Documenting the " Islamic Response"

I have discovered an editing error in my recent post: Stop the Trial: Khalid Sheikih Mohamnmed Confessed! the document link is incorrect as published.
The correct link to the pdf file containing the Islamic response to the accusations against K.S.M. etal. is: The Islamic Response to the Government's Nine Accusations.

That document contains several references to the Qur'an. My intention in this post is to give you access to the source of those references and their meaning. The quotes are linked to three parallel translations at USC-MSA for easy context checking.

The preamble begins with this statement.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate

You will find those same words in the transcript of Flight 93's cockpit voice recorder. Both the act of mass murder and the boast are couched in terms of service to the demon whose words are quoted to amplify the text of the boast. Both are acts of worship, neither is secular.

The first Qur'an quote is used to explain the covert nature of their operation.

((0 you believers! Take your precautions, and either go forth (on on expedition) in parties, or go forth together.))

That ayeh is 4:71. Ibn Kathir does not mention secrecy or covert operations in his tafsir of 4:71. Maududi does not mention it, nor does Abdullaj Yusuf Ali.

In the matter of attacking civilians, five ayat are quoted.

((The sacred month is for the sacred month, and for the prohibited things, there is the law of equality. Then, whoever transgresses the prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against him.))

That ayeh is 2:194, explained here by Ibn Kathir.

((And there is (a saving of) life for you in AI-Qisas (The law of equality in punishment), 0 men of understanding, that you may become A/~Muttaquin (the pious).))

That ayeh is 2:179, explained here by Ibn kathir.

((The recompense for an evil is an evil like thereof.))

That ayeh is 42:40, explained here by Ibn Kathir.

((Life for life, eye for an eye, nose for a nose, ear for an ear, tooth for a tooth, and wounds equal for equal.))

That ayeh is 5:45, explained here by Ibn Kathir.

((... Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression.))

This text does not agree with the translation I use for 2:193. Shakir's translation is the closest match, note, however, that the quote is out of context. Ibn Kathir's explanation is here. By selecting that fragment of the ayeh, the authors were creating a false impression of benign passivity. The full text of 2:193 follows, as translated by Shakir.

And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors.

Ibn Kathir's tafsir of this ayeh is titled "The Order to fight until there is no more Fitnah".

Allah then commanded fighting the disbelievers when He said:

﴿حَتَّى لاَ تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ﴾

(...until there is no more Fitnah) meaning, Shirk. This is the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, Abu Al-`Aliyah, Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Ar-Rabi`, Muqatil bin Hayyan, As-Suddi and Zayd bin Aslam.

For an overly aggressive interpretation of this ayeh, see the footnote by Hilali & Khan. The accused intend, by the selection of those ayat, to create a false impression that their attack was justified in retaliation for attacks by us. From the Islamic viewpoint, resisting their attacks is oppression & aggression. That attitude is one of the fruits of supremacism & triumphalism.

They answer the accusation of war crimes with these quotes.

((To those against whom war is waged, permission is given (to fight,) because they are wronged and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid.))

That is 22:39, explained here by Ibn Kathir.

((And fight in the way of Allah those who fight you, but be not the transgressor, Allah likes not the transgressors.))

That is 2:190, explained here by Ibn Kathir.

Regarding the hijacking charge, they quote the verse of the sword.

(("then fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, and besiege them and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush,))

That is 9:5, explained here by Ibn Kathir.

In answering the charge of terrorism, they cite an ayeh which sanctifies terrorism.

((Soon shall we cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, for that they joined companies with Allah, for which he has sent no authority; There place will be the fire; and evil is the home of the wrongdoers.))

That is 3:151, Ibn Kathir's tafsir is here.

((Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the heart of the enemies of Allah and your enemies.))

That is 8:60, Ibn Kathir explains it here. to delve a little deeper into terrorism, refer to this tafsir.

((Of a truth you (Muslims) are more feared in their (the infidels from Christians, Jews, and others) hearts, than Allah.
This is because they are men devoid of understanding.))

That quote is from 59:13, explained here by Ibn Kathir.

((They fight not against you even together, except in fortified townships, or from behind walls, their enmity among themselves is very great, you would think that they were united, but their hearts are divided. That is because they are a people who
understand not.))

That is 59:14, explained here by Ibn Kathir.

Last but not least, in answer to supporting terrorism, they return to the second surah.

((And spend of your substance in the cause of Allah, and make not your own hands contribute to your destruction, but do good; for Allah loves those who do good.))

That is 2:195, explained here by Ibn Kathir. Be sure to read the hadith used by Ibn Kathir to explain the meaning of casting yourself to destruction!

In the preamble, the authors made a statement which requires exploration.

Nevertheless, it would have been the greatest religious duty to fight you over your infidelity.

They assert that they fight us in retaliation, but claim a religious obligation to fight us because we are not Muslims. While they did not document the obligation to attack kuffar, it is not difficult to find in Surah al-Anfal & at-Taubah.

• 8:38. Say to those who have disbelieved, if they cease (from disbelief) their past will be forgiven. But if they return (thereto), then the examples of those (punished) before them have already preceded (as a warning).
• 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.
  

I added emphasis to the critical phrases. Ayeh 38 specifies the subject: disbelievers. Ayeh 39 specifies the verb: fight and the compound terminal condition no resistance and no shirk. Notice the title of Ibn Kathir's tafsir of this verse: The Order to fight to eradicate Shirk and Kufr.

In the next surah, Allah commands Muslims to make war on Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians until they are subjugated and make annual extortion payments.

• 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.

Several hadith confirm those commands, but this one, in my opinion, is the clearest. I added emphasis to make the critical elements stand out.

• Moe was ordered to fight because Allah said "fight them".
• The victims must become Muslims to save themselves by:
• testimony to Allah's deity
• prescribed prayers
• prescribed prayer orientation
• prescribed slaughter
• prescribed dietary laws.
• Until we do:
• our blood and property are not sacred
• we have no rights.

• 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."

Reliance of the Traveller, the all purpose handbook of Islamic law, cites 9:29 as the basis of a requirement that the caliph makes war upon Jews & Christians. [Emphasis & link added.]

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),[...]

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) ).

The Caliph is required to fight all other people until they become Muslims (O9.9). Al-Shafi'i issued a relevant ruling that there must be at least one annual military expedition against kuffar.

"The least that the imam must do is that he allow no year to pass without having organised a military expedition by himself, or by his raiding parties, according to the Muslims' interest, so that the jihad will only be stopped in a year for a (reasonable) excuse."

The Islamic religious duty to attack us is founded on those two ayat. It is confirmed by hadith and codified in Shari'ah; confirmed by fiqh. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and associates have exposed the fatal facts to our view by submitting them to the court. The facts can not be concealed any longer, they must be recognized and confronted.

In reality, K.S.M. etal. are not extremists; they have not hijacked Islam, they are believers, obeying Allah & emulating Moe. Islam is a war cult, not a 'religion of peace'. If our elected leaders do not wise up to this fact and react accordingly, we will surely be subjected to further attacks, and eventually lose our legacy of liberty.

Stop the Trial: Khalid Sheikih Mohamnmed Confessed!

Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and his four compatriots awaiting a Federal Court trial in N.Y.C. for their participation in the planning & execution of the attacks on the WTC & Pentagon submitted a response to to the accusations against them. The content of that response clearly establishes both their guilt and that of the demon's war cult whose doctrines motivated their evil act.

In this post I will quote the response out of context interspersing my comments. If you want to read the entire response to the accusations, click the link above. Notice how they open their statement.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate

They are asserting demonic sanction for their foul deed, claiming to speak and have acted for it.

With regards to these nine accusations that you are putting us on trial for; to us, they are not accusations. To us they are badges of honor, which we carry with pride. Many thanks to God, for his kind gesture, and choosing us to perform the act of Jihad for his cause and to defend Islam and Muslims.

Organizing the hijacking of commercial passenger aircraft, murdering the flight crews and flying them into occupied structures is a "badge of honor" to none but demon spawn. They thank Allah, the demon, for choosing them to perform an act of Jihad for his cause; in defense of Islam. That expression acknowledges their guilt, but they do not own it as guilt, they wear it with pride.

Therefore, killing you and fighting you, destroying you and terrorizing you, responding back to your attacks, are all considered to be great legitimate duty in our religion.

Fighting & terrorizing us is a great legitimate duty in their religion. Where would they get such an idea? Could it be the Qur'an? Could it be the hadith? Could it be the Sira? Could it be Shari'ah? Or is it all of those?

Nevertheless, it would have been the greatest religious duty to fight you over your infidelity.

It is their duty to fight us because we do not believe in and submit to their demon, Allah. If that is the case, it is the duty of every Muslim to attack us whenever the opportunity arises. Is it? What did Allah and his Messenger say about this issue?

• 2:216. Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.
• 8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.
• 9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
• 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." [Emphasis added.]

Do those words mean what they say or not? Turn to Islamic law: Reliance of the Traveller, for confirmation.

• 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),[...]

Allah said it, Moe confirmed it; Shari'ah codified it. Now the accused have confirmed it; what further proof do you need? Once in possession of this knowledge, how can you tolerate the existence of Islam?

After laying down their cause of action in the preamble, they answer the accusation of conspiracy.

This is a very laughable accusation. Were you expecting us to inform you about our secret attack plans? Your intelligence apparatus, with all its abilities, human and logistical, had failed to discover our military attack plans before the blessed 11 September operation. They were unable to foil our attack. We ask, why then should you blame us, holding us accountable and putting us on trial? Blame yourselves and your failed intelligence apparatus and hold them accountable, not us.

They had secret plans, and consider themselves innocent because we could not detect and interpret those plans. They call the abomination 'blessed'. Can anything be more perverse and evil? Why should the perpetrators be blamed? Blame the defenders instead. This blame the victims mentality; the role reversal, is a clear sign of AssWholliness.

With regards to us, we were exercising caution and secrecy in our war against you. This is a natural matter, where God has taught us in his book, verse 71 from An-Nisa: ((0 you believers! Toke your precautions, and either go forth (on on expedition) in parties, or go forth together.)) Also, as the prophet has stated: "War is to deceive."

They acknowledge the fact that Islam is waging war against us in the demon's name.

With regards to the second, third, and forth accusations; "Attacking civilians," "Attacking civilian objects," and "deliberately causing grave bodily harm":

We ask you; who initiated the attacks on civilians? Who is attacking civilian objects? And who is causing grave bodily harm against civilians? Is it us, or is it you?

This prime example of argumentum tu-quoque shows us the second reason why the demon spawn should not be granted a civilian trial: their attempt to reverse the roles and put us on trial. The best response to their contumacious attitude is to drown them in a septic tank, without any trial. They present a list of irrelevant accusations, in order to distract attention from the fatal fact that attacking us is their 'religious' obligation because we do not worship their demon.

In fact, it was you who had wiped out two entire cities off the face of the earth and killed roughly half a million people in a few minutes and caused grave bodily harm by nuclear radiation? Did you forget about your nuclear bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Our termination of the war in the Pacific was an act of self defense, not aggression. That history is entirely irrelevant to the issue of Islam's act of genocidal conquest against us. They accuse us of initiating the war, overlooking the attacks by the Barbary Pirates when this nation was young and had no external military presence.

With regards to accusations five and six. "Crimes in violation of the law of war." and "Destroying property in violation of the law of war":

Who is breaking the law of war in this world? Is it us, or is it you? You have disobeyed all heaven and earth's laws of war, to include your own laws. You have violated the law of war by supporting the Israeli occupation of Arab land in Palestine and
Lebanon, and for displacing five million Palestinians outside their land. You have supported the oppressor over the oppressed and the butcher over the victim.

Here we have a combination of role reversal and moral inversion. Israel was invaded and occupied by Islam in 638. It is Israel that is illegally occupied, by Muslims. Israel has every right to expel the illegal occupation and defend herself against her attackers.

Also, you have violated the law of war by attacking an independent sovereign Arab nation with you first crusade campaign in 1991. By force, you have occupied the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf. In addition, today, you are occupying Iraq and Afghanistan.

Can anything surpass this contumacious expression of AssWholliness? It was Saddam Hussein who attacked Kuwait, we came to Kuwait's defense. We retaliated against Afghanistan & Iraq because they were complicit in the second attack on the WTC. Claiming the consequence of their aggression as an excuse for it flies in the face of reason & justice. It can not and must not be accepted!

We do not possess your military might, not your nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, we fight you with the almighty God. So, if our act of Jihad and our fighting with you caused fear and terror, then many thanks to God, because it is him that has thrown fear into your hearts, which resulted in your infidelity, paganism, and your statement that God had a son and your trinity beliefs.
God stated in his book, verse 151, AI-Umran: ((Soon shall we cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, for that they joined companies with Allah, for which he has sent no authority; There place will be the fire; and evil is the home of the wrongdoers.))

Once again reversing the roles, they accuse us of terrorism, then they claim their demon as a weapon against us and cite his prophesy of terror.

So, our religion is a religion of fear and terror to the enemies of God: the Jews, Christians, and pagans. With God's wiling, we are terrorists to the bone. So, many thanks to God.

Such a fine reply to the charge of terrorism! No further confession is needed.

Verse 195, AI-Baqara: ((And spend of your substance in the cause of Allah, and make not your own hands contribute to your destruction, but do good; for Allah loves those who do good.))We ask to be near to God, we fight you and destroy you and terrorize you. The Jihad in god's cause is a great duty in our religion. We have news for you, the news is: You will be greatly defeated in Afghanistan and Iraq and that America will fall, politically, militarily, and economically. Your end is very near and your fall will be just as the fall of the towers on the blessed 9/11 day. We will raise from the ruins, God willing. We will leave this imprisonment with our noses raised high in dignity, as the lion emerges from his den. We shall pass over the blades of the sword into the gates of heaven. So we ask from God to accept our contributions to the great attack, the great attack on America, and to
place our nineteen martyred brethren among the highest peaks in paradise. God is great and pride for God, the prophet, and the believers....

Yet they conclude with another confession. What need is there for a trial? Why waste the money? Why give them a platform for their damnable lies and false allegations? Why risk the chance that their compatriots will take hostages to force us to release them?

Let justice be done instead. Force them to dig pit toilets in Central Park, stake them out in the pits, erect outhouses over them and hold a big picnic every day in the week of the next 9/11 anniversary. When the pits are full, replace the outhouses with apple trees.

Besides doing justice in the matter of those five captured terrorists, we must recognize the fatal fact that Islam, as preached and practiced by its founder, is the enemy that attacked us and which will continue to attack us so long as it continues to exist. We must cast its votaries and its institutions out of this nation and bar their re-entry.

Those who seek to appease Islam; who defend it, asserting that it is a 'great religion' or that it has been 'hijacked' are not patriots, they are traitors. The elected officials among them must be impeached and removed from office.

Jesus 4 Shari'ah??

A British Muslim web site, whose creators and clients should have long since been expelled from Britain, http://www.islam4uk.com/ polluted the web with a blasphemous suggestion that Jesus Christ was a Muslim and would favor Shari'ah over secular 'democracy'. They want to debate Christians & Jews about Christ's mission one week before we celebrate the traditional anniversary of his birth. They advertise their debate proposal with two graphic images. Thanks and a tip of the hat to Logan's Warning for alerting me to the existence of this drek.




http://www.islam4uk.com/index.php/current-affairs/uk-news/367--the-big-debate-jesus4shariah-181209.html


The three questions propounded in the second image are critical. I will take them on superficially.

1. The message of Jesus was apolitical. His message was directed to his audience jointly and severally as God's creations, not as citizens of the state. He told them how to relate to each other and to God, not how to govern their nation. His kingdom is spiritual, not temporal; he came as a teacher, not a ruler.

• 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
  
  
  
• 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. [John, KJV]
  

2. I have seen no scriptural record of Jesus rebelling against the Romans or the Jewish hierarchy that cooperated with them. Driving the money changers from the Temple was his only recorded violent act; it was not against the hierarchy
3. Islamic arrogance stands out like a wart on the tip of Moe's nose. The question begs the question of oppression. The people of Iraq were oppressed by the Hussein regime, which provoked a war. They suffer the consequences of silently allowing a tyrant to engage in malicious mischief. Afghanistan made the same mistake, by supporting al-Qaeda and refusing to hand them over after they attacked us. Palestine is oppressed by the an occupying force of Muslim Arabs who do not belong there. Jesus would stand with the genuine victims, not the aggressors who pretend to be victims.

Islam blasphemes Jesus, denying his paternity & divinity, assigning him the status of slave, denying his crucifixion, death & resurrection and co-opting him as a genocidal warlord. As-Saff 14 implies that Jesus led his disciples into battle against the Jews who rejected him.

One hadith stands apart from the rest. Pay careful attention to this description of the second coming. What will Jesus do?

• Sunan Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4310:
  Narrated AbuHurayrah:
  
  The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (peace_be_upon_him). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him.

"He will fight the people for the cause of Islam." According to Islamic prophecy, Jesus will return as a warlord, like Moe. What is the meaning of "break the cross, kill swine":? The answer is in the next sentence: "Allah will perish all religions except Islam. According to Islamic propecy, Jesus, fighting the people, will kill the remaining Christians and Jews.

The wise guiys will claim that I am reading too much into a simple saying, that I am mis-interpreting it. But I have confirmation, which comes from Ibn Kathir's Tafsir of 7:167.

• [...]In the future, the Jews will support the Dajjal (False Messiah); and the Muslims, along with `Isa, son of Mary, will kill the Jews. This will occur just before the end of this world.[...]

So Jesus will impose and enforce Shari'ah. That includes amputation for theft and stoning for adultery. Lets check the scripture again.

• 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
  [John, KJV]
  

Jesus was a Muslim? Did he pray at the prescribed times? How did he know what they were? How did he know the prescribed prayers? How did he know the prescribed ritual gestures? Did he perform hajj and its attendant rituals? How is it possible that Islam's second most important prophet never visited the Kaaba? If he did, why is it not recorded in the Gospels? Why did he fail to teach his disciples to fast during Ramadan and perform Hajj? How would he know the rituals of Islam more than 500 years before Muhammad invented the cult? What Muslim would study the Torah instead of the Qur'an? Does anyone know of a Muslim Rabbi?

The imposition is a blasphemous outrage and an insult to our intelligence. The Church of England should send a qualified theologian to debate the impostors and trim them down to size. I doubt that they will do that; I expect that they will pass up a great opportunity to expose Islam as a foolish imposture.

Swiss Minaret Ban: Big Deal

Regular readers of my blog posts know that I waste few opportunities to blast Islam with facts. They must be wondering why I have not written about the Nov. 29 referendum which banned new minarets in Switzerland. There are two primary reasons. First, I am not entirely in agreement with the concept. Second, I wanted to let others write first so that I could take the role of clean up writer.

First and foremost, I am opposed to superficial, symbolic attacks which accomplish nothing beyond the counter productive stimulation of Islamic resentment. Beards, burkas & hijabs are symbolic, but they are not more important to the wearer as they are to us. Their value is more than symbolic, they are warning signs. Like a skunk's stripes and a rattle snake's noisy tail, they serve to alert us to the proximity of danger.

Second, I perceive the vote to be a temporary victory. I have little doubt that the result will be overturned in the courts. The vote serves mainly as a signal of rising public awareness of Islam's true nature and the existential threat it poses to Western Civilization.

My readers know that I will take on anyone, without fear or favor. While other writings have been more deserving of criticism, My choice did a better job of clarifying some of the issues involved. Dr. Sami Alrabaa wrote an exclusive for Family Security Matters: Minarets are Symbols of Bigotry. I will quote some good parts, but you really should click the link and read the entire article because the quotes which follow are taken out of context. .

It is also true that huge lavish mosques funded by petrodollars are being constructed to prove that Islam is omnipresent everywhere and Islam – the best religion on earth! – is increasingly being accepted and practiced all over the world.

The huge mosques & soaring minarets are symbols of Islamic supremacism & domination.

Minaret construction is an exhibition of political power spearheaded by Islamists. These “towers” are simply aggressive symbols of fanatic defying power.

Minaret construction has nothing to do with freedom of religion. It is a symbol of bigotry.

If we allow the erection of minarets without offering resistance, our silent acquiescence is a token of surrender. The Swiss electorate decided not to surrender, but they stopped short of effective resistance. They attacked symbolism, not substance.

But when it comes to referendum, the majority in the Western world would also reject Islam as a stone-age “religion.” I am pretty sure that if the Swiss referendum were held in other European countries, the majority would also vote in favor of banning the construction of minarets. The European public is better informed than their self-appointed defenders of Islam.

I am not yet convinced that a majority are fully aware of the nature of Islam. But the Swiss vote may indicate a trend of increasing awareness. Lapidation may be a stone age execution method, but Moe had weapons made of more advanced materials. 610 was hardly part of the stone age.

It is also true that the Swiss and the rest of the world are not against Muslims practicing their own religion in peace like all followers of other religions.

Islam can not be practiced in peace. Jihad is an intrinsic and inseverable part of Islam. Al-Anfal & At-Taubah are permanent parts of Islamic scripture. If we are not against the practice of Islam, then we are passively surrendering.

If, however, people around the globe, especially in the West, read the Koran and Hadith and realize how this religion incites to hatred and violence against non-Muslims, and discrimination against women, they would classify it as an extremist ideology, as politically incorrect and demand banning it like all extremist organizations. Check out “Is Islam a Violent Faith?” and “Women in Hadith.”

Nevertheless, the world community, including Switzerland, accepts Islam as a “religion” and allows its followers to practice it under the principle of religious freedom.

We accept Islam as a "religion" and allow its practice, but if we read Islam's canon of scripture and tradition we would reject it. Will anyone get a clue from those vital paragraphs?

Before the West accepts Islam as a religion it must demand that Muslim states reform Islam; accept/apply universal human rights and religious freedom in their societies.

Preaching hatred and violence must be banned and their perpetrators must be punished. Additionally, the free civilized world must demand from Muslims and their religious institutions and states: Drop all those atrocious passages from your Koran and Hadith if you want to be part of the civilized world.

So Islam must be reformed; the violent passages must be removed from its canon of scripture & tradition. You forgot one, Dr. Alrabaa : Shari'ah. Islamic law reflects Islamic scripture & tradition. How many of those texts exist in book stores and in libraries all over the world? How many exist in computer hard disks and web pages? How do you hope to edit all of them? Who will edit all the copies of Ibn Kathir's Tafsir and Riyad us-saliheen?

Allah tells us in 5:3 & 11:1 that Islam and its scripture are perfected. Perfection can only be defiled, not improved. Allah tells us in 6:115, 10:64 and 30:30 that the Koran and the "religion" of which it is the foundation can not be changed. In Sahih Bukhari 9.78.174 Moe is on record cursing anyone who changes Islam after his death, saying that they will be far removed from mercy. Abu Dawud 23.3455 has Moe saying that if Muslims abandon Jihad in favor of agriculture, "Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion." [Emphasis added.]


Muslims who would reform Islam risk fatwa as apostates. Muslims Against Sharia is a prime example. Their Koran revision leaves As-Saff 10-13 intact. while Surah At-Taubah has been entirely excised. Surahs 8 & 47 lose context & continuity when the violent ayat are removed.

Perhaps you'd prefer to re-interpret the Koran. But the gates of ijtihad have been closed for 900 years. They are not about to spring open. Who knows the interpretation better than the one who revealed it? His Sunna & Sira show us what the Koran means. What does this mean?

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.

Moe will tell you what it means!

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." [Emphasis added.]

Allah's jihad imperatives mean exactly what they say. They can not be edited, and if they were, they would eventually be restored.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4278:

Narrated AbuHurayrah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Allah will raise for this community at the end of every hundred years the one who will renovate its religion for it.

The Swiss initiative is symbolic, with no effect beyond giving visibility to the rising tide of rejection of Islam. Islam is an intolerable predator which can not be reformed. That leaves Western Civilization one alternative: Islam must be prohibited by law. Ban the substance, not its symbols.

Dr. Sami Alrabaa asserts that we would reject Islam and favor banning it if we understood it from reading the Koran & hadith. You can test that hypothesis without slogging through thousands of pages of musty text. The ayat most relevant to Islamic aggression, the tafsir which explain them and the ahadith which confirm them are contained in EgregiousAyat.chm, along with the most important part of Shari'ah which codifies them into law.

The practical application of those texts is found in fiqh: rulings by Islamic jurists. FOMIJihad.chm's Jihad in Fiqh chapter presents a significant sample of relevant rulings. For those who prefer the hard slog method, the Muslim Student Association at USC maintains a data base containing three parallel translations of the Koran and four of the six canonical hadith collections.

For those who need the look, feel, permanence & aroma of printed text:

• The Meaning Of The Holy Quran by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (Hardcover - May 2004) Buy new: $24.95 $20.60
• The English Translation of Sahih Al Bukhari With the Arabic Text (9 volume set) by Muhammad Ibn Ismail Bukhari and Muhammad Muhsin Khan (Hardcover - Oct 1996) 2 new from $158.98 2 used from $169.23
• Tafsir Ibn Kathir (10 Volumes; Abridged) by Hafiz Ibn Kathir (Hardcover - Sep 1, 2000) Buy new: $279.50
• Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law Umdat Al-Salik by Ahmad Ibn Lulu Ibn Al-Naqib and Noah Ha Mim Keller (Hardcover - Jul 1, 1997) Buy new: $29.95 $25.60

Cancel the Show Trials!

World Net Daily has initiated a petition campaign against civilian trials for terrorists. After stating the obvious logical reasons for opposing the New York show trials, they cite Article III, Section 1of the Constitution as the legal basis for Congressional control of lower court jurisdiction and resolve:

We, the undersigned, assert our rights as citizens of the United States in demanding the Congress of the United States use its authority to stop this show trial and any future abuses of American jurisprudence by making a simple declaration:

"Federal district courts shall have no jurisdiction over any case involving unlawful enemy combatants, as that term is defined in the United States Code (Title 10, Section 948a)."

Foreign terrorists, captured on foreign soil, who are not U.S. citizens, are not entitled to the rights, privileges & immunities of citizens. They do not have a right to get off Scott-free by trickery or technicality.

We do not owe them a soapbox from which to spew their anti-civilization venom. We do not need to subject the survivors of the Abomination to the daily grind of news coverage which will surely tear open their psychic wounds.

We must not subject the residents of New York City and the surrounding area to increased risk of terrorism, particularly that of hostage taking designed to win the release of the terrorists.

3,528 people have signed the petition, I am one of them. Please sign it and urge your family, friends & associates to sign it. Lets say no to treasonous, suicidal idiocy!

Muslim Connection to Maurice Clemmons?

A friend emailed a link to a defunct blog. A Google search turned up a related post at The Last Crusade. They assert that Maurice Clemmons, the cop killer, was a prison convert to the Nation of Islam. They assert that an organization of black criminals, claiming Islamic association, is celebrating his 'martyrdom'. Bill Warner begs to differ click this link for details.

The black militant site The Last Crusade links to has been pulled down, and for good reason. Eliminate all fire, choke, spill, spew, and related hazards before clicking the following link. Make sure there are no hammers or guns within reach. Go take care of any biological necessities, because this site may induce incontinence and will certainly induce extreme rage. http://ghettobraggingrights.ning.com/ I can only tell you that the original link and this one share a common graphic of a very disgusting nature. They may or may not share common authorship or sources; I don't know.

This link: http://ghettobraggingrights.ning.com/profiles/blogs/for-many-are-called-but-few claims that the murdering wretch will collect 72 houris for each cop he murdered.

72 x 4 =288 Virgins in Heaven

That link is to the Wordpress blog which has been pulled down for TOS.
The next link : http://ghettobraggingrights.ning.com/profiles/blogs/whos-your-favorite-officer is to a similar page, with the same graphic, and this offensive text.

Who is your favorite officer down?” Seattle Black Foot Soldier Alfred “Issaquah” Shafford is reported as asking in a rally to celebrate (what’s being called) the blow against the white terrorist racism of the Washington State Police Regime at the Steele Street Forza Coffee House that occurred early Sunday morning.

“For Many Are Called But Few Are Chosen.” BOW Martyr Against White Terrorist & Racist Police Regime (Maurice Clemmons) Adorned With Virgins, Jewelry & Crowned; “When the Battle is Over, We Shall Wear a Crown.” – Seattle Black Foot Soldiers

The rally came after a reported emergency meeting held by the movement to to map out plans for a street penitentiary protest and street party that will be held to disrespect tributes, memorials and funerals whites are expected to have for the terrorists.

Shafford advised brothers to prepare for street penitentiary protest and party unlike any previously known and to collect pictures and prepare effigies of the four terrorists for desecration and destruction.

“WE don’t WANT THE CITY LITTERED WITH FECES SMEARED PHOTOS OF THESE TERRORISTS. FOR THAT WOULD PROVE THAT WE ARE UNCIVILIZED.”

Wearing masks and dressed in black, it is reported that around a hundred local OOBAN Guerrillas were also in attendance.

A quick skimming of their blog posts page indicates that GBR celebrates murder, rape, racism & sedition. I did not find any evidence of genuine Islamic affiliation. It is possible that they have posthumously co-opted Clemmons and mention Islam as a rhetorical flourish.

The bottom line: if any living person has or adopts the attitudes expressed on that web site, I want it in prison, a grave or exile. I do not want such a fiend loose in this society!!! The judge who granted bail to Clemmons ought to be up before the Judicial Review Board.

Obamination: Wasting More Blood and Treasure in Afghanistan

In remarks at West Point, President Barack Hussein Obama laid out his plan for the surge in Afghanistan. As is my usual practice, I will present excerpts in block quote format interspersed with my comments.

To address these important issues, it's important to recall why America and our allies were compelled to fight a war in Afghanistan in the first place. We did not ask for this fight. On September 11, 2001, 19 men hijacked four airplanes and used them to murder nearly 3,000 people. They struck at our military and economic nerve centers. They took the lives of innocent men, women, and children without regard to their faith or race or station. Were it not for the heroic actions of passengers onboard one of those flights, they could have also struck at one of the great symbols of our democracy in Washington, and killed many more.

In this paragraph, President Obama begins to set up his pretext, one shared by his predecessor. Any sentient American more than 17 years old must be very sheltered to be unaware of the fact that the abomination was planned by Muslims in Afghanistan. Sure, we needed to retaliate. But the next paragraph contains egregious deceptions which must be refuted in detail.

As we know, these men belonged to al Qaeda -- a group of extremists who have distorted and defiled Islam, one of the world’s great religions, to justify the slaughter of innocents. Al Qaeda’s base of operations was in Afghanistan, where they were harbored by the Taliban -- a ruthless, repressive and radical movement that seized control of that country after it was ravaged by years of Soviet occupation and civil war, and after the attention of America and our friends had turned elsewhere.

Al-Qaeda means "the base", it is equivalent to Ummah al Islamiyya: the set whose members are Muslims. Taliban means "students of the Qur'an". Those are Muslims. There is nothing special about them except the fact that they are believers who obey Allah and emulate Moe. They are normal, not exceptional. They have not "distorted and defiled Islam". Islam remains what it was when Moe died in 632, a damnable war cult, not a religion of peace. There is nothing great about Islam. It conquered half the known world. Is that greatness? In the process, it murdered 270*10⁶, what is great about that? Great slaughter, is desired by Allah, Islam's demon, who established it as a prerequisite for releasing hostages for ransom. That is genocide; if genocide defines greatness, then morality has been inverted.

Islam does not recognize "innocents" outside Ummah al;-Islamiyya. Only Muslims can be innocent, all others are rebels against Allah, who must be defeated and gathered together into Hell. Jihad against disbelievers is not an optional extra added by extremists; it is not bida, it is standard Islamic doctrine laid down in Surah Al-Anfal & Surah At-Taubah. 8:39 contains Allah's command to fight pagans until all resistance ceases and only Allah is worshiped on a global scale. 9:29 contains Allah's command to fight Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians until they are subjugated and extorted. Moe confirmed the command to Jihad, which continues until the last day. Islamic law requires a minimum of one military expedition against kufar in every year, failing only when there is insufficient strength. Doubters & dissenters should open Reliance of the Traveller to O9.0 and continue reading through O9.9. O9.1 is explicit about the communal obligation to attack disbelievers in their own countries in every year. O9.8 & 9.9 reveal what the caliph does as a regular practice, aggressively, not defensively: he makes war upon Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians until they become Muslims or pay extortion, he fights all other people until they become Muslim or dead. How is it possible that a religion has such a law in its canon?

America, our allies and the world were acting as one to destroy al Qaeda’s terrorist network and to protect our common security.

The terrorist network is Islam. It consists of every Mosque, Madrassa & Muslim wheresoever dispersed over the face of the earth. Destroying al-Qaeda is not possible without destroying Islam! No effort is being made to accomplish that necessary objective. Both President G.W. Bush and President Obama deny the fact that Islam is at war against us. Our elected leaders will not acknowledge the fact that Islam is intrinsically inimical to life, liberty & representative government.

Under the banner of this domestic unity and international legitimacy -- and only after the Taliban refused to turn over Osama bin Laden -- we sent our troops into Afghanistan. Within a matter of months, al Qaeda was scattered and many of its operatives were killed. The Taliban was driven from power and pushed back on its heels. A place that had known decades of fear now had reason to hope. At a conference convened by the U.N., a provisional government was established under President Hamid Karzai. And an International Security Assistance Force was established to help bring a lasting peace to a war-torn country.

You can not scatter what is dispersed globally: Islam. President Bush lacked the courage to attack Tora Bora with sufficient force to eliminate bin Laden. Even eliminating him would not end the Jihad.

Neither were Taliban driven from power. Taliban are only Muslims who study the Qur'an. Afghanistan's new constitution makes the Qur'an the source of its law. Umdat as-Salik O9.8, which requires warfare against us, is part of Afghanistan's law. This nation and the world are being misled by morons and traitors. It is not possible to bring peace to a nation whose culture is war. The only peace Afghanistan can have is the peace of the grave, when the graveyard is full and the surface is empty.

Today, after extraordinary costs, we are bringing the Iraq war to a responsible end. We will remove our combat brigades from Iraq by the end of next summer, and all of our troops by the end of 2011. That we are doing so is a testament to the character of the men and women in uniform.

There is no responsible end to the war in Iraq while it remains populated by Muslims, our sworn enemies. When our troops leave, Iraq will revert to war between Shiia & Sunni, when that warfare ends, it will resume status quo ante as a sponsor of terrorism. No other outcome is possible while its population remains Islamic. The pull out on a set timetable is a testimony to the stupidity and treachery of our elected leaders.

But while we've achieved hard-earned milestones in Iraq, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated. After escaping across the border into Pakistan in 2001 and 2002, al Qaeda’s leadership established a safe haven there. Although a legitimate government was elected by the Afghan people, it's been hampered by corruption, the drug trade, an under-developed economy, and insufficient security forces.

No legitimate government can be composed of Muslims! Islam requires theocracy, one man rule by the Qur'an, not man made legislation. While Afghanistan remains Islamic and tribal, it will be corrupt and violent, neither well governed, peaceful nor stable. The problems listed by President Obama are not members of the set of soluble problems. Even if they could be solved, Afghanistan would revert to status quo ante: a state sponsor of terrorism.

I set a goal that was narrowly defined as disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al Qaeda and its extremist allies, and pledged to better coordinate our military and civilian efforts.

The "extremist allies" are every Muslim on the face of the earth. Will you kill them all? Will you convert them to a peaceful religion? No, you will do neither, and the terrorism will continue because you are a cowardly fool.

And our forces lack the full support they need to effectively train and partner with Afghan security forces and better secure the population.

"Afghan security forces" is an oxymoron. Those forces are composed of Muslims. Muslims are warriors, not security forces. To Muslims, peace is the condition of the world after they have completed their conquest of it. No matter how much you train them, they will shoot you in the back when given the opportunity, and they will betray your plans to the mujihideen.

I owe you a mission that is clearly defined, and worthy of your service. And that's why, after the Afghan voting was completed, I insisted on a thorough review of our strategy.

Any strategy that leaves live Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq is a total waste of blood and treasure, a fool's errand of the worst sort. No good outcome is possible.

After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home. These are the resources that we need to seize the initiative, while building the Afghan capacity that can allow for a responsible transition of our forces out of Afghanistan.

When will our forces leave Bosnia? When will our forces leave Germany? When will our forces leave Japan? You have presented our enemy with a time line telling them how long they must wait before they can seize power and restore the status quo ante. I call it treason.

I do not make this decision lightly. I opposed the war in Iraq precisely because I believe that we must exercise restraint in the use of military force, and always consider the long-term consequences of our actions.

How do you win a war with restraint? How do you win a war without identifying and killing the enemy? What are the long term consequences of allowing Islam to continue to exist on the face of the earth, accruing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons which it will not long hesitate to use? What were the consequences of ignoring Hitler's military buildup, substituting appeasement for preemption?

Most of all, I know that this decision asks even more of you -- a military that, along with your families, has already borne the heaviest of all burdens.

You are asking them to die for a lie. You are sending them to defeat, wasting their blood and the taxpayer's treasure.

If I did not think that the security of the United States and the safety of the American people were at stake in Afghanistan, I would gladly order every single one of our troops home tomorrow.

Our security is at stake wherever Islam exists; wherever Zakat is collected and sent to Hamas, Hizbollah & al-Qaeda; wherever Muslim satrapies are stockpiling missiles and rushing to construct nuclear warheads.

So, no, I do not make this decision lightly. I make this decision because I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the epicenter of violent extremism practiced by al Qaeda. It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak. This is no idle danger; no hypothetical threat. In the last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our borders who were sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit new acts of terror. And this danger will only grow if the region slides backwards, and al Qaeda can operate with impunity. We must keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and to do that, we must increase the stability and capacity of our partners in the region.

Strike al-Qaeda, insert Islam. The danger will grow no matter what, unless you eliminate Islam from the region. Then, the danger will come from another region where Allah's writ runs and his slaves reside.

No Muslim is our partner! Muslims who claim to be our partners are practicing al-taqeyya and kitman; they are deceiving you. Allah explicitly forbids Muslims to be friends or partners of kuffar. Muslims must be in a dominant, not equal or subordinate relationship with kuffar.

To meet that goal, we will pursue the following objectives within Afghanistan. We must deny al Qaeda a safe haven. We must reverse the Taliban's momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the government. And we must strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan's security forces and government so that they can take lead responsibility for Afghanistan's future.

Islam has bases in Iran, Syria & Lebanon. There are Islamic bases and training camps right here in America. What will you do about them? You say "al-Qaeda" when the correct word is Islam. Why can't you name the enemy? How do you hope to defeat an enemy you can not identify? Weak or strong, Afghanistan's government, like that of Pakistan, is in the hands of Muslims, our enemies. In the end, they will attack us and our allies. There is no benefit in strengthening them.

We will meet these objectives in three ways. First, we will pursue a military strategy that will break the Taliban's momentum and increase Afghanistan's capacity over the next 18 months.

To win, you must seize and hold territory 24/7/365. You must kill enemy combatants. No more catch and release. You must deny sanctuary, both in Pakistan and Afghanistan. You must deny human shields. Your rules of engagement are costing our soldiers their lives. The word is treason. Like Lindon Johnson, you are murdering our service members for political gain. More troops is not a strategy, it is feeding the meat grinder, filling coffins.

They'll increase our ability to train competent Afghan security forces, and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight. And they will help create the conditions for the United States to transfer responsibility to the Afghans.

Afghans are the enemy, idiot. They are not our allies nor partners, they are Muslims. You are training them to fight against us, just like Arafat's "security forces".

We will support efforts by the Afghan government to open the door to those Taliban who abandon violence and respect the human rights of their fellow citizens.

.Stupid statements like that make my blood boil! Muslims do not abandon violence without abandoning Islam! Muslims do not respect human rights! They never did and never will!! Allah does not, Moe did not and they will not. Being a Muslim, President Obama knows that. There is only one possibility: treason.

We're in Afghanistan to prevent a cancer from once again spreading through that country. But this same cancer has also taken root in the border region of Pakistan. That's why we need a strategy that works on both sides of the border.

Strike cancer, insert Islam. Otherwise the statement must remain false. No strategy can work unless it causes Islam to be eliminated from Afghanistan and Pakistan. Any outcome that leaves them Islamic is a defeat.

And there is no doubt that the United States and Pakistan share a common enemy.

Islam is the enemy of all mankind. Pakistan is our enemy. Is Obama too stupid to comprehend objective factual reality or a traitor. I don't believe its stupidity.

Moving forward, we are committed to a partnership with Pakistan that is built on a foundation of mutual interest, mutual respect, and mutual trust. We will strengthen Pakistan’s capacity to target those groups that threaten our countries, and have made it clear that we cannot tolerate a safe haven for terrorists whose location is known and whose intentions are clear.

Imbecility, maundery & treachery; what a combination! We have no mutual interest with Muslims. They do not respect us. We can not trust them. They support those groups, they do not combat them. Pakistan was, is now and will continue to be a safe haven for terrorists. Muslim and terrorist are synonymous terms.

To abandon this area now -- and to rely only on efforts against al Qaeda from a distance -- would significantly hamper our ability to keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and create an unacceptable risk of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies.

A single drop of truth in a river of lies. It stands out like a carp swimming upstream in a sewer.

Second, there are those who acknowledge that we can't leave Afghanistan in its current state, but suggest that we go forward with the troops that we already have. But this would simply maintain a status quo in which we muddle through, and permit a slow deterioration of conditions there. It would ultimately prove more costly and prolong our stay in Afghanistan, because we would never be able to generate the conditions needed to train Afghan security forces and give them the space to take over.

The same is true of Obama's strategy.

Now, let me be clear: None of this will be easy. The struggle against violent extremism will not be finished quickly, and it extends well beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan. It will be an enduring test of our free society, and our leadership in the world. And unlike the great power conflicts and clear lines of division that defined the 20th century, our effort will involve disorderly regions, failed states, diffuse enemies.

Shrub failed the test. Obamination is failing the test. We need leaders who can measure up, men like Churchill, McArthur & Truman.

We will have to take away the tools of mass destruction. And that's why I've made it a central pillar of my foreign policy to secure loose nuclear materials from terrorists, to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and to pursue the goal of a world without them -- because every nation must understand that true security will never come from an endless race for ever more destructive weapons; true security will come for those who reject them.

Nukes are in the world. There is no possibility of ensuring that our enemies have eliminated their inventories and won't make more. The dream of a nuke free world is impossible. Continuing to harbor it is evidence of insanity, or is it treason?

Like Shrub, Obamination refuses to identify and accurately describe the enemy. He falsely ascribes to the enemy objectives that it does not have. He falsely characterizes our relationship with certain enemy powers as an alliance or partnership. He postulates a non-existent dichotomy between the enemy, which he calls a partner, and a subset of the enemy, which he mislabels as the enemy. Obamination's strategy is a house of cards founded on a lie. It can not stand in the storm of reality.