Take Our Country Back

Bare Naked Islam Is Back!!

2012-01-27T06:07:00.001-06:00

Bare Naked Islam, the video rich blog about current events related to Islam, taken down by Word Press after badgering by CAIR, is back, on its own, previously registered domain.

At present, there is a redirect from the old WordPress domain, but that might not last forever, so visitors should go to http://www.barenakedislam.com/
bookmark it and sign up for email notification of new posts.

Tyrants & dictators have long sought to squelch critics; the Stamp Act and attempts to limit access to printing presses played a role in causing the ar of Revolution which resulted in American independence.

George Washington said something of vital importance about free speech, we must ever bear his wise words in mind.

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."
"[http://www.georgewashingtonsociety.org/Mission.html]

When attackers threaten, we must be free to identify & accurately describe the source of the threat and warn our fellows to fend off approaching danger. Islam arrogantly demands that the alarm be silenced so as to facilitate conquest. Moe set the pattern, by commissioning the murder of poets & singers who criticized and mocked him.

Bare Naked Islam, which had more than 100,000 page views per month at WordPress, is one of the premier watchdogs, loudly sounding the alarm. It will not be silenced.

Pamela Geller Reams Them a New Orifice

2012-01-25T03:31:00.001-06:00

Pamela Geller Reams Them a New Orifice. Pamela Geller is fast, frustrated & furious in this 40 minute video she reams indolent society a badly needed new orifice. She has much more than she can say in such a short time, but she gives us a very good outline, drawing her points together to form a circle which encompasses the globe full of issues.

Its war, and you are an army of one. Pamela is your General. She gives you your orders: learn and teach others. If you do nothing more, at least watch this video and share it with everyone who will listen. Thanks and a tip of the hat to Front Page Magazine
http://frontpagemag.com/2011/09/23/pamela-geller-wednesday-morning-club/

Reading the Qur'an is not easy because it is archaic, redundant and jumbled, lacking context & chronology. The Noble Qur'an, translated by Hilali & Khan, is reputed to be 95% accurate and contains parenthetical expressions from tafsirs and the translator's footnotes. Several Surahs are essential to understanding the malignantly militant nature of Islam: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 33, 47, 48, 49 & 61. You can select them from a pick list at the top of the page.

Hadith are sayings of Muhammad, passed down from mouth to ear by his companions. They have been collected by several scholars, the most widely accepted collection being that of Bukhari. Like the Qur'an, hadith collections suffer from redundancy. Begin with Books 52, 53 & 59, then read the others if you have sufficient patience.

Tafsir are scholarly explanations of the Qur'an. They use parallel verses and relevant ahadith to clarify the verses. Tafsir Ibn Kathir is fairly complete and easily accessible. You can select the Surahs listed above and read them instead of the Qur'an & hadith to save time and effort.

Islamic biography and history are also important, but less easily accessible than the Qur'an, hadith and tafsir. Craig Winn compiled selections of the canon into a 1000 page book with the quotes compiled into handy appendices "The Prophet of Doom".

For those lacking the time, patience and ambition to tackle the large tomes, there is a short book which encapsulates the most essential information: Suhas Majumdar's "Jihad: The Islamic Doctrine of Permanent War".

Pamela Geller raises the issue of Shari'ah: Islamic law based on the Qur'an & hadith. Much of it is arcane, dealing with matters of prayer & ritual purity. The really important parts deal with "justice", marriage & divorce. It will be easier for you go go to Amazon and buy a hard copy of Reliance of the Traveller. If you can tolerate a low resolution scan and large, pdf, this link will get you into Chapter 9 of Book O; "Justice".You can scroll up to Books N & M.

If you delve deeply into Reliance, you will discover that divorce is affected by the husband's thrice repeating "I divorce you". You will discover that a father can force his virgin, pre-pubescent daughter to marry the man of his choice. You will learn that a Christian woman married to a Muslim can not obtain child custody in divorce.

worship same God,promote justice & equality,faiths equal,

2012-01-22T00:20:00.001-06:00

CAIR vs. Santorum and Gingrich: More Islamic Lies CAIR published a press release objecting to remarks by Rick Santorum in which he asserted that Islam is not the source of the concept of equality. I have selected some representative quotes and will disprove CAIR's lies with citations to the Qur'an, hadith & Shari'ah.

"The Quran, Islam's revealed text, is the best refutation of Mr. Santorum's inaccurate and offensive remarks, which are unbecoming of anyone who hopes to hold our nation's highest office. Christians, Jews and Muslims all worship the same God and share religious traditions that promote justice and equality.

worship the same God

Do Christians and Jews worship Satan, the deceiver?

Ahmed Ali

3:54

And they cheated/deceived and God cheated/deceived, and God (is) the best (of) the cheaters/deceivers.

Miim-Kaf-Ra = To practice deceit or guile or circumvention, practice evasion or elusion, to plot, to excercise art or craft or cunning, act with policy, practice strategem.

makara vb. (1)
perf. act. 3:54, 3:54, 7:123, 13:42, 14:46, 16:26, 16:45, 27:50, 40:45, 71:22
impf. act. 6:123, 6:123, 6:124, 8:30, 8:30, 8:30, 10:21, 12:102, 16:127, 27:70, 35:10
n.vb. 7:99, 7:99, 7:123, 10:21, 10:21, 12:31, 13:33, 13:42, 14:46, 14:46, 14:46, 27:50, 27:50, 27:51, 34:33, 35:10, 35:43, 35:43, 71:22
pcple. act. 3:54, 8:30

LL, V7, p: 256

source: http://www.studyquran.co.uk/14_MIIM.htm

Ahmed Ali

8:30

And when those who disbelieved deceive/scheme at you to affix/affirm you, or kill you, or bring you out, and they scheme/deceive , and God deceives/schemes and God (is) best (of) the deceivers/schemers .

Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar

4:142

Truly, the ones who are hypocrites seek to trick God. And He is The One Who Deceives them, and when they stood up for formal prayer, they stood up lazily to make display to humanity. And they remember not God but a little,

Hamid S. Aziz

4:142

Verily, the hypocrites seek to deceive Allah, but He deceives them; and when they rise up to pray, they rise up lazily to be seen of men, and little do they remember Allah;

Muhammad Sarwar

4:142

The hypocrites try to deceive God but He, in fact, deceives them. They stand up in prayer lazily just to show that they pray, but, in truth they remember God very little.

PRON – 3rd person masculine singular personal pronoun الواو حالية ضمير منفصل
(4:142:6) khādiʿuhum who deceives them.		N – nominative masculine active participle PRON – 3rd person masculine plural possessive pronoun اسم مرفوع و«هم» ضمير متصل في محل جر بالاضافة

Do Christians and Jews Worship a blood thirsty demon who appoints warlords as prophets and demands great slaughter as their price of admission to Paradise?

8:67. It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allâh desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.

promote justice and equality

"The Quran and the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) stress racial and gender equality.The Prophet said: 'All people are equal as the teeth of a comb.'

Allah's word declares that men are superior to women, whose testimony is valued as half that men and who inherit half as much as men.

4:32. And wish not for the things in which Allâh has made some of you to excel others. For men there is reward for what they have earned, (and likewise) for women there is reward for what they have earned, and ask Allâh of His Bounty. Surely, Allâh is Ever AllKnower of everything.

2:282. [...] And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence).

4:11. Allâh commands you as regards your children's (inheritance); to the male, a portion equal to that of two females; if (there are) only daughters, two or more, their share is two thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is half. [...]

"The Prophet once told a companion: 'You are not better than people (of other races) unless you excel them in piety.' (Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 1361)

excel them in piety

How might Muslims excel us in piety? Allah conceals, Moe reveals, look beneath the surface of the text! Muslims excel us in piety by attacking and enslaving us.

3:110. You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh - and rebellious against Allâh's Command).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 80:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Verse:--"You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind." means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.

CAIR Reminds Gingrich That All Faiths are Equal in America http://tinyurl.com/7rvpa2e

All Faiths are Equal

Religious liberty is one of the fundamental ideas of America, but not of Islam. The Qur'an treats Christians and Jews rather harshly, criticizing, cursing and declaring war against them.

1:7. The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).

2:159. Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidences and the guidance, which We have sent down, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allâh and cursed by the cursers.

2:160. Except those who repent and do righteous deeds, and openly declare (the truth which they concealed). These, I will accept their repentance. And I am the One Who accepts repentance, the Most Merciful.

2:161. Verily, those who disbelieve, and die while they are disbelievers, it is they on whom is the Curse of Allâh and of the angels and of mankind, combined.

9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Where Allah's writ runs, Christians and Jews are subject to draconian restrictions under Shari'ah. The following quote is from Reliance of the Traveller.

O11.5

Such non-Muslim subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. In addition, they:

-1- are penalized for committing adultery or theft, though not for drunkenness;

-2- are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar);

-3- are not greeted with "as-Salamu 'alaykum";

-4- must keep to the side of the street;

-5- may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims' buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;

-6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;

-7- and are forbidden to build new churches.

Newt Gingrich Misses the Mark on Islam & Shari'ah

2012-01-19T01:28:00.001-06:00

Newt Gingrich Misses the Mark on Islam & Shari'ah News Gingrich swerves dangerously close to the truth, but veers away at the last moment. Thanks and a tip of the hat to Pulp Ark, who posted a link on Facebook. I viewed the video and read the accompanying article at Huffington Post.

The amateur transcript which follows will not be perfect, but should be close enough. I have highlighted some major points which I will consider below.

Q: Now you mentioned that the founding fathers have said that we are all created equal as men and also you have unquestionable support for Israel, obviously. My question is on foreign policy--you've mentioned through the campaign theat the Palestinian people were invented people. What do you suggest should happen to them, should they become Israeli citizens, or should they just... what do you suggest should happen to them?

The other question is: I know this is South Carolina, I am from South Carolina, but ...is 60% Evangelical Christians and with a strong support for Israel, but also my question is, you know, the governor of the state is, you know, of Indian heritage, her parents came from India, and we have a Catholic running for President, a Mormon running for President; would you, as Newt Gingrich support a Muslim American running for President, would you endorse, at one point in the future, in American history, that a Muslim American could possibly be running for President given that we had a woman running for President in Hillary Cl8inton and we had a Jewish American in Joe Lieberman running for Vice President, thank you very much?

A: I think it would depend entirely on whether they would commit in public to give up Shari'ah. I am totally opposed to Shari'ah law, being accepted by any court in the United States, in fact I favor a federal law that preempts it and says Shari'ah law will not be used in any court in the United States and this is a very fundamental question. I mean, people who are truly moderate ...we have a friend in Arizona who served in the U.S. Navy, who is a medical doctor, who is Muslim but he is a totally modern person trying to find ways to bring Islam into modernity.

When you realize it was said last night that a rising Islamization of Turkey has been accompanied by a 1400% increase in women being killed; when you look at the actual implementation of Shari'ah in places like Iran, when you look at churches being burned in Nigeria and in Egypt...the decline of Christians in Iraq from 1,200,000 when Americans arrived to about 500,000 today; It depends entirely on the person: If they are a modern person integrated into the modern world, and they are prepared to recognize all religions, that's one thing, on the other hand, if they are the Saudis, who demand that we respect them while they refuse to allow either a Jew or a Christian to worship in Saudi Arabia, that's something different. and I think we need a President who stands up, tells the truth and rejects any kind of effort to impose on us a sense of guilt because we believe in our religion and we're prepared to tell the truth and I am totally opposed to the State Department meeting a week ago with the Organization of Islamic Countries who are seeking to censor any comment about Islam because I think it is a fundamental violation of our right of free speech as Americans. But within that framework, a truly modern person who happened to worship Allah would not be a threat. A person who belonged to any kind of belief in Shari'ah, any kind of effort to impose that on the rest of us, would be a mortal threat.

Now, the Palestinian question is a good one. I think if HAMAS and the PLO would recognize Israel's right to exist, and if they meant it; if they would hunt down and stop the terrorists and the bombings, I would favor peace with the Palestinians; I would favor an independent state, I would an ability of them to become prosperous and live in safety and have the right of property rights. But, in Novemeber, eleven missiles were fired into Israel; that's not a peace process, that's war, and I think this idea... and HAMAS's official position is the extinction of Israel...we don't have negotiations with somebody who says lets sit down and negotiate while I figure out how to wipe you out. and I think that we have tolerated for too long terrorist activities disguised as diplomatic behavior, and i think the Palestinian people should throw out the folks .who want to destroy Israel and should say "Ok, we accept Israel's right to exist, if Israel will accept our right to be prosperous, have the rule ... of our property... and candidly, that means giving up the 'right of return', and the reason I talk about it that way is no natural right of return. Greeks have no right to return to Turkey, East Germans have no right to return to Poland, Poles have no right to return to Russia, and we;ve had all sorts of changes in territorial boundaries in the last 200 years, and the only place where it's propped up is against the state of Israel and the purpose of propping it up is to destroy Israel and we are to say 'fine, that's over; there is no right of return, now lets negotiate the future. '.

give up Shari'ah

Including that phrase in a conditional clause is either a token of irony or ignorance. I am not sure which applies in this case. Abandonment of Shari'ah is an act of apostasy, one of twenty such acts listed in Reliance of the Traveller, Book O8.7.

-14- to deny the obligatory character of something which by the consensus of Muslims (ijma`, def: B7) is part of Islam, when it is well known as such, like the prayer (salat) or even one rak'a from one of the five obligatory prayers, if there is no excuse (def: u2.4);

-19- to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law;

Allah's permissions, prohibitions 7 imperatives, expressed in the Qur'an, are the primary source of Shari'ah.

Only Allah has the right to rule

5:44. [...] And whosoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed, such are the Kâfirûn (i.e. disbelievers - of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allâh's Laws ).

5:49. And so judge (you O Muhammad ) between them by what Allâh has revealed and follow not their vain desires, [...]

22:41. Those (Muslim rulers) who, if We give them power in the land, (they) order for Iqamat-as-Salât. [i.e. to perform the five compulsory congregational Salât (prayers) (the males in mosques)], to pay the Zakât and they enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm orders one to do), and forbid Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism and all that Islâm has forbidden) [i.e. they make the Qur'ân as the law of their country in all the spheres of life]. And with Allâh rests the end of (all) matters (of creatures).

33:36. It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.

truly moderate

That phrase defines a hypocrite [47:20], not a believer. Believers are only those who engage in jihad, killing others and being killed fighting in Allah's cause [9:111].
Newt appears to imply that he would endorse the candidacy of Dr. Zuhdi Jasser if he seeks high office. I find Dr. Jasser to be an exemplar of cognitive dissonance because, while professing to be Muslim, he asserts that Islam can be modernized or reformed; that it is compatible with our Constitution & Republic, which it clearly is not. You will not catch me knowingly voting for a Muslim, including Dr. Jasser!

bring Islam into modernity

Dr. Jasser might as well try to fly by jumping off his roof and flapping his arms like wings. Islam is perfected and immutable.

5:3. [...]This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islâm as your religion. [...]

6:115. And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can change His Words. And He is the AllHearer, the AllKnower.

10.64. [...] No change can there be in the Words of Allâh, this is indeed the supreme success.

18:27. [...] None can change His Words, and none will you find as a refuge other than Him.

30:30. [...] No change let there be in Khalqillâh (i.e. the Religion of Allâh Islâmic Monotheism), that is the straight religion, but most of men know not. [Tafsir AtTabarî, Vol 21, Page 41]

Sahih Bukhari 8.76.585 [...] 'I will say: They are of me (i.e. my followers). It will be said, 'You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you left'. I will say, 'Far removed, far removed (from mercy), those who changed (their religion) after me." Abu Huraira narrated that the Prophet said, "On the Day of Resurrection a group of companions will come to me, but will be driven away from the Lake-Fount, and I will say, 'O Lord (those are) my companions!' It will be said, 'You have no knowledge as to what they innovated after you left; they turned apostate as renegades (reverted from Islam)."

depends entirely on the person

Is the person a Muslim in name only, or is he a zealous Muslim concealing what he believes to avoid offending potential voters? In one of his books, President Obama said that the would "side with the Muslims" if things turned ugly. Who did he side with in the "Arab spring"? Who is he siding with on the issue of censoring critic8ism of Islam? Is he exemplifying his belief or is he practicing al-Taqiyya?

3:28. Let not the believers take the disbelievers as Auliyâ (supporters, helpers, etc.) instead of the believers, and whoever does that will never be helped by Allâh in any way, except if you indeed fear a danger from them. And Allâh warns you against Himself (His Punishment), and to Allâh is the final return.

The Prohibition of Supporting the Disbelievers
[...](unless you indeed fear a danger from them) meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' Al-Bukhari said that Al-Hasan said, "The Tuqyah is allowed until the Day of Resurrection.'' [...]

A Muslim's oath of office can not be trusted. 66:2 is in the context of marital disputes and 9:1 is in the context of breaking the hudna with Mecca to facilitate conquest. But the hadith collected by Muslim shows us that Muslims have a break your oath free card from Moe. This dispensation vitiates a Muslim's oath.

66:2. Allâh has already ordained for you (O men), the dissolution of your oaths. And Allâh is your Maula (Lord, or Master, or Protector, etc.) and He is the All-Knower, the All-Wise.

9:1. Freedom from (all) obligations (is declared) from Allâh and His Messenger () to those of the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh), with whom you made a treaty.

9:3. And a declaration from Allâh and His Messenger to mankind on the greatest day (the 10th of Dhul-Hijjah - the 12th month of Islâmic calendar) that Allâh is free from (all) obligations to the Mushrikûn (see V.2:105) and so is His Messenger. So if you (Mushrikûn) repent, it is better for you, but if you turn away, then know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allâh. And give tidings (O Muhammad ) of a painful torment to those who disbelieve.

9:4. Except those of the Mushrikûn with whom you have a treaty, and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor have supported anyone against you. So fulfill their treaty to them to the end of their term. Surely Allâh loves Al- Mattaqûn (the pious - see V.2:2).

Sahih Muslim Book 015, Number 4052:

Abu Huraira reported: A person sat late in the night with Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him), and then came to his family and found that his children had gone to sleep. His wife brought food for him. but he took an oath that he would not eat because of his children (having gone to sleep without food) He then gave precedence (of breaking the vow and then expiating it) and ate the food He then came to Allah s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and made mention of that to him, whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace he upon him) said: He who took an oath and (later on) found something better than that should do that, and expiate for (breaking) his vow.

recognize all religions

Islam is declared to be perfect, final & superior. Allah declares Jews & Christians to be the "worst of living creatures" Allah, his angels and Muslims curse Jews & Christians. The religion with Allah is Islam, and nothing else will be accepted. A Muslim who tolerates other religions is either ignorant, deceptive or an apostate.

a President who tells the truth

Yes, we need a truthful President. First, we must find truthful candidates who will acknowledge the fact that Islam is the existential & irreconcilable enemy, with whom negotiation is fruitless. It is Islam, not Wahhabism, 'radicalism' or 'extremism'. Islam's perpetual enmity and aggression are functions of the core doctrines of Islam, having nothing to do with nationality or sect.

modern Muslim

There is no moderate Islam. There is no modern Islam. Islam is what Moe preached and practiced 1400 years ago, not what you wish it to be. Islam is defined by the Qur'an, which is immutable because the text forbids editing and Moe's sunnah, which does not change because he is dead.

Shari'ah

If Allah or Moe said it or did it, it is Shari'ah. A Muslim who abjures Shari'ah signs his death warrant for believers to execute. Because Shari'ah is primarily derived from the Qur'an, it is impossible to abjure it without abjuring Islam.

mortal threat

If one is a Muslim believer, one is a mortal threat to every person who is not a Muslim. Exactly what part of Islam do you not comprehend?

8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.

9:111. Verily, Allâh has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allâh's Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. It is a promise in truth which is binding on Him in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur'ân. And who is truer to his covenant than Allâh? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is the supreme success .

if HAMAS would recognize Israel

If pigs grew wings they could fly. HAMAS is Islam. Allah promised Muslims that they would conquer the world, irreversibly. Allah's judgment is final, there is none to put it back, but Israel recovered some of her territory stolen by Muslims in 638 & 1948. That recovery of territory is the ultimate blasphemy; empirical proof of the fact that Allah is an impotent idol. If you expect Muslims to tolerate that, you need a brain transplant. It has not happened in 63 years, and it will never happen because it ain't possible.

throw out the folks

Brilliant idea, Newt, you found the solution! Expel the Muslims from Israel, including Judea & Samaria. But you must also push them back beyond rocket range.

Your Vote Could Narrow My Choices

2012-01-13T22:27:00.003-06:00

When South Carolina and Florida go to the polls, it is likely that candidates who trail in the polls will drop out of the race. The Iowa Caucuses already eliminated two of my choices.

If Rick Santorum is eliminated, I will have no choice but to hold my nose and vote for Gingrich Feb. 28. If Gingrich and Santorum are both eliminated, I may as well stay home because I absolutely will not vote for Huntsman, Perry or Romney.

In my opinion, the time has come to consider standardizing the Primaries, on a common day, giving citizens of every state equal opportunity to participate in the candidate selection process. It is time to put an end to the petty fussing over who votes first the rules are arcane and idiotic.

lets switch to a two stage ballot: let every voter make a first, second and third choice. If no candidate obtains a majority of the first choice ballots, add in the second, and if necessary, third choice votes until a majority is obtained. If there is no majority using all three ballots, let the convention system make the final choice the old fashioned way.

While we are at it, lets close the primaries, there is justification for allowing Democrats and Morons to interfere in the selection of the Republican nominee.

Your Vote Could Narrow My Choices

2012-01-13T22:27:00.001-06:00

When South Carolina and Florida go to the polls, it is likely that candidates who trail in the polls will drop out of the race. The Iowa Caucuses already eliminated two of my choices.

While we are at it, lets close the primaries, there is justification for allowing Democrats and Morons to interfere in the selection of the Republican nominee.

Urinating Marines: No Harm Done

2012-01-13T21:38:00.001-06:00

While urinating on the corpses of enemy combatants may technically violate the Geneva Accords, the enemy is not a signatory. The act also violated the letter and spirit of Marine Core regulations. The men involved should have been smart enough not to allow the act to be photographed. Maintenance of discipline may require punishment, but I agree with Rep. West; their punishment should be minimal.

Urinating on dead Taliban has no effect on 'peace talks' . Anyone who believes that talking with Muslims can result in peace needs to take care in passing gas & wiping to avoid brain damage. Nothing can make Muslims hate us more than they already do, either. Muslims hate us because we are not Muslims, no provocation is required.

The conflict with Islam is existential: it can only end in the extinction of one side or the other. Either Islam goes to Hell or Western Civilization goes, no other outcome is possible. Both the electorate and our Congressmen & President need to know the fatal facts of Islam.

Allah commands Muslims to wage war against disbelievers. The jihad imperatives are expressed as fight ... until loops.

8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.
9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."
- 33:21. Indeed in the Messenger of Allâh (Muhammad ) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allâh and the Last Day and remembers Allâh much.
Sunan Abu Dawud Book 14, Number 2526

Narrated Anas ibn Malik:
The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist). The tyranny of any tyrant and the justice of any just (ruler) will not invalidate it. One must have faith in Divine decree.

Is there some part of 'fight them until', 'fight those who until', 'ordered to fight' and 'performed continuously' that they do not comprehend? The j8ihad imperatives are codified in Shari'ah, best exemplified in Reliance of the Traveller, Book O9.8: "The caliph makes war" & "The caliph fights". From Hedaya, we learn that "War must be carried on against the Infidels, at all times, by some party of the Muslims." and is undertaken offensively, on Islam's initiative, not defensively: "The destruction of the sword is incurred by infidels, although they be not the first aggressors, as appears from various passages in the sacred writings which are generally received this effect."

From the Islamic perspective, peace is the result of conquest. There can be no peace until the entire world is conquered. Islam does not negotiate peace, it negotiates hudna, for a maximum term of ten years or until it is able to resume attacks, whichever comes first. Why did we fight two Barbary Wars?

47:35. So be not weak and ask not for peace (from the enemies of Islâm), while you are having the upper hand. Allâh is with you, and will never decrease the reward of your good deeds.

Human Rights First: Wrong about Abigail Esman's Assessment of HRC 16/18

2012-01-11T23:58:00.001-06:00

http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/2012/01/10/abigail-esman-gets-it-wrong-on-free-speech/

Having presented a link to the article, I will post only a few paragraphs that bear directly on the issue. Links in the quotes are original, the highlighting is mine.

In the first paragraph, the author suggests that “incitement to imminent violence” – an act that the resolution recommends be criminalized – could mean anything. This is a harmful misconception that serves as a crux of the opposition to this resolution.

The author doesn’t directly dispute a quote from a recent Human Rights First blog on Myth vs. Reality on US Engagement with Islamic States that “the only limitation on speech that is in the operative part of the resolution is incitement to ‘imminent violence,’ which is in accordance with US law.” Yet at the same time the author states that opponents of the resolution “rightly find [this measure] distressing.” How could one be distressed by a provision that recommends the criminalization of only those instances of incitement that are considered criminal under the U.S. Constitution, the highest standard of free speech in the world?

As the UN documents are fond of saying, read "inter alia". HRC RES 16/18 is based on UN standards, not Constitutional standards. "Incitement to imminent violence" means what they want it to mean, not what we want it to mean. Islam practices Orwellian double speak.

Through her examples, the author seems to indicate that speech could be considered “incitement to imminent violence” simply because an individual or group of individuals react violently to it. This is an incorrect understanding of the legal concept of “incitement” as it is used in U.S. law, the standard on which this part of the resolution was based.

Where in the resolution does it explicitly define the meaning of incitement? Nowhere!! The definition is found elsewhere, in the expressions of the Secretary General of the OIC and the Secretary General of the United Nations.

http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/G11/127/27/PDF/G1112727.pdf?OpenElement

2. Expresses its concern that incidents of religious intolerance, discrimination
and related violence, as well as of negative stereotyping of individuals on the basis of
religion or belief, continue to rise around the world, and condemns, in this context, any
advocacy of religious hatred against individuals that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence, and urges States to take effective measures, as set forth
in the present resolution, consistent with their obligations under international human rights
law, to address and combat such incidents;

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

5. Notes the speech given by Secretary-General of the Organization of the
Islamic Conference at the fifteenth session of the Human Rights Council, and draws on his
call on States to take the following actions to foster a domestic environment of religious
tolerance, peace and respect, by:

(f) Adopting measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on
religion or belief; [http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/8864sggenevaoic.pdf#page=3]

In the first page of Ishanoglu's address to the HRC, we discover something important: his definition of incitement to violence includes announcing intent to burn the Koran.

The new session of Council is also coincident with regrettable events that are deliberately meant to defame religions as well incite hatred, xenophobia, discrimination and violence against religions, in particular, Islam. The increasing incidents of violence and discrimination on the basis of religion must not be ignored. We hope that this and other related issues remain an important priority in the work of the Council.

The most recent and unfortunate in the series of such events was the announcement pertaining to Burn a Koran Day.

On the next page, Ishanoglu lists campaigns that incite hatred, including Burn a Koran Day, and informs us that they threaten global peace & security. In the short form: they incite violence.

In this regard all xenophobic campaigns of fear mongering and discriminatory
measures - both in policy md practice - which restrict, prohibit or discriminate against of any
religion such as ban on the construction of minarets, organization of events that incite hatred
like Burn a Koran Day, and other discriminatory measures must be strongly condemned by
the international community. A recurrence of such events substantiate OIC's call for a
normative approach to deal with this menace that continues to pose a clear 'and present danger
to peace, security 'and stability in the regional as well as the global context.

Lets clarify the issue of "clear and present danger to peace"; in essence: violence, by breaking down the conjunctive clause.

Incitement to violence:
- fear mongering
- discriminatory
- ban minarets
- incite hatred
- Burn a koran Day
other discriminatory measures

Now that it is clear that discrimination is equated with incitement, lets zero in on that last clause: other discriminatory measures: what, exactly, does this category include? To find out, we turn to the most recent annual Islamophobia Report.

http://www.oic-oci.org/uploads/file/Islamphobia/2011/en/islamphobia_rep_May_2010_to_April_2011_en.pdf#page=6

Other instances of Islamophobia in the US recorded in the report include the agenda of the Tea
Party Movement, which openly advocated hatred against Muslims, the proposed “ban on Sharia”
which succeeded within the State of Oklahoma, and the congressional hearings on the
“radicalization of the American Muslim Community” initiated by Rep. Peter King, Chairman of
the US House Committee on Homeland Security. The hearings launched a debate built on
prejudiced and biased premises that Muslims were potential terrorists who, in his opinion,
ostensibly refused to cooperate with the Nation’s “war on terror”. Such a debate, regardless of
the outcome, would contribute to a climate of fear and distrust towards the Muslim community.

http://www.oic-oci.org/uploads/file/Islamphobia/2011/en/islamphobia_rep_May_2010_to_April_2011_en.pdf#page=10

The United States of America – a country long admired for its embracement of diversity –
recorded the highest intensity of hostility and prejudice towards Muslims during the period
under review. The infamous “Burn A Quran Day” by a hitherto non-entity Florida Pastor Terry
Jones and his subsequent actions at hate mongering, the Congressional hearings by the
Chairman of the US House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security on the
“radicalization of American Muslims” in Washington DC on March 11, 2011 and his statement
that “We (the US) are under siege by Muslim terrorists”1 along with other anti Muslim events,
were ominous signs of Islamophobia taking roots in the USA. The fact that such incidents cast a
shadow on the US image of tolerance frustrating the optimism generated, throughout the Muslim
world, by President Obama’s speech in Cairo in June 2009, may not be discounted.

Tea Party Platform
Qur'an burning
Radicalization Hearings

Lets gild the lilly by bringing in two more important sources which confirm the obvious, from the initial meeting of the Istanbul Process .

OIC Journal June-August '11
http://issuu.com/oic-journal/docs/journal_issue18_english?mode=window&pageNumber=7
Ambassador Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe, US Representative to the Human Rights Council,

In response to OIC Journal query on defining what would
constitute incitement to hate, she clarified that in the US there
is a single case where freedom of expression can be restricted
or prohibited by the State, and that is when “incitement to
eminent violence”.

In this context, she pointed out that the President, the
Secretary of State and several public officials went out on a
limb to publically condemn ‘Burn the Quran Day’ to show
that such abominable acts are not accepted. “When you have
the President, the Secretary of State and public figures jointly
condemning that, it will be more effective than throwing
that pastor in jail. I believe the same is true for the hateful
cartoons (of the Prophet). We should all be joining together
in conveying our disgust with such intolerance.”

Ambassador Zamir Akram, Permanent Representative
of Pakistan on behalf of the OIC at the HRC, told the OIC
Journal that both sides – the OIC countries and the western
countries – made important concessions to each other to
reach a compromise on the resolution. What is important for
the OIC point of view is that it would not compromise on
three things: anything against the Quran, anything against the
Prophet (PBUH), and anything against Muslim community
in terms of discrimination.

According to our HRC Ambassador, Burn the Qur'an Day was abominable intolerance. According to Pakistan's Ambassador, the OIC will not compromise on anything against the Qur'an or Moe.

Now it is time to go right to the top, to obtain the working definition of incitement to violence from the Secretary General of the United Nations.

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:"There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence," Ban said in a statement. "The right of free expression is not at stake here."

According to Ban, the short documentary by Geert Wilders, combining verses from the Qur'an & hadith with sermons from Friday prayers and images of the ensuing violence, is incitement to violence. In reality, Fitna exposes incitement, it does not constitute incitement. Having examined the operative definition of incitement, lets take a look at the Islamic law behind the whole operation.

What Moe preached is law, what he practiced is exemplary, together, his preaching and practice form the basis of Islamic law. Moe had critics murdered. Because of that exemplary conduct, the penalty for criticizing Islam is death.

08.1 When a person who has reached puberty
and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he
deserves to be killed.
08.7 (0: Among the things that entail apostasy
from Islam (may Allah protect us from them) are:
- (4) to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah
  bless him and give him peace);
- (5) to deny the existence of Allah, His beginningless
  eternality, His endless eternaIity, or to
  deny any of His attributes which the consensus of
  Muslims ascribes to Him (dis: vI);
- (6) to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His
  command, His interdiction, His promise, or His
  threat;
- (7) to deny any verse of the Koran or anything
  which by scholarly consensus (def: b7)
  belong
- (15) to hold that any of Allah's messengers
  or prophets are liars, or to deny their bcing sent;
  (n: 'Ala' ai-Din 'Abidin adds the following:
- (16) to revile the religion of Islam;
  (17) to believe that things in themselves or
  by their own nature have any causal influence
  independent of the will of Allah;
- (18) to deny the existence of angels or jinn
  (def: w22), or the heavens;
- (19) to be sarcastic about any ruling of the
  Sacred Law;
  (20) or to deny that Allah intended the
  Prophet's message (Allah bless him and give him
  peace) to be the religion followed by the entire
  world (dis: w4.3--4) (al-Hadiyya al-'Ala'iyya (y4),
  423-24).)

011. IO The agreement is also violated (A: with
respect to the offender alone) if the state has stipulated
that any of the following things break it, and
one of the suhjects does so anyway. though if the
state has not stipulated that these break the agreement,
then they do not; namely, if one of the subject
people:
- (5) or mentions something impermissible
  about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and
  give him peace), or Islam.
011.11 When a subject's agreement with the state
has been viOlated, the caliph chooses between the
four alternatives mentioned above in connection
with prisoners of war (09.14).
O9.14 When an adult male is taken captive, the
caliph (def: 025) considers the interests (0: of
Islam and the Muslims) and decides between the
prisoner's death, slavery, release without paying
anything, or ransoming himself in exchange for
money or for a Muslim captive held by the enemy.
If the prisoner becomes a Muslim (0: before
the caliph chooses any of the four alternatives)
then he may not be killed, and one of the other
three alternatives is chosen.

The OIC seeks to prevent & punish every negative utterance about Islam. Their current tactic is to conflate criticism with incitement, proscribing the latter.
The fourth Islamophobia Report hints at the next step.

http://www.oic-oci.org/uploads/file/Islamphobia/2011/en/islamphobia_rep_May_2010_to_April_2011_en.pdf#page=16

The restraint was short lived and on 20 March 2011 the controversial Florida Pastor Terry
Jones oversaw24 the burning of a copy of the Koran, carried out by Pastor Wayne Sapp, in his
small church. The incident was presented as a trial of the book in which the Koran was found
“guilty” and “executed”. The event was open to the public. Fewer than 30 people attended but
widespread media coverage attracted by the event somewhat served the nefarious designs and
the extremist philosophy behind the outrageous act.

After the unfortunate incident, the OIC Secretary General issued a statement expressing his deep
disappointment, and warned against unforeseen and volatile consequences of such outrageous
and irresponsible acts that could hurt the deep seated religious sentiments of over 1.5 billion
Muslims around the world. He characterized the unfortunate incident as “the worst example of
extremism” that the international community had been consistent in condemning.

http://www.oic-oci.org/uploads/file/Islamphobia/2011/en/islamphobia_rep_May_2010_to_April_2011_en.pdf#page=36

Approaches like applying the ‘test of consequences’ were useful and would have to be
explored/refined further in an objective fashion towards evolving a consensus with
regard to effectively addressing the matter; and

 As regards the issue of freedom of opinion and expression, the OIC could with the views
of Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and expression with regard to making “very
few exceptions” but the contours of such exceptions would have to be identified. OIC
believed that unfortunate and outrageous episodes like the caricatures and the burning of
holy Quran merited the grant of such exceptions;

For those too stupid or indolent to connect the dots: if the resolution had been implemented a year ago, Pastors Jones & Sapp would be persecuted criminally & sued civil court for the "consequences" of their trial and execution of the Qur'an. Holding them responsible for the acts of a Muslim rabble roused by kutbah at Jumah Salat is not just, nor is it rational. Jones & Sapp did not incite anyone to violence. Asian Imams did.

It becomes obvious that the plan is to compel self-censorship through legal intimidation. It is equally obvious that Human Rights first is so heavily invested in the Istanbul Process that they are blinded to objective factual reality.

Open Letter To Rick Santorum

2012-01-08T23:23:00.001-06:00

Open Letter To Rick Santorum Dear Mr. Santorum,

Your answer to a question about national security issues involving Afghanistan exposes a vital element of truth on the surface, while an unpleasant stream of hypocrisy flows beneath the surface.

Thanks and a tip of the hat to Paul Hoffman, whose Facebook post brought to my attention Robert Spencer's post, where I found this video clip.

How long do you want to wait? Until the security of our country is ensured, that's what the job of the commander of chief is and you make that decision, not the generals--you make that decision based on an analysis of how virulent the threat of radical Islam is and you confront that threat not just militarily, and importantly, not just militarily, you confront it first by being honest with the American public about what this threat is.

This President has sanitized every defense document, everything, the word radical Islam does not appear anywhere , why? because we are fighting political correct -- we are trying to fight this politically correct war and not being honest with the American public as to who the enemy is, how virulently they are and why they hate us and what we must do to stop...

how long ?

The question of the duration of our occupation of Afghanistan can not be answered with a clock, calendar or time table.

strategic objectives

national security

If the strategic objective is to permanently end Afghanistan's membership in the set of state sponsors of terrorism and prevent Afghanistan from being used as a training ground and staging area for terrorists, then the eradication of Islam from Afghanistan is the criteria for ending the occupation. We bring the troops home when the population of Afghanistan and their government are totally free from the influence of the damnable doctrines of Islam which inculcate hatred and enjoin genocidal conquest which is won by casting terror.

In that case, you remove our troops from Afghanistan when its population is either apostatized or converted and its government is able and willing to secure its borders against infiltration from neighboring countries infested with Muslims.

free, democratic & secure

If the strategic objective is, as Shrub stated, a free, democratic, secure & prosperous Afghanistan with a stable government which respects human equality, dignity & rights, then cleansing Afghanistan from the infestation of Islam is insufficient. In this case, Afghanistan must be cleansed from its long tradition of tribalism and its honor/shame culture as well. Good luck with that; measure the occupation in millenia, not centuries.

how virulent

how infectious

Islam spread from Mecca & Medina to infect all of Arabia, North Africa, the Levant, nearly half of Asia and South East Europe in a few centuries. Infected persons now infest Western Europe and America and are spreading the infection through our prisons and inner cities.

how malignant

It is impossible to count with accuracy, the many innocent victims of Islam, but the best estimate runs to 270 million.

radical Islam

radical Englishmen

Were the founders fighting 'radical' Englishmen in the Revolution against King George or were they fighting his army?

radical Nazis

Was the greatest generation in combat against 'radical' Nazis ? Were those 'radicals' a tiny minority of Nazis? Was there a peaceful majority of Nazis who did not want to participate in world conquest?

radical Communism

Did millions die of starvation at the hands of Stalin, Mao & Pot because of an extraordinary, 'radical' variant of International Communism? Was the Cold War fought against 'radcal' Communism or the real thing?

radical Muslims

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to relive it. I quote from Wikipedia's entry on the First Barbary War: "On October 11, 1784, Moroccan pirates seized the brigantine Betsey.^[2] " ... "Algeria began piracy against the U.S. on July 25, 1785 with the capture of the schooner Maria and the Dauphin a week later.^[5]"

Where the Barbary Pirates 'radicals', 'perverting', 'distorting' and 'twisting' normative Islamic doctrine into a perverted form, or were they acting in obedience to Allah; emulating their Prophet? Thomas Jefferson and John Adams put the question to Tripoli's Ambassador in 1785. His reply is a clue for you.

It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once. ^[12]

Koran

Is that true? Is it really written in their Koran that they have a right and duty to plunder and enslave?

right & duty

2:216. Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.

Ordained means it is Allah's law. "fight ... until" makes the statements imperative. The Koran commands Muslims to wage perpetual war against disbelievers.

plunder

8:1. They ask you (O Muhammad ) about the spoils of war. Say: "The spoils are for Allâh and the Messenger." So fear Allâh and adjust all matters of difference among you, and obey Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad ), if you are believers.

8:41. And know that whatever of war-booty that you may gain, verily one-fifth (1/5th) of it is assigned to Allâh, and to the Messenger, and to the near relatives [of the Messenger (Muhammad )], (and also) the orphans, Al-Masâkin (the poor) and the wayfarer, if you have believed in Allâh and in that which We sent down to Our slave (Muhammad ) on the Day of criterion (between right and wrong), the Day when the two forces met (the battle of Badr) - And Allâh is Able to do all things.

33:26. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.

33:27. And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches, and a land which you had not trodden (before). And Allâh is Able to do all things.

48:19. And abundant spoils that they will capture. And Allâh is Ever All-Mighty, All-Wise.

Isn't that special: the Koran has rules for distribution of spoils, in anticipation of offensive warfare. Moe got the top 205, first pick of the spoils. And as a Prophet, Moe was not allowed to ransom prisoners until he had made great slaughter. We learned that Moe's motivation was mercenary and Allah's is blood lust.

Moe besieged a local Jewish settlement, overcame them with terrorism and seized their property, enslaving their widows & orphans. Allah promised the Muslims "abundant spoils".

Paradise

9:38. O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that when you are asked to march forth in the Cause of Allâh (i.e. Jihâd) you cling heavily to the earth? Are you pleased with the life of this world rather than the Hereafter? But little is the enjoyment of the life of this world as compared with the Hereafter.

9:39. If you march not forth, He will punish you with a painful torment and will replace you by another people, and you cannot harm Him at all, and Allâh is Able to do all things.

48:17. No blame or sin is there upon the blind, nor is there blame or sin upon the lame, nor is there blame or sin upon the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whosoever obeys Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad ), He will admit him to Gardens beneath which rivers flow (Paradise); and whosoever turns back, He will punish him with a painful torment.

61:10. O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment.

61:11. That you believe in Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know!

61:12. (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success.

If Muslims do not join the jihad, they will go to Hell; if the fight, they will go to There is a long and esoteric hadith about Umar's sending the army to fight the great nations, in which a Muslim General is quoted as explaining things to a Persian General in similar terms. Sahih Bukhari 4.53.386

Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."

"Its Islam, stupid!"

What Allah commanded and Moe exemplified is Islam, the real thing, not a distortion, twisting or perversion of Islam. There is no such thing as radical Islam. Islam is what Moe preached & practiced, not the anodyne, passive & benevolent religion you wish it would be.

not just militarily

Islam can not be defeated militarily short of wholesale extermination. If you are unable or unwilling to kill every Muslim on the face of the earth, then you must break their faith, you must induce mass apostasy.

expose Allah

Effectively combating Islam requires inducing mass apostasy by introducing the Ummah to the reality of Allah and his Messenger, their true character and works. You must effectively discredit Moe, and thereby descredit Allah. You must expose the fallacy of Allah's promises.

war of ideas

If you would win this war, list the ideas of Islam and the ideas of Western Civilization and prove our ideas to be superior to theirs, in intrinsic merit as well as empirical results.

honest about the threat

When you add adjectives or modifiers to the name of the enemy, you are not being honest. The enemy is Islam, not 'radical Islam'. In the long run, the threat is existential; Islam is Hellbent on global conquest. In the short run, the threat is continued and escalating attacks, large and small, against civilian targets. Once Iran obtains a nuke and couples it with a delivery system, our cities will be in grave danger.

politically correct

President Bush called Islam a "great religion of peace" because he knew that, if the public knew the truth, there would be a massive popular demand for the eradication of the enemy. President Obama repeats the same lie and declares that we are not at war against Islam because he is a traitor, one of them, not one of us.

sanitized

President Obama has removed all reference to the false meme which has been substituted for the name of the enemy because he is politically correct, not factually correct.

In order to win, we need to identify and truthfully describe the enemy, its intentions and capacity. The traitor in the White House has no desire to defeat the enemy because he is one of them, at the head of the enemy's fifth column. Removing all acknowledgment of the nexus between Islamic doctrine and terrorism is in compliance with the demands of Islam and the United Nations.

the enemy

Islam, as revealed & exemplified by Moe.

virulence

Islam demands that only Allah be worshiped, "alltogether and everywhere". Allah demands "great slaughter". The gates of Paradise will not swing open to Muslims until they exterminate the Jews.

why they hate us

Because we are not Muslims. Disbelief is a status offense, called Kufr: rebellion against Allah, the punishment for which is described in 5:33 and the definition of which is found in Tafsir Ibn Kathir.

what we must do

Either cause Muslims to quit believing in Allah, his threat & promise, breaking his yoke of slavery or cause them to quit living. That should be an easy choice.

I want you to:

Take your own advice, be honest about the identity of the enemy, its character, ability & intentions and what we must do to win this war and restore peace 7 security. First and foremost: quit adding adjectives to the name of the enemy.

Unthinking Regression: Bashing Santorum over 'Islamophobia'

2012-01-07T03:11:00.001-06:00

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/01/05/398688/santorum-islam-eradicate/... Think Progress uttered & published a nasty diatribe against Rick Santorum. Thanks and a tip of the hat to Bare Naked Islam. UPDATED With Audio: Rick Santorum’s Islamophobia Problem By Ali Gharib on Jan 5, 2012 at 5:33 pm right-wing That is one of the favorite slurs of LibTards. The connotation is Nazi~fascist but there is no linkage between Conservatism and National Socialism or fascism. The Declaration of Independence & Constitution are not related to Mein Kampf. attitude toward Islam Given the Author's name, it is easy to predict what follows. Anyone not in love with Islam must be extremely evil. endorsed profiling When we hear hoof beats, do we look out for unicorns? The Magnificent Nineteen were all Muslims. They pronounced Takbir while slitting the throats of the flight crews. Their leader ordered them to do so: "Shout, 'Allahu Akbar,' because this strikes fear in the hearts of the non-believers.". The man who co-ordinated Atta's martyrdom operation proudly declared that the attack was done as an act of worship: "These actions are our offerings to God." The fine art of hijacking airliners was popularized and perfected by Muslims. Why then should the attention of the TSA be directed anywhere other than towards Muslims? We could save a great deal of time, money and hassle by simply banning Muslims from mass transit vehicles and terminals. “radical Islam” Islam does not require modifiers; I wish that everyone, including Rick Santorum, would quit wasting words and call it what it is: Islam. Use of modifiers such as "radical" falsely implies the existence of an anodyne, passive & benign normative Islam. Jihad, defined in Islamic law as: "to war against non-Muslims", is "ordained" for Muslims. "casting terror" is a battle tactic sanctified by Allah and bragged about by Moe. Muslims are promised extra credit (deed of righteousness) for any act taken to injure or enrage disbelievers. Genocidal jihad & terrorism are normative Islam, neither extreme nor radical; participation in them is a function of intense belief, neither innovation nor esoteric doctrine. conflates extremists with the entire Muslim faith The Magnificent Nineteen were believers, not extremists. Islam does not have extremists, it has believers who obey Allah and emulate Moe. all-encompassing ideology Islam is a "Deen": way of life. The Qur'an & hadith dictate everything from conception to burial. If you have any doubt, examine the table of contents of Sahih Buchari, the most authentic hadith collection, and Reliance of the Traveller, the handbook of Shari'ah. religious freedom Conquered Jews & Christians are not permitted to display crosses, ring bells, hold religious processions, pray or read the Bible aloud in public, build or maintain churches. Doubters & dissenters should read Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 11.5. It is assumed that Islam is a religion, and therefore we are obligated by the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, to permit Muslims to practice it here. Under that assumption, Muslims have a right to attack, plunder & kill us and enslave our widows & orphans. The ignorant masses are not cognizant of the fact that Islam entails those actions. Allah commanded Muslims to attack Jews and Christians; to wage war against them until they are subjugated and make annual extortion payments. That command is clear on the face of 9:29, confirmed by Moe in Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387 and codified in Islamic law by Reliance of the Traveller O9.8. Muslims are commanded to attack those disbelievers nearest them in 9:123. A minimum of one military expedition must be mounted in every year, and if neglected when possible, all who know of the obligation are in sin, specified in Reliance of the Traveller O9.1. Disbelieving men are killed; their widows & orphans enslaved as exemplified by 33:26-27 and codified in Reliance of the Traveller. O9.13 - 9.14. Islam is not "cafeteria Catholicism", it is all or nothing. This quote from 2:85 makes the matter crystal clear: "Then do you believe in a part of the Scripture and reject the rest? Then what is the recompense of those who do so among you, except disgrace in the life of this world, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall be consigned to the most grievous torment." Muslims are threatened with "painful torment" in Hell if they shirk jihad and promised eternity in Allah's celestial bordello if they go to war. If a Muslim truly believes Allah's threat and promise, what will he do? Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387, besides confirming the jihad imperatives, has vital clues for you: you are the prey, its open season, and you have no rights, as made clear by these excerpts: "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 " "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." If Muslims have a right to practice Islam then our rights to life, liberty & property are abrogated; null and void. Which is it? One or the other, not both; either we have a right to live free and secure in our property or they have a right to practice Islam. Which is it? Dialogue The article quotes Santorum [Emphasis original.] Until we have the kind of discussion and dialogue with Islam — that democracy and freedom of religion, along with religious pluralism, are essential for the stability of the world and our ability to cohabit in this world. Unless Islam is willing to make that conscious decision, then we are going to be at war for a long time. . The proposed dialogue is useless because jihad is ordained for Muslims, required to be performed in every year until the last day or until the entire world is conquered, whichever comes first. Islam is theocratic, not democratic because only Allah has the right to legislate. Religious pluralism is out of the question because 3:2 "Allâh! Lâ ilahâ illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), " Also Muslims are commanded to wage war until only Allah is worshiped on a global scale, in 8:39. If Muslims abandon jihad in favor of trade, commerce or agriculture, Allah will make disgrace to prevail over them. Islamophobia Phobia implies irrational fear or loathing. Fear and loathing of Islam are anything but irrational. Since 622, Islam has been responsible for 270*106 premature deaths. Both the doctrines of Islam enshrined in the Qur'an and the resulting conquest which built an empire that encompassed nearly half the world confirm the fact that Islam is a worthy object of fear & loathing. extremist ideologies The concluding paragraph demonstrates unwillingness to face the fatal fact of Islam. No decent American — or anyone across the globe — should oppose “eradicat(ing)” extremist ideologies like militant, “radical Islam.” But Santorum’s history of statements raises questions about just exactly what and who he’s targeting for eradication. The founder of Islam declared that he was: * ordered to fight * commanded to fight * made victorious by awe * made victorious by terror * and would prefer o to be martyred in Al1ah's Cause and then get resurrected and then get martyred, and then get resurrected again and then get martyred and then get resurrected again and then get martyred. That is not an extremist; that is not a radical; that is the role model for all Muslims to emulate, in all places, at all times. Normative Islam is defined by the Qur'an and exemplified by Moe's sunnah. As a wise man said "Its Islam, stupid!". Secure peace can not be established without eradicating Islam.

Response to Keith: An Apologist For Islam

2012-01-04T02:46:00.001-06:00

Response to Keith: An Apologist For Islam http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/12/30/bare-naked-islam-is-back-sort-of/

Bare Naked Islam is one of the great ani-Islamic blogs. I frequently find interesting information there. Unfortunately, WordPress is forcing it to close down as of January 6. Someone going by the screen name: "Keith" commented Sunday, using argumentum ad homimem. I did not respond directly to his comment, instead responding to another commenter. Keith's comment and mine are reproduced below.

Keith

January 1, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Not to put to much effort into giving you nuts a dose of reality but…THIS is NOT a First Amendment Issue…BNI does not HAVE a first amendment right in this issue because WordPress is privately owned. First amendment rights ONLY apply to Public forums and public areas. You can say what you want on a public sidewalk, more or less, but you cannot say it on MY yard. I have the right to get rid of you. WORDPRESS is not public property.
NOW as for TOS one only need read some of the comments to see that they would violate ANY website TOS with the language, the veiled threats and in some cases the calls for violence.
IF BNI goes elsewhere and does not better regulate the comment section it will be closed down again…that’s just reality…so if you people want this pile of islamophobic dog crap website to remain, stop being morons.

dajjal

January 2, 2012 at 4:00 AM

Mama Grizley, unfortunately Keith is right about the First Amendment issue, it applies to the Federal Gov’t., not to private entities. There might be a weak case for tortuous interference against CAIR, but their deep pockets could drag anyone through the courts for years, with little chance of prevailing.

Of course, Keith is totally wrong in his opinion of this blog, its commentators & content. Evidently he either did not read or could not comprehend the cut line on the banner. Given Noble Qur’an 8:39, 9:5, 9:29 & 9:123, there is no such thing as Islamophobia. Loathing of Islam is well warranted by the fatal facts: 270 million innocent victims in 1400 years.

Examine the arguments Keith used:

Ad Hominem:

you nuts

Keith labels the blog owner and commentators insane, without any basis in fact.

dose of reality

The numerous embedded videos at Bare Naked Islam reflect a grim reality: the true nature of Islam and practices of its adherents. Keith dismisses them with baseless derision.

islamophobic

Phobia implies irrational fear or loathing. There is nothing irrational about fear and loathing of Islam. We need look no further than Islamic scripture to find the proof of this fact.

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."

8:57. So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson.

so as to strike terror
strike terror in those

8:60. And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery, etc.) to threaten the enemy of Allâh and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but whom Allâh does know. And whatever you shall spend in the Cause of Allâh shall be repaid unto you, and you shall not be treated unjustly.

to strike terror
you terrorize/terrify with it God's enemy
Cause terror with this
you terrorize/terrify with it
to terrify
by which you may terrify
to put fear in
that you may instil fear
to cause fear
to put fear
that you may instil fear

59:13. Verily, you (believers in the Oneness of Allâh - Islâmic Monotheism) are more awful as a fear in their (Jews of Banî An-Nadîr) breasts than Allâh. That is because they are a people who comprehend not (the Majesty and Power of Allâh).

Sahih Bukhari 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, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).

Allah sanctified terror, declared that he would cast terror and cast terror resulting in death, captivity & dispossession. Allah told Moe that the Jews were more afraid of him than of Allah. Moe bragged that terror made him victorious. The best estimate of Islam's victims is 270,000,000. The accusation of irrationality is malignant malarkey at its worst.

pile of dog crap

With more than 3000 pages, 3000 unique visitors per day and 110,000 page views per month, there must be a very large number of people interested in 'dog crap'. What drew Keith to read and comment on 'dog crap'?

morons

Morons can't stop being morons. Those born with substandard intellectual capacity can't increase it.

Facts

In sum, Keith has two valid factual arguments about the First Amendment and blog terms of service. The rest is baseless insult. Unfortunately for Keith, the facts are arrayed on our side, not his.

Keith subsequently returned to spew more venom. Take a close look:

Keith

January 3, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Jugger, the problem is BNI does NOT post fact. BNI posts opinions that are ALWAYS geared against Islam…so not honest at all…it wouldbe good if the same was done against Judaism and Christianity and the other religions…but ONLY Islam gets this dishonest treatement…the question is why?

posts

BNI posts news stories, mostly containing video evidence of the reality of Islam. BNI and readers comment on those news stories. Nobody compels anyone to read those posts or comments. Anyone who does not like them can close the tab or window and seek more satisfying web sites.

always against Islam

There are no facts in favor of Islam. Islam's own canon of scripture, tradition, exegesis & jurisprudence defines Islam as a barbarian war cult, a continuing criminal enterprise disguised as a religion. BNI exposes the grim reality of Islam, it makes no pretense of balance, it takes a side.

Tu quoque

Judaism & Christianity do not have scriptural imperatives to genocidal global conquest. The Judaic conquest imperative was limited to Canaan, once that conquest was finished, Israel's battles were defensive, not offensive. No matter how long or intensely you search the Gospels and Book of Acts, you will not find, in the New Testament, Jesus issuing functional equivalents of NQ 2:256, 3:151, 8:12, 8:57, 8:60, 8:67, 9:5, 9:29, 9:111, 9:120 & 9:123. You will not find Jesus making a declaration equivalent to Sahih Bukhari 1.8.367. Note to high functioning Morons: parables & metaphors do not cut the mustard:

Luke 19:9-27 does not cut the mustard because it is a parable, not an imperative. Matt 10:34 does not cut the mustard, it is a metaphor for personal relationships, not a war imperative. [http://infidelsunited.com/documents/2944/163/standing-challenge-to-muslims]

dishonest

Exactly what has BNI posted that is not factually true? Point out the lies and show your evidence to prove that they are lies.

only Islam

Where is the Christian genocidal conquest imperative? Where are Christians, emulating Jesus by abductions, murders & mass casualty attacks against non-combatant civilians? Anyone thus engaged would be acting in contravention of the teachings of Jesus, not in emulation & obedience.

Keith

January 3, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Christopher…Islam is no more a threat to the constitution than any other religion that people want to force upon us instead of the constitution…something MANY Christians for instance have been very vocal about…yet no one says anything about THESE radicals. Let’s be clear on facts for you…Islam is a religion…your incorrect opinion that it is not is irrelevant. ACCORDING to the Constituion, they have freedom of religion just like anyone else with the same limits as everyone else…if you don’t like this, then feel free to leave.

Christian Constitutional threat

This nation was founded by Christians, as a non-sectarian government. The establishment clause of the First Amendment is there for good reason, there was sufficient experience with sectarianism in Europe and the colonies. .

Constitutional threat

BNI frequently quotes a leader of CAIR declaring a desire to see Shari'ah supplant the Constitution. Our organic documents enshrine and protect human dignity, equality, liberty and rights. The Constitution is man made law, which Islam arbitrarily rejects. Islam demands imposition of Allah's law: Shari'ah, what Moe preached and exemplified. In the last thirty years, 50 trial and appellate decisions have involved conflicts between Shari;ah and the Constitution & l;aws of the United States.

Islam is not a religion

Islam is a continuing criminal enterprise disguised as a religion. Its mission is mercenary and its method is martial. The 'original religion' of Islam is jihad.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 23, Number 3455:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar:

I heard the Apostle of Allah, (peace_be_upon_him) say: When you enter into the inah transaction, hold the tails of oxen, are pleased with agriculture, and give up conducting jihad (struggle in the way of Allah). Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion.

O9.0: Jihad

(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the lesser jihad. As for the greater jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self (nafs), which is why the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said as he was returning from jihad.

``We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad.''

The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus (def: b7) is such Koranic verses as:

-1- ``Fighting is prescribed for you'' (Koran 2:216);

-2- ``Slay them wherever you find them'' (Koran 4:89);

-3- ``Fight the idolators utterly'' (Koran 9:36);

and such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

``I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah'';

and the hadith reported by Muslim,

``To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.''Details concerning jihad are found in the accounts of the military expeditions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), including his own martial forays and those on which he dispatched others. The former consist of the ones he personally attended, some twenty-seven (others say twenty-nine) of them. He fought in eight of them, and killed only one person with his noble hand, Ubayy ibn Khalaf, at the battle of Uhud. On the latter expeditions he sent others to fight, himself remaining at Medina, and these were forty-seven in number.)

freedom of religion

Freedom of religion is for religions, not continuing criminal enterprises. Islam entails genocidal conquest. It can not be properly practiced without engaging in genocidal conquest. If there is a right to practice Islam, than all our human rights are abrogated. Rather than repeat the obvious, I direct doubters & dissenters to full documentation of the fatal facts.

Keith

January 3, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Claes, BNI has no stand to sue…Wordpress is not owned by the public, it is privately owned, as such the First Amendment does not apply. They are free to create their own rules (TOS) and enforce them as they see fit…BNI agreed to this when creating the BLOG.

legal standing

WordPress, acting of its own free will, can enforce their TOS against BNI. If CAIR interfered in the relationship between BNI and WordPress, then there might be a cause for litigation.

If an agency of the federal government, acting under color of the Istanbul Process for implementing HRC Res 16/18, prevailed on WordPress to sanction BNI, then there would be a clear First Amendment issue. In either case, proving tortuous interference would probably be an insurmountable barrier.

Keith

January 3, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Natalie let’s clear up a few things since you’re obviously confused. I have stated other places that I am not Muslim. I am not Christian, I am not Jewish, I in fact follow NO religion. Thre reason is simple, religion is nonsense. It is a sedative for the weak and small minded that need to believe they are special, and that some invisible mythological sky bully is up in the clouds and watching them…nonsense.

Now that, THAT is cleared up lets move on. I am not a wimp at all, and have stood up to bullies my whole life, even doing so when I SERVED this nation in the United States Navy…that’s right ass clowns, I’m a vet. I served with Jews, Christians, Muslims, and even a Druid or two, and learned a lot about their respective religions and the nonsense they believe. One thing I learned with respect to Islam is that RADICAL ISLAM is not true Islam. Radical Islam is Islam’s version of the KKK.

Now ignoring terrorism, sinec MOST Muslims do not believe in it, and moving on to your other complaints about the crimes committed against men, women, and children, I feel the same outrage as I do when I hear about Mormons marrying children, Or Orthodox Jews spitting on little girls and calling them whores. Or Christian’s shooting doctors because they perform abortions. I know that these people are committing their crimes, their acts of “BULLYING” and using their religion as justificiation. I don’t hold the religion responsible for the acts of idiots.

I would REMIND you, child, that Muslims defend you EVERY DAY serving willfully and honorably in the military. The only ones that make the news however are the ones that do something bad (see ft hood)

And when a Muslim deos something good no one sees, listens, or cares, like the muslim that alerted police to a something suspicious in New York a few years ago that turned out to be a bomb.

The fact is that there are BAD CRIMES committed everyday and none of them have anything to do with religion. People do not do bad things because they are muslim, they do bad things because they are bad people. They use their religion as justification but that does not mean the relgion actually condones it. There have been dozens of Fatwas (spelling) against the things you’re complaining about, something you’d know if you did some research, but people still do bad things claiming it is in the name of islam.

The sad fact is that there are TOO MANY people like you. People not grown up enough, or experienced enough, or educated enough to know what the world is really like and what people are really like. IF ISLAM vanished tomorrow, all the horrible things would stillhappen, they’d just use a different excuse.

SO, until you are READY to condemn Christianity, Judaism, and the REST of the religions out there for the terrorist acts committed in THEIR supposed name, stop singling out Islam because you don’t like it.

As for your childish accusation of me being a pedophile, I’ll just forgive it and chalk it up you your obvious youth and ignorance.

Radical Islam

There is no such entity! As a wise man wrote: "Its Islam, stupid!". Islam has a standard, set by Moe's preaching & practice, which are recorded in the Qur'an & hadith.

terrorism

I don't give a damn how many Muslims believe in it or abjure it. Terrorism is an inseverable intrinsic sacrament of Islam. "I will cast terror, "Allah cast terror" "I have been made victorious with terror" Islam is all or nothing, a package deal: "Then do you believe in a part of the Scripture and reject the rest?" . "Indeed in the Messenger of Allâh (Muhammad) you have a good example to follow". "...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." The arrogance of these liars who defend the indefensible is infuriating! Any step taken to injure or enrage a disbeliever is a deed of righteousess!!! That says it all, putting the lie to the Moronic protestations of innocent, moderate Islam.

Three thousand people are dead and thousands more injured because the magnificent nineteen believed Allah's threat & promise, implementing his accursed imperative. Ain't that sufficient?

Keith

January 3, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Dajjal I am of course not wrong…I’m simply, based on the errors in your posting, smarter and better educated than you are. OR you are a LIAR…you get to choose.

TO CLAIM that there is no such thing as Islamophobia is a BOLD FACED FALSE statement. To claim there is no such thing as islamophobia is the same as claiming there is no such thing as racism, or sexism, etc etc. You think by denying its existance it gives you license to engage in it.

It doesn’t.

It does exist and you are one such person that engages in it.

You want to continue to be part of the problem? Then keep lying like the rest of these childish cowards and dullards.

IF YOU want to truly be part of some kind of solution then the first thing you have to do is recognize your own failings, and dismiss your phobia, and THEN engage the very people you falsely judge and get their help….that’s how you make solutions…not by lying about people you know nothing about.

As for teh number of people killed by Islam, I find your numbers to be nonsense….and if you want to play that game, how many killed by the terrorists of Christianity, or the VILLANS of Judaism…play fair boy, or don’t play.

smarter

I have a tested verbal IQ of 140. I have 140 hours of college credit with a GPA of 3.25.

liar

You called BNI a pile of dog excrement. In fact, it is a blog, with plenty of well documented facts and opinions based on those facts. I did not fabricate anything or tell any lies in my reply to Mama Grizley's comment. In this response to your comments, I have quoted the Qur'an, hadith and Islamic law, in each case I have supplied links so that readers can verify the authenticity of the quotes and explore the context. You have personal attacks, diversions and false, ignorant assertions. I have relevant, verifiable, well documented facts.

Islamophobia

I took that lie apart and disproved it with factual evidence in a previous paragraph. Click the linked heading to review the details.

part of the problem

The problem is Islam, a set of doctrines which sanctifies men's worst impulses, sanctioning barbarity in the 'service of god'. I am not part of that problem, I am exposing the problem. BNI exposes Islam with video evidence. I expose it with textual evidence from Islam's canon.

lying

Islam is a lie, told by a liar. Moe did not receive divine inspiration or revelation, he took advantage of hallucinations and issued situational scripture to permit himself to sin. Refer to the following documents for the gritty details.

number of victims

The number is not mine, the statistic was compiled by someone else. Only Islam has an open ended, unlimited genocide imperative. 8:39 & 9:29 are fight until loops of global scale, terminated only by total global conquest and subjugation. 8:67 makes "great slaughter" Moe's price of admission to Allah's celestial bordello. 47:4 tells Moe not to take prisoners until he has "killed and wounded many of them.

Christian terrorists

Show me the New Testament book, chapter & verse wherein Jesus Christ sanctions, sanctifies and exemplifies terrorism. Christians acting like Muslims would be contravening Christ's teaching and example, obeying Allah and emulating Moe instead of Christ.

WordPress Stifles Discussion of Bare Naked Islam

2011-12-30T21:49:00.001-06:00

The WordPress Forum thread about BNI has been closed, the last word being: "Now that we have descended into pointless name-calling I am closing this thread.". who "descended into pointless name calling?

by lettershometoyou:

It's really hard to form an opinion of BNI without having read the site.

But the extremist, bigoted, racist views expressed here give a good idea of the kind of whacko it attracted.

Gleaned from the sickening streak of hate this thread contains:

There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim.

Such lies!

I live an work with Muslim people, and find them solid, upstanding people who wish the world no harm.

There are extremists everywhere. They're the problem, not average Muslims.

The landing page of that blog does not indicate a political or philosophical knowledge of or orientation toward Islam and related issues. The author admits not having enough knowledge to judge BNI, then he launches into the forum participants with argumentum ad hominem. Evidently lettershometoyou is too indolent to search for the Yahoo cache of BNI and see it for himself. Instead of doing due diligence, he launches:

extremist
bigoted
racist
whacko
lies

Only one quote is cited: "no such thing as a moderate Muslim", which is dismissed with the author's narrow personal experience which he expands by generalization to encompass the ummah-al-Islamiyya. It is evident that the author is unaware of Allah's Qur'anic injunctions against equal and inferior relationships with Kuffar. Muslims are strictly prohibited from being friends with disbelievers except to deceive them for their own personal safety if a threat is perceived.

The Prohibition of Supporting the Disbelievers

Allah prohibited His believing servants from becoming supporters of the disbelievers, or to take them as comrades with whom they develop friendships, rather than the believers. [...] (unless you indeed fear a danger from them) meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' Al-Bukhari said that Al-Hasan said, "The Tuqyah is allowed until the Day of Resurrection.''

Islam is not moderate, it is genocidally violent, by design. To fully comprehend the fatal fact, one must read the following citations from Islam's canonical texts.

Moe divided Muslims into two classes: believers and hypocrites. Those who implement Allah's genocidal imperatives are believers, those who shirk jihad are hypocrites. Do not take my word for this, I am not an authority; take Allah's word for it, and Moe's. Believers fight in Allah's cause, killing others and being killed. The rest are either hypocrites in whose hearts is a disease or have not been called to fight yet.

Lettershometoyou followed up with another post:

What you extremists fail to realise and hope the rest of us will ignore is the fact that 99.99% of all Muslims, Jews, Christians, Buddhists and others just want to get on with the daily business of getting through life without harming other people. You can hang on to your hatreds all your like and hope you'll attract more followers by spreading more lies, but you can't accept that basic fact.

Evidently lettershometoyou is omniscient, knowing what everybody wants while we are "extremists [...] haters [...] spreading lies". How will he explain the conquests of Arabia, India, Turkey, North Africa and South East Europe? How did a tiny minority of extremist Muslims conquer nearly half the world without majority support?

Lettershometoyou angered an EDL member, trinovante, who responded in kind.

@lettershometoyou,by god you are a fool !

You CLEARLY know nothing of Islamic history,the Qur'an or Hadith you odious
little man.Still you have some "Muslim's who you work with",so you must know
everything about Islamic doctrine?

You dangerous left wing idiot.

The thread ended with one last left wing slur which I will not quote here. I fully understand why WordPress is sensitive about this issue and wants to squelch discussion of it. Succumbing to intimidation to shut down a major traffic generator must be very painful. If name calling was an issue, the forum moderator would have deleted the four offending posts and allowed the thread to continue.

I did a little research on BNI and found some interesting statistics for the blog.

source	value	site visits	revenue	Alexa
http://kolorob.net/d/www.barenakedislam.wordpress.com	475.57	1393
http://value3w.com/barenakedislam.wordpress.com	49,122.00	3064	67.00	48446
http://www.webzi.info/barenakedislam.wordpress.com	38,681.00	2428	53.00	61666
http://websitevaluecheck.net/barenakedislam.wordpress.com	48,910.00	3064	67.00	48446
http://webhost-a.com/www/barenakedislam.wordpress.com	73,736.00
http://bizinformation.co/www.barenakedislam.wordpress.com	286,934.48	6,352
http://www.findwebstats.com/barenakedislam.wordpress.com	26148.6		35.82
http://www.siteoutlooker.com/barenakedislam.wordpress.com	49,122.00	3,064	67.00
http://whois-domain-find.com/info/www.barenakedislam.wordpress.com	110,732,390 *		152,381*
http://webnamesinfo.com/barenakedislam.wordpress.com	41,238.00	2,585	56.00

* These numbers are so unrealistic that I presume they apply to the entire WordPress domain, not to a single sub domain blog.

117,087 page views/month

Those numbers ain't trivial. Even if we accept the lowest evaluation, a sub domain name worth nearly $500,. is too good to waste if it is bringing 100K visitors to WordPress every month. At snooper.wordpress,com, the post about BNI received 25 page views, while the average daily page views for the blog has been less than 20 this week. At Islam Exposed, it got 16 hits. Page ranks for searches for Bare Naked Islam ranged from 9 to 45 in the Google serps. The post at Bloggersbase had 125 views.

If three thousand people are learning the truth about the doctrines & practices of Islam every day, its no wonder that CAIR is determined to silence it. But the blog's creator is dedicated, motivated & persistent. She will rebuild the blog, bigger and better than before and the publicity resulting from CAIR's intimidation tactics will increase the size of the blog's audience.

Bare Naked Islam Hidden From View at Beheost of Bigots

2011-12-29T22:56:00.001-06:00

Google Alerted me to a Pat Dollard post announcing that Bare Naked Islam has been pulled down again; Dollard included the text of a CAIR press release announcing their great victory.

A new WordPress Forum thread has been opened for the subject. I urge other WordPress users to add your own comments urging WordPress to show spinal & testicular fortitude and respect for free speech by reinstating BNI.

BNI aggregated news stories and particularly graphic videos from all over the world. Combined with incisive commentary, those videos proved to be valuable tools for exposing the stark reality of Islamic doctrine and practice.

BNI earned a large audience, receiving more hits each day than my blogs get in a year. I view BNI as a colleague, not a competitor. I want one of my favorite sources restored! I know that BNI is seeking a new venue. As soon as I learn that the blog is back, I will publish a link to it.

Islam, because it is a plagiarized fraud, is extremely sensitive to criticism. Muhammad murdered his critics. CAIR can't get away with that yet, but they can engage in intimidation & litigation jihad. BNI stands up to them, I stand shoulder to shoulder with her. We will not submit; we will not be silent.

Your Vote Belongs to You: don't Give it Away!

2011-12-29T20:53:00.001-06:00

Voting is an activity we participate in jointly and severally. Each voter's decision is diluted by the large number of votes cast, but when the votes are counted, issues are decided and nominees or officers selected based on the numbers of votes cast.

When you cast your ballot in your Presidential Primary or Caucus, cast it on the basis of who is the best potential President, not who is most popular, leads in the polls or has 'the best chance of winning".

Candidates rise and fall in the polls on the basis of selective sampling and biased questions. The mass media build up one candidate, only to kick the pedestal from under his feet a few weeks later. Their objective is to insure the re-election of President Obama.

The party insiders, also known as the 'establishement' have a win at any cost bias. Their objective is to gain control of the Senate so that they can feather their own nests and line the pockets of their favorite crony capitalists.

Four years ago we let the 'establishment' and the media select our nominee. McCain ran an incompetent campaign, and he lost as he richly deserved. Obama did not deserve to win, he won by default because we let others choose our nominee. The best candidates were knocked out in the early primaries because it was said of them that they could not win.

The Iowa Caucuses and early Primaries narrow the field, reducing the options of those who vote later in the season. If you reject the best candidates, we all lose.

If McCain had been elected, we would still be losing in Afghanistan & Iraq, Iran would be busy building their A bomb, the Arab Spring would have sprung and the economy would still be in the septic tank. But all of those problems would be blamed by the media and the talking heads on a false caricature of Conservatism. When we nominate a LibTurd disguised as a Conservative, we degrade the brand, risking the future of the movement. Do not let the 'establishment' 'redefine' Conservatism by nominating Romney or Perry!

There are two genuine committed Conservatives currently in the race: Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann. At present, they trail in the polls. It is in your power, by ignoring the polls and voting for the best candidate, to keep them in the race, giving others who follow you a chance to vote for the best instead of the worst.

The future of the Republican Party and the nation hangs in the balance. Yours is a heavy responsibility, exercise it with great care. "A white ball elects, a black cube rejects; be careful when voting and make no mistakes."

No Compulsion in Religion & Defamation from MPAC

2011-12-26T01:58:00.001-06:00

http://www.mpac.org/assets/docs/publications/MPAC-defamations-of-religion.pdf

MPAC takes a legalistic & libertarian tack against blasphemy laws, asserting that the Qur'an supports open debate, not compulsion. Lets look a little deeper, below the surface of a few crucial citations. [Links added to quotes.]

Let there be no compulsion in religion, the truth stands out clear from error… (2:256)

Say: O ye that reject Faith,! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that
which I worship, And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye
worship that which I worship, To you be your Way, and to me mine (109:1-6)

He was not permitted to force people to believe. (17:53-54; 88:21-22)

If the Prophet was commanded directly by God to just advise and persuade, who are we as ordinary
human beings to claim a higher mantle of authority and impose our beliefs on others?

2:256 Tafsir Ibn Kathir mentions relation to the Ansar, whose children were among the Banu an-Nadir who were exiled from Medina. Unfortunately, Ibn Kathir leaves the story open ended, I suspect that there was an editing error somewhere along the way. Other tafsirs complete the story and add more details.

Certain women among the Ansar, whose sons died in infancy would swear to raise one who lived as a Jew. Evidently they farmed their surviving sons out to wet nurses among the Banu an-Nadir. When Moe drove the Banu an-nadir from their fortifified settlements [59:2, The End that Bani An-Nadir suffered] some of the Answar offspring opted to remain among the exiled Jews. Their mothers ran complaining to Moe, who revealed 2:256 to fit the occasion. The story finds its fullest explication in these tafsirs:

Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi
Tafsir Al-Mizan [Select Surah 2 and enter 256 in the text box.]

Mufti Shafi Usmani brings in a related argument not raised by the others in this context: the relationship between non compulsion and jihad, holding that the two are not in conflict.

Keeping this verse in view, some people raise objections. They say
this verse tells us that there is no compulsion in faith, although the
teaching of jihad and qital (fighting) in Islam appears contrary to this
principle.
Looking at this a little carefully, we can find out that the objection
is not valid, since the teaching of jihad and qital in Islam is not to
coerce people into accepting Faith. Had it been so, why would there be
Islamic injunctions of jizyah to provide an umbrella of security for
kuffar (disbelievers) which protects their life, property and honour? [...]

It is for this reason that Allah Almighty has ordained that the
fasad created by these people should be removed by jihiid and qitl. So,
killing such people is like the killing of serpents, scorpions and their
harmful likes.

Usmani asserts that jihad is for the purpose of eradicating people who cause fitna, not about compelling them to convert to Islam. Note that he claims that jijya provides security for kuffar, protecting their life and property. From whom does jizya protect them? I have three clues for you, and will allow you to draw your own conclusion.

These people have been informed of the orders about Jiziya. If you desire that there should be peace and security in the world, obey Allah and His Prophet. Thereafter none in Arabia and Ajam (Iran) shall dare cast an evil eye on you. But the rights of Allah and His Prophet can at no time be waived.
If you do not accept these terms and set them aside, I do not need your presents and gifts. In that case, I shall have to wage war (to establish peace and security). Its result would be that the big ones shall be killed in war and the commoners shall be taken prisoners. [Letter to the rulers of Aqaba]
[...]And whoever says: None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' saves his wealth and his life from me[...] [Sahih Bukhari 9.92.388]
Capitation tax is to be imposed upon Kitabees, because this is mentioned in the Koran: and it is in the same manner to be imposed upon Majoosees, as the prophet imposed capitation-tax upon Majoosees.-- Capitation-tax is also to be imposed upon the idolaters of ajim (Persia) this is contrary to the opinion of Shafii, for he argues that destruction is incurred by all infidels; but the legality of abstaining from it, in sconsideration of a capitation-tax, with respect to Kitabees, is known from the word of the Koran, and with respect to Majoosees, from the traditions; any others, therefore, than those, (namely idolaters,) remain subject to the original penalty, which is destruction. [Hedaya, Volume II, Book IX, Chapter VIII, Page 212]

In the matter of Surah Al-Kaafiroon, Tafsir Ibn Kathir informs us that the surah was revealed about Kafirs who challenged Moe to swap religions for a year. Rather than a statement of tolerance, it is a statement of rejection and immunity from their shirk. [He commanded His Messenger to disavow himself from their religion completely] Tafsir al-tustari informs us that Surah 109 was abrogated by 9:5; Tafsir al-Jalalayn & Tafsir Ibn Abbas cuncurr, citing the "command to wage war" and "verses of fighting" respectively.

Surah Al-Kaafiroon was # 18 in seqeuence of revelation , Surah Al-Baqarah was # 87, both are abrogated by conflicting ayat in Surah At-Taubah which was next to last in revelation.

Does Surah Al-Isra' 53-54 forbid compulsion? Perhaps we should examine the context.

17:53. And say to My slaves (i.e. the true believers of Islâmic Monotheism) that they should (only) say those words that are the best. (Because) Shaitân (Satan) verily, sows disagreements among them. Surely, Shaitân (Satan) is to man a plain enemy.

17:54. Your Lord knows you best, if He will, He will have mercy on you, or if He will, He will punish you. And We have not sent you (O Muhammad ) as a guardian over them.

17:55. And your Lord knows best all who are in the heavens and the earth. And indeed, We have preferred some of the Prophets above others, and to Dawûd (David) We gave the Zabûr (Psalms).

17:56. Say (O Muhammad ): "Call unto those besides Him whom you pretend [to be gods like angels, Iesâ (Jesus), 'Uzair (Ezra), etc.]. They have neither the power to remove the adversity from you nor even to shift it from you to another person."

17:57. Those whom they call upon [like 'Iesa (Jesus) son of Maryam (Mary), 'Uzair (Ezra), angel, etc.] desire (for themselves) means of access to their Lord (Allâh), as to which of them should be the nearest and they ['Iesa (Jesus), 'Uzair (Ezra), angels, etc.] hope for His Mercy and fear His Torment. Verily, the Torment of your Lord is something to be afraid of!

17:58. And there is not a town (population) but We shall destroy it before the Day of Resurrection, or punish it with a severe torment. That is written in the Book (of our Decrees)

I do not see mention of compulsion or toleration in that context, but I do see a threat of destruction, before the day of judgment. Perhaps you can find something of interest in Ibn Kathir tafsir of 17:53.

Surah Surah Al-Ghaashiyah 21-22 looks swell until we examine the context. Of course, Muslims, who accuse us of "cherry picking" are prone to engage in selectivity.

88:21. So remind them (O Muhammad ()), you are only a one who reminds.

88:22. You are not a dictator over them.

88:23. Save the one who turns away and disbelieves

88:24. Then Allâh will punish him with the greatest punishment.

Moe is only one who reminds, not a dictator; then comes the exception clause, which MPAC did not cite for us. Allah will punish the disbelievers. Of course, punishment is not coercion. Of course, Ibn Kathir had something to say about that. [The Messenger is only charged with delivering the Message]

(You are not a Musaytir over them.) Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid and others said, "You are not a dictator over them.'' This means that you cannot create faith in their hearts. Ibn Zayd said, "You are not the one who can force them to have faith.'' Imam Ahmad recorded from Jabir that the Messenger of Allah said,
(I have been commanded to fight the people until they say La ilaha illallah (none has the right to be worshipped except Allah). So if they say that, they have safeguarded their blood and wealth from me - except for what is rightfully due from it - and their reckoning is with Allah, the Mighty and Majestic.)'' Then he recited, (So remind them - you are only one who reminds. You are not a dictator over them -) This is how Muslim recorded this Hadith in his Book of Faith, and At-Tirmidhi and An-Nasa'i also recorded it in their Sunans in the Books of Tafsir. This Hadith can be found in both of the Two Sahihs.

you are not a taskmaster over them (a variant reading [for musaytir] has musaytir, that is to say, [not one who has been] given authority over them) - this was [revealed] before the command to struggle [against the disbelievers]. [Tafsir al-Jalalayn]

Moe can't make us believe, but he has been commanded to wage war upon us until we recite Shahada. That is a clue for the clueless. Surah Al-Anfal & Surah At-Taubah contain the jihad imperatives refered to above. Because they were among the last to be revealed, they abrogate earlier verses whith which they are in conflict. [2:106 & 16:101 establish the rule of abrogation.] The jihad imperatives are commands to fight idolaters until only Allah is worshiped and people of the book until they are subjugated & extorted.

Those imperatives are codified in Shari'ah, best exemplified by Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9.8 & 9.9. No compulsion? Fighting Arabian pagans until they become Muslim is not compulsion.

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) ).

I am not arguing with MPAC about the negative impliciations of the "defamation of religions" meme. The points raised fy Freedom House and other critics are valid, based on solid facts and logic. I simply pointed out their practice of kitman: deception by obfuscation. But this subject is raised in the context of two resolutions passed this year by the Human Rights Council and General Assembly.

The name has changed; the language has changed, but the meme has not changed. The OIC & UN have not abandoned "combating defamation of Islam".

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

¶5(f) on page 5 of Draft resolution XVII, "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.

The resolutions demand passage and enforcement of legislation to criminalize criticmsm of Islam. Another resolution, flying below the radar, passed the GA by concensus, without a vote. ¶10, on page 3 of Draft resolution XVIII, emphasizes that Islam must not be equated with terrorism 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.

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;

The obvious was confirmed by our own Department of State last summer when they met the OIC at Istanbul to discuss implementation of the resolution. This quote from the Secretary of State requires a little decoding. for the meaning of "intolerance" Refer back to the quote from Ban Ki-moon. [Following quotes from OIC Journal.]

“Together we have begun to overcome the false divide that pits
religious sensitivities against freedom of expression, and we
are pursuing a new approach based on concrete steps to fight
intolerance wherever it occurs.

Our Ambassador to the HRC piled on.

A positive aspect of Resolution 16 /18 is that it did not
pit the principle of freedom of religion against freedom of
expression, said Ambassador Donahoe, rather it combined
them. “We believe that through free expression we are better
able to combat intolerance.”

"Intolerance" and "incitement to violence" mean: International Burn the Qur'an Day and the Motoons, just as Ban mischaracterized Fitna.

Allah had something to say about blasphemy.

3:78. And verily, among them is a party who distort the Book with their tongues (as they read), so that you may think it is from the Book, but it is not from the Book, and they say: "This is from Allâh," but it is not from Allâh; and they speak a lie against Allâh while they know it.

7:37. Who is more unjust than one who invents a lie against Allâh or rejects His Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.)? For such their appointed portion (good things of this worldly life and their period of stay therein) will reach them from the Book (of Decrees) until, when Our Messengers (the angel of death and his assistants) come to them to take their souls, they (the angels) will say: "Where are those whom you used to invoke and worship besides Allâh," they will reply, "They have vanished and deserted us." And they will bear witness against themselves, that they were disbelievers.

6:93. And who can be more unjust than he who invents a lie against Allâh, or says: "I have received inspiration," whereas he is not inspired in anything; and who says, "I will reveal the like of what Allâh has revealed." And if you could but see when the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrongdoers, etc.) are in the agonies of death, while the angels are stretching forth their hands (saying): "Deliver your souls! This day you shall be recompensed with the torment of degradation because of what you used to utter against Allâh other than the truth. And you used to reject His Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) with disrespect! "

10:17. So who does more wrong than he who forges a lie against Allâh or denies His Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.)? Surely, the Mujrimûn (criminals, sinners, disbelievers and polytheists) will never be successful!

Moe's reaction to criticism is instructive: he had them murdered. I direct doubters & dissenters to List of Killings Ordered or Supported by Muhammad.

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.

Killing critics of Islam is not just sunnah, it is Islamic law. I invite doubters & dissenters to examine the relevant passages of reliance of the Traveller, the Shafi'ite manual of fiqh, to verify the fatal fact. A conquered Jew or Christian, remaining in Dar al-Islam as a Dhimmi, who "mentions something impermissible" about Islam, reverts to the status of a prisoner of war who may be killed.

Apostasay: penalty: O8.1
definition: O8.7
application to Dhimmis O11.10
penalty applied to Dhimmis: O9.14

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

2011-12-21T02:27:00.001-06:00

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 "defamation" of 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 15^th 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.

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.

¶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/

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

2011-12-20T00:24:00.001-06:00

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.

The hypocrisy of Congressional Bigotry

2011-12-19T22:23:00.001-06:00

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 1.7.331, with 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.

http://www.shiasource.com/al-mizan/
- Select Surah 2 from the pick list and enter 190 in the adjacent text box.

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.

http://www.2muslims.com/books/alraheeq.pdf
http://www.archive.org/download/IbnIshaq-SiratRasulAllah-translatorA.Guillaume/IbnIshaq-SiratRasulAllah.zip
- This is an archive of several hundred jpg. images, you can view it with your favorite image viewer.

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.

Preserve Free Speech!!!

2011-12-16T23:38:00.001-06:00

Between December 12 & 14, 2011, the OIC, Department of State and others met in Washington to find ways of implementing HRC Res. 16/18. From the available evidence, they appear to have settled on a new enforcement model, linked to "consequences" .

If this new model had been in place a year ago, Pastors Jones & Sapp would be sued for civil liability and persecuted for trying and burning a Qur'an , based on the assertion that Pakistani Muslims rioted, causing death and destruction, as a result of their book burning.

The fact that the riots resulted from inflammatory sermons at Jumah Salat probably would not have saved the Pastors from legal expenses and penalties. The intention is to impose self censorship by implementing a heckler's veto.

If we expose Islam and they don't like it, Muslims can riot and blame us for their actions, and the government can impose fines, costs, and imprisonment.
Now is the time to stand up for the First Amendment's Free Speech clause by demanding that Congress block implementation of the Istanbul process.

I now therefore ask you to take the following actions:

Sign this on line petition: http://www.petition2congress.com/5741/preserve-first-amendment-from-attack-by-oic/
Send emails to your Representative & Senators as part of the petition process.
Share the petition through Facebook, Twitter and other social media.
Exhort your friends & family to sign and share the petition.