incite anyone to assault Muslims. He issued no war cry or call to arms and implied none.

hatred

    It is only natural for a nation under attack and threat of attack to hate its attackers and the damnable doctrines which motivate them and inspire them to attempt genocide & politicide.  No incitement is needed to make intelligent and informed Americans hate Islam. 

discrimination

    People naturally make choices. If we choose to avoid association with and proximity to persons made inimical to us by their ideology, that is discrimination, but it is not evil. 

    Hating a man for his skin pigment is evil. Hating a man because he adheres to an ideology which enjoins him to kill or enslave you is not evil, it is common sense.  Warning people about that ideology and its consequences is not inciting hatred.  Hatred is incited by the ideology and the acts it inspires.

violence

    When Pastor Jones tried and burned a Qur'an in March of 2011, rioting broke out in Pakistan.  The riots were not incited by anything in Gainesville, they were incited by what was preached in the mosques at Jumah Salat.  The politicians and media dare not make the connection between the riots and the end of Friday afternoon sermons.  Instead, they prefer to blame an unrelated event separated by thousands of miles and several days.

events that incite hatred

Beirut Embassy bombing

USS Cole bombing

WTC1 

WTC2

Beslan Massacre  

Mumbai Massacre

London subway bombing

Madrid rail bombing

endanger peaceful coexistence

    Trying and burning a Qur'an did not start a war; what did?  have you forgotten? When such a threat is issued, why do we lift Satan's tail and pucker up?

    Defamation, while prominently cited, is not the issue. Examine this transcript of remarks by Pakistan's Ambassador at the 16th session of the HRC.

Pakistan (on behalf of
the OIC)
Mr. Zamir Akram
03/24/11

Thank you Mr. President. On behalf of the OIC countries, I have the
honor to introduce the draft resolution entitled “combating
intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of and
discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons
based on religion or belief contained in document L.38.

Mr. President: this resolution addresses a number of
issues over which the OIC has been expressing concern over the years.
having said  that, I wish to state categorically that this
resolution does not replace earlier resolutions on combating
defamation.  which were adopted by the Human Rights Council  and
remain valid.  This resolution L.38  is an attempt on the
part of the oic to build consensus on an issue of vital importance
not only to Muslims but to people of all religions  and beliefs by
identifying  ways and means to deal with the growing problems of
religious incitement and discrimination and incitement to hatred and violence based on
religion or belief.

At the heart of this resolution are a series of practical steps
which need to be taken by states in order to address
this problem. This resolution addresses the core issues in a manner
that is acceptable to all including in  a legal sense, thus
seeking to bring all stake holders on board.  The OIC has gone
the extra mile to maintain a spirit of constructive engagement with all
partners during this process of consultation.

Our primary objective is to ensure that this text,
which will hopefully be adopted by consensus, will bind us all to the
commitments contained therein and oblige us all to ensure compliance
with its decisions.

Mr. President: Muslims around the world continue to be confronted
with ever increasing instances of intolerance, negative stereotyping,
stigmatization, discrimination  and violence on the basis of their religion; Islam.
Objective academic studies reveal that following the end of the cold war, the
pernicious doctrine of a clash of civilizations signaled the start of a narrative that required
the construction of a new enemy  to replace the global threat of
Communism with the so-called menace of Islam.

The reprehensible acts of terrorism on September 11,
2001 provided the trigger to unleash the clash of civilizations to the
forefront of global politics.  In the general Western view, no
distinction was made between a handful of extremists and terrorists  and
the overwhelming majority of peaceful and law abiding Muslims
living around the world. To make matters worse, against the backdrop of
the recent global economic crisis, these fears of Islam and Muslims are
now being manipulated by irresponsible and bigoted Western politicians
to gain political mileage  in their countries, unfortunately, with
remarkable success.

Terms such as Islamofascists have become common.
Even the Qur’an has not been spared;  it has been compared to Hitler’s
Mein Kampf. More recently, it was tried for religious crimes and
burnt.  Minarets at mosques deliberately depicted on posters
as missiles, have been banned. There have even been restrictions on
shops selling halal food, while no such restrictions exist on kosher
food outlets which are similar.

There is also increasing discrimination against Muslims in various
parts of the world.  They are being subjected to racial profiling
which confronts them with intractable problems at every border where
they are checked and re-checked.  Their businesses are repeatedly
scrutinized and their places of worship disallowed or desecrated.
They are made to feel unwelcome in societies where they live as
minorities.

One prominent politician has recently organized
hearings that seek to put on trial the entire Muslim community and are
obviously designed to stoke fears against Muslims in that
country.

Mr. President, the efforts by the oic to defend
our religion, our holy book and our prophet  and our people have
often been misrepresented as being contrary to international human
rights principles and laws, and in particular, rejected as undermining
the freedom of expression or opinion. The reality is different.
It is therefore appropriate in such a position, for us to try and
explain our faith and our principles. I hope, Mr. President, you will
give me a bit of extra time to do so.

Mr.  President: the Qur’an lays great emphasis on the
need for religious tolerance  as well as freedom of thought and
opinion.  In chapter 2, verse 256, the Qur’an states there is no
compulsion in religion.  In chapter 18, verse 29, the Qur’an
maintains that truth is from your Lord, so let him who please believe
and him who please disbelieve.  As regards freedom of
thought and opinion in Islam, the Qur’an states, in chapter 16, in verse 125 invite
all to the way of your creator with wisdom and arguments that are the
best and most gracious.  The Qur’an and the traditions of the holy
prophet also lay emphasis on the treatment of non-Muslims.
According to Prophet Muhammad, (PBUH), he who hurts a non-Muslim
citizen of a Muslim state I am his adversary and I shall be his
adversary on the day of  judgment.

Mr. President: it is also instructive for us to know
that we Muslims are not only bound by temporal laws to respect human
rights but by divine enjunctions contained in the Qur’an.  The
basic human rights as ordained in the Qur’an  include the
rights to life,  individual freedom, justice, equality, privacy, association
and basic necessities of life or minimum standard of living. These
obligations also include respect for women,  equality among human
beings, freedom of expression, protection from arbitrary imprisonment
and the right to oppose tyranny and injustice.  the last sermon of
the prophet (PBUH) is, in itself, a comprehensive charter of human
rights.  Islam has even established a complete code for the right
of combatants in war. Measures for the protection of all combatants as
well as homes and property belonging to them.

Mr. President: I have dwelt at length on these characteristics of Islam
because I want to underscore the common principles that underlie our
faith and the requirements of international law including international
human rights and humanitarian law.  Indeed, given the tremendous
contributions by Islam in various fields of human activity over
the  years, these principles have contributed to the evolution of
the very principles that we are trying to uphold today.

Mr. President, we sincerely believe that that irrespective of our
different cultural backgrounds and traditions, there is a shared
interest for all of us to show respect for each other’s religions and
beliefs  as well as to prevent any advocacy of religious hatred and
intolerance, discrimination and incitement  on the basis of religion or
belief.

The resolution under consideration seeks to achieve
these laudable objectives through a range of actions by states
including administrative steps, measures to criminalize imminent
violence, training and awareness programs, promotion of dialogue and
understanding at all levels.   The resolution also calls for
a global dialogue for the promotion of a culture of tolerance and peace
and in this context it decides to convene a panel discussion in the
Human Rights Council.  We hope that this resolution will be
adopted by consensus.  Before concluding, Mr. President, I would
like to place on record my appreciation for the support and cooperation
of all my colleagues in the oic  and in particular, members of
the core group of ambassadors that we set up to work out this
resolution.  I have truly benefited from the wisdom and advice and
without their support this text would not have been possible.  I
would also like to thank the Secretary General of the oic whose
support and guidance made this resolution possible.  In addition I
would like to express my appreciation — my sincere appreciation to all
our partners in the various groups, especially the ambassadors of the
U.S. and the U.K. on behalf of the European Union for their cooperative
and constructive approach.  Let me also thank the ambassadors from
the African group, grulac and Croatia for their cooperation and
engagement in this effort. I am glad that this oic initiative has
met with broad cross regional support which will send out a strong
message of unity from this council. Finally I would  like to thank
the experts from Pakistan, the U.S., the U.K. and other countries for
their tireless efforts to work out the text of this resolution. I thank
you Mr. president.


    Akram's screed contains numerous lies, which have been dissected in another blog post.

number of issues

    To see what Akram was talking about, read the Islamophobia Report for April '11.  The three principal exemplars are the Motoons, Fitna and the above mentioned Qur'an burning. 

Motoons

    The ostensible objection to depicting Moe is idolatry. There are two problems with that. First, Moe ain't supposed to be the deity, Allah is. Second, nobody would possibly make those cartoons an object of idolatry.  The real reason for objecting to their publication is their depicting Moe as a terrorist.

    Moe could not have possessed a bomb because he died prior to the invention of gunpowder.  Moe cast terror by a series of barbarian attacks, deliberately building a reputation for barbarian repine, so that he was more feared than Allah.  Moe bragged about being made victorious by awe & terror. What more do you need to know to make a judgment?

Fitna

    The 15 minute documentary juxtaposes Qur'an verses and ahadith with the rabid rants of Imams at Jumah Salat and resulting acts of terror and rioting. Fitna does not incite violence, it exposes incitement. Fitna: Supporting Documentation 03/27/08  documents the ayat quoted in the documentary. Though words have meanings, we must be aware of the meanings intended by Muslims.  HRC 16/18 & Draft resolution XVII appear to concentrate on incitement.

Condemns any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print, audiovisual
or electronic media or any other means;

(e) Speaking out against intolerance, including advocacy of religious hatred
that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence;
(0 Adopting measures to criminalize the incitement to imminent violence
based on religion or belief;

incitement

    What is it? Am I inciting hatred and violence by exposing the damnable doctrines of Islam which inculcate hatred and incite violence?  There is only one way to know the meaning: we must examine recent exemplary statements. This one, by Secretary Ban Ki-moon is dispositive.

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 the Secretary General, Fitna constitutes hate speech & incitement not protected by freedom of expression.  From that statement, it is clear tha the intention of HRC 16/18 and Draft resolution XVII is to criminalize all criticism of Islam. 

negative stereotyping

    What is the difference between stereotyping and defamation?  Because Moe was a terrorist, who commanded Muslims to emulate himself, and because Allah commanded terrorism, Muslims are commanded to obey Allah and because selectivity is prohibited, all Muslims are potential terrorists.  To the extent that they are believers in Allah, his promise and his threat, they will eventually participate in an attack.  If it were not true, this paragraph would be defamatory. Even though it is true, it is negative and it is stereotyping, condemned by the resolutions.  In any case,

defamation

    Islam is terrorism!  Allah sanctified it & engaged in it. Moe bragged about being made victorious by it.  To those bigots who who deny the obvious facts previously documented by reference to the Qur'an & hadth, this is defamatory. Previous resolutions condemned associating Islam with terrorism. These resolutions omit that meme, so, has the UN abandoned the defamation meme?  HELL NO!!!  And I will prove it.  Draft resolution XVII ain't the only resolution passed by acclamation Dec. 19. I know something you don't know but are about to find out.

Also emphasizes that no religion should be equated with terrorism, as this
may have adverse consequences on the enjoyment of the right to freedom of religion
or belief of all members of the religious communities concerned;

¶10, on page 3 of Draft resolution XVIII,  emphasizes that Islam must not be equated with terrorism, which it is by the testimony of its own deity & founder previously cited.  Equation with terrorism fits the defamation meme, and it has not been dropped or abandoned by the UN, it lives on in a concurrent resolution. The suckers have swallowed the bait, hook, line and sinker. 

    ¶12(j), on page 4, belies the assertion that freedom of expression is not threatened. 

To take all necessary and appropriate action, in conformity with
international standards of human rights, to combat hatred, discrimination,
intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by intolerance
based on religion or belief, as well as incitement to hostility and violence, with
particular regard to members of religious minorities in all parts of the world;

    For the Morons among my readers, "all necessary and appropriate action" means legislation to combat "incitement to hostility and violence", which means: Fitna, the Motoons and this blog post. 

    No doubt the Moronic chorus will begin chanting: "that ain't in the resolution under discussion". To which I gleefully reply:  Ye Suckers!!! Assumptions make asses of you!

Adopting measures to criminalize the incitement to imminent violence
based on religion or belief;

¶5(f) on page 5 of Draft resolution XVII, proves you wrong. "Adopting measures to criminalize" is a code phrase for legislation. They are demanding passage & enforcement to establish criminal punishment for publications such as Fitna, the Motoons and this blog post. Remember, Ban Ki-Moon defined the terms for us. 

"U.N. Tackles Religious Intolerance without Limiting Free Speech"

   
    Legislation to criminalize the publication of Fitna, the Motoons and this blog post will not limit free speech.  Yeah, right ;=(

If you love liberty, you will sign, share and promote this petition to preserve the First Amendment against the above described resolutions and the Istanbul Process.  http://www.petition2congress.com/5741/preserve-first-amendment-from-attack-by-oic/
 

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

The Real Threat to Freedom: Islam or "Radical Right"?

The Real Threat to Freedom: Islam or "Radical Right"? Ahmed Rehab  : Let's Face it: It's the Radical Right, not Islam, that is the Greatest Threat to the American Way

    Rehab's screed at the Huffington Post names Congressmen Allen West and Peter King as examples of  "Radical Right" politicians.  There is one little problem with that: "Radical Right" denotes authoritarian and fascist systems and ideologies such as Nazism.  Nazism was National Socialism.  Those two Congressmen are free market capitalists who believe in limited, constitutional government, not fascism. 

    Did Rep. West really say that " Islam is the enemy" and "Islam is not a religion"? 

Ten seconds into this video, West says: "This is not a religion that you are fighting against, you are fighting against a theo-political system, a construct --you are fighting against something that has been doing this thing since 622 A.D. ...:


    The quote is not exact, but it conveys the essential meaning.  Unfortunately for Rehab, West is correct; Islam describes itself as a "Deen", a way of life. Islam dictates all facets of human life from conception to burial.  Consider Reliance of the Traveller, the handbook of Shari'ah; Book O treats of justice; its table of contents takes up five pages with as many as 49 items on three of them.  Examine the portion pertaining to jihad. I linked one item to the pdf file so that you can examine the text.

Jihad 09.0
MeaningofJihad 09.0(0:)
Scriptural Basis for Jihad 09.0(0:)
The Obligatory Character of Jihad 09.1
A communal obligation 09.1
When it is personally obligatory 09.2
Surrender when overrun 09.3
Who Is Obliged to Fight in Jihad 09.4
Those who are not permitted to fight 09.5
Caliph's Permission Required If He Exists 09.6
Non-MuslimAllies 09.7
The Objectives of Jihad 09.8
Regarding Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians 09.8
Regarding others 09.9
Rules of Warfare 09.10
Those Unlawful to Kill in Jihad 09.10
Non-Muslims under a Muslim's protection 09.11
Those who enter Islam before capture 09.12
Women and children captives 09.13
Adult male captives 09.14
Destruction of enemies' trees etc. 09.15
Truces 09.16
Permissible 09.16
Preserving the status quo is not a valid reason 09.16
The Spoils of Battle 010.0
Who Is Entitled to Spoils of Battle 010.1
Dividing Collective Spoils 010.2
Personal Booty 010.3
Dividing the First Fifth Taken (Khums) 010.4
Who is entitled to it 010.4


    Reliance of the Traveller is based on what Moe preached and practiced as recorded in the Qur'an & hadith, which define and exemplify Islam.  What legitimate religion has laws which require constant war of offensive conquest?  What legitimate religion has a law requiring offensive conquest to be carried out "in every year"?  [See Hedaya, Volume II, Book IX, Chapter 1 for confirmation of constant jihad on Islam's initiative.]  What legitimate religion has a chapter in its scripture titled "The Spoils of War"?    What deity worth worshiping terrorizes his creation and commands his Prophets to make "great slaughter"?.    Islam is waging war against us and it is a way of life, not a religion; West is correct. 

    Consider Rep. King's inquiry into "radicalization".  The titles of the hearings suggest a dichotomy between a normative, "moderate" Islam and a violent "radical' Islam.  There is one Qur'an, and there is one authentic interpretation of it exemplified by the oral traditions of Moe's companions.  Is normative Islam passive or aggressive?  What did Moe say and do about jihad?  One book has the answer to this question: Riyad us-Saliheen, Book 11, Chapter 234 : Obligation of Jihad.  Normative Islam is aggressively violent, by design. 

    "Radicalism" is a false meme used to divert our attention from objective factual reality.  The difference between the passive Muslim and the terrorist is the intensity of his faith, not its content. The proof is in 9:111 & 49:15, read them and weep.  The dichotomy is hypocrite||believer, not moderate||radical.

    Lets get down to the gritty detail:

    Lowe's is putting forth a very dangerous argument: that the far right bigots and the mainstream Muslim voices with their pro-tolerance allies of all faiths are equal opposites; that those who wish to humanize a faith community that comprises 25 percent of humanity and those who wish to demonize them are equal opposites; that the forces of bigotry and the forces of anti-bigotry are equal opposites. The pervasive assumption that there is a moral equivalency between the two sparring sides is a major factor in the rise of Islamophobia in the US. But Lowe's goes further than to claim moral equivalency. It actually takes sides, the wrong side: the side of the bigots.

    The running complaint used to be that Muslims are always portrayed as terrorists. But now, the message being sent is that "not portraying American Muslims as terrorists" is sufficient for complaint and controversy. It's moving the goal posts to a dangerous new "lowe."

    The purpose of the tv series about Muslims is to project an image of normalcy for the purpose of  lulling us into a state of apathy and inaction.  It is a hagiographic polemic.  The tactic is kitman: deception by obfuscation.   Two things are important: the content and intensity of their faith. The content is dictated by the Qur'an & hadith.  Muslims pose a real, proximate & continuing threat which varies directly with the intensity of their faith.

    Muslims are promised that if they fight in Allah's cause, they will be admitted to Paradise.  If they take any step to injure or enrage disbelievers, they get extra credit for "deeds of righteousness".  Muslims are threatened with eternity in the fire if they shirk jihad.   Put yourself in the Muslim's faith; if you really believe Allah's threat and promise, what will you do?

    Rejection of Islam is not a function of bigotry or political extremism, it is a function of knowledge of the doctrines & practices of Islam   About that running complaint, refer to Front Page Mag's revelation of CAIR's intimidation of FOX24.

    The forces of bigotry are Islam and political correctness. Representatives King and West are among the forces of anti-bigotry. The bigots do not want you to examine the facts. We want you to examine and consider the facts contained in Islam's canonical texts.

.

Monday, December 19, 2011

The hypocrisy of Congressional Bigotry

The hypocrisy of Congressional Bigotry
Fatwa on Islam brought this video to my attention. I had read a little about the controversy but had not delved deeply into it. I can't let this slide by without a blast of the torch. We find Christopher S. Murphy on the floor of the House, wasting precious time.

Last week, the giant home improvement chain, Lowe's decided to pull their ads from a new show on The Learning Channel called All American Muslim. ...American Muslim families of Lebanese descent in Dearborn, Michigan and highlights how their faith affects their lives and their families.  The show is aptly titled because it shows Muslim families to be exactly what they are in this situation and millions like them around the nation; they're Americans.  They face problems just like the rest of us, the only difference is they worship in a different church

    Now Lowe's pulled these ads because one right wing anti-Muslim group in Florida show hides the "true agenda" of Islam which, according to this group, is to destroy America. 

    Now this kind of anti-Muslim bigotry isn't new, it seems like every month we are being warned by a new radical group about the creep of Shari'ah law or a peaceful Mosque is being run out of a community or a radical pastor is burning the Qur'an on television.  But it is one thing when a fringe group or a radical unhinged pastor is doing it, it is quite another when a Fortune 100 company is endorsing this nonsense.

    Now Lowe's defends itself by saying that they are pulling these ads because some of their customers have "strong social and political views on this topic".  Well, congratulations to Lowe's for acknowledging that there are some really bigoted people in the world.  That doesn't mean  that Lowe's or any other company should acquiesce to this kind of behavior.  For instance, there are, unfortunately, a  lot of people out there who still hold racist views about African-Americans, but I don't think that means Lowe's is going to be pulling its ads from television shows featuring African-Americans.   Lowe's also says that they are sorry for walking into a "hotly contested debate".  Well, what debate are they talking about?  yes, we face threats from a fringe sect of radical anti-American Islamists but there is no debate that the millions of patriotic, peace loving Muslims who live in this country have no connection to that movement and do nothing except strengthen the fabric of our nation. 

    And maybe you think that this is just a minor side show and Congress shouldn't be talking about it on this floor; I submit to you that you're dead wrong.  This is a major American company rubber stamping basic foundational bigotry against a major American religious group

    This nation was founded on the premise of religious freedom and this body should never remain silent when a group of people is marginalized just because they worship a different god.  And though its certainly got more important things to worry about like fixing the economy,  its traditionally  been in bad economic times that this kind of social marginalization has been at its worst  because people don't speak up against it. 

    Now further, this kind of bias, it endangers our national security. Thadius  McDunn*, the President's deputy national security adviser, recently said: "al-Qaeda's core recruiting argument is that the West is at war with Islam".  With this action, extremists can say "Look, we're already being run out of their neighborhoods, now we're being run off of their television sets.". 

    This kind of anti-Muslim sentiment doesn't just endanger our nation's soul, it endangers our national security.  and so, here's my message for the folks at Lowe's who made this decision, and, frankly anybody out there of sound mind who is considering getting behind this growing anti-Muslim bias: you're better than this; you know that the history of this country and of this world never ever looks kindly on this kind of marginalization that you've endorsed with your actions.  And whether its agains Irish-Americans or Jewish-Americans or African-Americans,  the history books make sure that this kind of exclusionary politics becomes a stain on the reputation of anyone who takes part in it. 

    Today I am leading a group of members of Congress calling on Lowe's to reconsider their decision and listen, we do have a lot to fear from Islamic groups that seek to do harm to America, but we have nothing to fear from a tv program called All American Muslim and we have nothing to fear from the tens of millions of peace loving and patriotic Muslim Americans who are just like those who are portrayed in that show.  This is America and we have never been perfect at living up to our founding ideals, we've gotten pretty good at calling out bigotry when we see it and stamping it out before its mark becomes indelible; this can be one of those moments. 

* I typed what I heard, rewound the video and played that segment back. I checked Wikipedia and found: Denis McDonough. Not being a cat, I can safely indulge curiosity. I ran the quote through Google and found that most of the serps went to articles about the present controversy.  This one is the Congressman's letter.  The second link I tried turned out to be the 109 page transcript of the House Security hearing. This turned up on  page 2.

Just this past Sunday, for instance, Denis McDonough, the deputy national security adviser to President Obama, made a major speech on radicalization, stating that, quote, "Al Qaida and its adherents have increasingly turned to another troubling tactic, attempting to recruit and radicalize people to terrorism here in the United States. "For a long time, many in the U.S. thought that we were immune from this threat. That was false hope and false comfort. This threat is real and it is serious." "Al Qaida does this for the express purpose of trying to convince Muslim Americans to reject their country and attack their fellow Americans,"


Another quote, from the first Muslim elected to Congress,  turned up on page 12.

Mr. McDonough noted that Al Qaida's core recruiting argument is that the West is at war with Islam.


    Representative Ellison also quoted President Obama

"Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism. It is an important part of promoting peace."


    There is a major problem in the recruit and radicalize meme: al-Qaeda and other so called "extremists groups" are normative Islam. Muslims have already been recruited.  Radicalized is a shibboleth designed to reinforce the false moderate || radical dichotomy.  Islam is not moderate and there is no moderate Islam.  There are Muslims who are ignorant of their "religious" obligations and Muslims who ignore their obligations, but there are no moderate Muslims.
For the detestable details of that Islamic obligation, turn to Reliance of the Traveller, Book O9.1.  Pay particular attention to the first and penultimate paragraphs of that section.  [See also: http://islamic-world.net/youth/jihad_articles.htm]

    Islam's normal state is war, periods of peace are the exception; for the duration of a state of weakness. Outside of incapacity, failure to attack disbelievers is a sin. If you do not comprehend that, follow this link, read the page, then scroll up to the proceeding page and read it; Jihad is undertaken on Islamic initiative and must be continuous. 

    The West is not at war against Islam but should be because Islam is at war against us.  If you do not comprehend this, open the Qur'an to 9:29.  if reality still does not sink in, follow up with Tafsir Ibn Kathir.

    Representative Ellison and President Obama are damned liars: Islam promotes war, it does not promote peace.  I direct doubters and dissenters to the links in the previous paragraph and the link two paragraphs up, to Reliance of the Traveller.  Islamic law says that the caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians.  Allah said "fight them".  Moe said that he was 'ordered to fight the people".  Al-Mughira told a Persian general: "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]

    The Dey of Algiers explained to Adams & Jefferson by what right the Barbary Pirates attacked our shipping.

[the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet (Mohammed), that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman (or Muslim) who should be slain in battle was sure to go to heaven. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War]


    From the Islamic viewpoint, peace is the condition appertaining after Islam has conquered the entire world, until then there is war.  Islam promotes peace by conquering us.  If that ain't the Acme of arrogance, what is?

worship in a different church

    Muslims are not our fellow believers in Jehovah & his son. The difference between us and Muslims is not analogous to the difference between Catholics and Baptists. Their deity commands them to participate in offensive warfare to conquer the entire world  Those Muslims who observe the five compulsory prayers curse us seventeen times every day, reminding Allah why he wants to burn us

right wing anti-Muslim

    That is argumentum Ad Hominem, a meritricious personal attack designed to denigrate one's opponent and distract attention from the merits of his facts & logic.  In the old French Parliament, the regime and its supporters sat on the right side, the populists sat on the left.  When they shout "right wing", they are labeling us authoritarians or fascists.  The popular connotation is Nazi.  But the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was allied with Hitler and raised two divisions of SS from Muslims in Bosnia. 

    The meme:  we are against Muslims, we must be bigots. What we oppose is Islam: propagation & implementation of Allah's imperatives to genocidal conquest through terrorism.  This is not about Arabs or Asians, we have no problem with Christian Arabs or Asians.  This is about an ideology which is the polar opposite of ours and denies our dignity and rights because we do not embrace it.

true agenda of Islam

    That phrase was used derisively, to dismiss, a priori, without evidence, the fact that Islam is a system of global conquest. If any doubt lingers, read Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331with particular attention to items 1 & 5.

anti-Muslim bigotry

    That phrase is another example of argumentum Ad Hominem, which dismisses, without facts & logic, informed, principled opposition to being murdered, our widows raped and our orphans sold into slavery. The academics, clergy, media personalities & elected officials who spew Ad Hominem against us should read and comprehend Noble Qur'an 9:111, 120 & 123; if they did, those who have any conscience would feel great shame.

radical group

    They attack us because they can not contest the facts we present.  Because they can not refute our facts and logic, they seek to denigrate  us in hopes or discrediting our arguments. Intelligent and open minded people can see through that tactic. Exactly what is "radical" about SIOA, UAC & Act! For America?

creep of Shari'ah

    There have been 50 trial and appellate cases involving Shari'ah in American courts.    Shari'ah allows a Muslim to divorce his wife by repeating "I divorce you." three times. Shari'ah prohibits granting custody of a Muslim child to its Christian mother. A mother who remarries loses custody of her children. Christians are disqualified from giving testimony.

Mosque is being run out

    Exactly where has an existing Mosque been run out of a community?  Objections have been raised to the Mosque proposed for Ground Zero and construction has been opposed in other areas, with good reason. 

radical pastor is burning the Qur'an

    Exactly what is radical about Rev. Terry Jones?  He opposes an ideology which demands that he be slaughtered. Is there something wrong with that?  He held a four hour trial in which the Qur'an was convicted of inciting violence and subsequently burned.  Burning the American flag is protected free speech but burning a book which commands perpetual genocidal war against us is "bigotry", "hate speech" & "inciting violence".  Kindly kiss my big, deformed, ulcerated smelly foot, Congressman!

radical unhinged pastor

    Notice how the Congressman makes repeated use of argument against the man because he can not contest the facts.  Argumentum Ad Hominem is a constant theme in his screed.

Fortune 100 company

    There he goes again; a "radical unhinged pastor" has no credibility, but  a "Fortune 100 company" has plenty of credibility so its speech must be coerced.

endorsing this nonsense

    Pulling their advertisement does not prove the assertion that Lowe's opposes Islam.  It is probable that their primary motivation is financial, related to diminishing ROI as the show's audience shrank. 

nonsense

   Resistance to the invading and occupying fifth column of an existential enemy is not nonsense. Islam caused the untimely deaths of 270*106 people  over the last 1388 years. As recently as ten years ago it murdered 3000 on our soil.  Arrogant dismissal of that  proximate & continuing threat is the real nonsense.

strong views = bigoted

    Bigots are uninformed and closed minded. Opponents of Islam are informed by Islam's canon of scripture, tradition, exegesis & jurisprudence and by information shared by scholars who have studied those sources. The real bigots are those who accuse us of bigotry.

acquiesce

    Terrible bigotry it is to acquiesce to customer complaints over advertising on a tv show which covers the enemy fifth column with the false mantle of religion, but how sensible & righteous to acquiesce to an arrogant demand letter from a Congressman.  Does anyone else recognize hypocrisy when they see it? Did these Congressmen send demand letters in opposition to Muslim boycotts of advertisers on Mike Savage & Rush Limbaugh's radio shows?  If not, they should sit down and shut up.

what debate

    The debate about Islam: "great religion of peace" or genocidal crime syndicate disguised as a religion.  Six years ago, a "Soldier of Allah", holding the rank of Major in the U.S. Army, shot and killed 13 soldiers as an act of worship in Allah's name.  Political Correctness labels his act as "workplace violence".  Kindly take PC to Hell with you.

fringe sect of radical Islamists

       Are these the words of fringe radicals:

  • 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.
  • O9.9

    The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim (O: because they are not a people with a Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax (jizya) ) (n: though according to the Hanafi school, peoples of all other religions, even idol worshippers, are permitted to live under the protection of the Islamic state if they either become Muslim or agree to pay the poll tax, the sole exceptions to which are apostates from Islam and idol worshippers who are Arabs, neither of whom has any choice but becoming Muslim (al-Hidaya sharh Bidaya al-mubtadi' (y21), 6.48-49) ).

  • 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.
  • O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad

    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),...

  • 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.

  • 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 . 
  • 9:120. It was not becoming of the people of Al-Madinah and the bedouins of the neighbourhood to remain behind Allâh's Messenger (Muhammad  when fighting in Allâh'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 Allâh, 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, Allâh wastes not the reward of the Muhsinûn
  • 9:123. O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the Al-Muttaqûn (the pious - see V.2:2). 
  • 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." 

Is Allah, the deity of Islam, a "fringe radical"?  Is Moe, who founded and exemplified Islam, a "fringe radical"?  Explain to me, with valid, verifiable facts, that what Allah said and Moe did ain't normative Islam.  Explain to me exactly how the genocidal conquest of India was anything but normative Islam.  Explain to me how the conquest of Arabia, Syria, South East Europe and North Africa was anything other than normative Islam.  Explain to me how the Assyrian & Armenian genocides were anything other than normative Islam.  Explain to me how the attacks on New York City, London, Madrid, Beslan & Mumbai were anything other than normative Islam.  And prove it!!!

    Damned fools and liars will assert "mis-translation", "mis-interpretation" & "cherry picking"~"out of context".  Save your voice. Parallel translations, an Arab/English dictionary and scholarly exegesis expose your malignant malarkey. 

To all of which, the arrogant anal orifices will respond, chanting in unison: "That's all Sunni, inauthentic; we don't believe in it.". Ok, try Al-Mizan, a Shi'ia Tafsir. The translation of Surah Al-Anfal & At-taubah is not available, but 2:190 nicely covers the same territory.

Although Reliance of the Traveller is Shafi'ite, it is most widely accepted as authentic Islamic Law. let the doubters & dissenters resort to the Maliki & Hanifi fiqh.

But, of course, Moe was kind and gentle, the best and greatest of men; a perfect role model for emulation. If you are stupid enough to believe that, reading his biography probably won't help, but I'll link it anyway.

    For permanent reference and easier reading, go to Amazon and buy a hard copy, they have the books except the Maliki  Risala.  Note that the Hedaya is Volume II, Volume 1 lacks the information on jihad.

http://www.florida-family.org/take_action_form.php?message=51
Here is the message Florida Family wants supporters to send to advertisers.

All-American Muslim is propaganda. Please do not support it with advertising.

The Learning Channel's new show All-American Muslim is propaganda clearly designed to counter legitimate and present-day concerns about many Muslims who are advancing Islamic fundamentalism and Sharia law.

The show profiles only Muslims that appear to be ordinary folks while excluding many Islamic believers whose agenda poses a clear and present danger to the liberties and traditional values that the majority of Americans cherish.

One of the most troubling scenes occurred at the introduction of the program when a Muslim police officer stated "I really am American.  No ifs and or buts about it."  This scene would appear to be damage control for the Dearborn Police who have arrested numerous Christians including several former Muslims for peacefully preaching Christianity.

Many situations were profiled in the show from a Muslim tolerant perspective while avoiding the perspective that would have created Muslim conflict thereby contradicting The Learning Channel’s agenda to inaccurately portray Muslims in America.

Clearly this program is attempting to manipulate Americans into ignoring the threat of jihad and to influence them to believe that being concerned about the jihad threat would somehow victimize these nice people in this show.

I encourage you to stop supporting this show with your advertising dollars.

Is the show propaganda designed to improve Islam's image?  What other purpose could it have?  Are there reality shows about Amish and Mormons? Why not?  What is so interesting about the lives of  ordinary Muslims that we should want to look through their living room windows?

    Would the show be less objectionable if it also portrayed members of Revolution Muslim, showing them preaching hate and violence on the sidewalks of New York?  Have any segments been taped showing RM or other "radicals"?  Are there any segments on American Muslims parading photographs of Khomeini?  If not, why not?

    For the other side's POV, with some hyperbole, more quotes & links and css that makes it difficult to read, visit The American Muslim:  http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/all-american-muslim.

    Murphy's screed is an archetype of Hillary Clinton's implementation of HRC 16/18: combating "defamation of Islam" * "negative stereotyping", "hate speech" & "incitement to violence"  by denouncing anyone who criticizes Islam. Contradiction is the best counter to lies, but against relevant, verifiable facts and clear logic, it needs more than argumentum Ad Hominem, which is all Murphy has to offer.

    I urge and exhort all lovers of liberty and freedom of expression to join in demanding an immediate and permanent halt to implementation of the Istanbul Process. Sign this petition to send emails to your Representative & Senators. Please share and promote the petition as widely as possible.