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]
  

1. 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   
2. 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.

    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.[...]

• 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]
  

    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.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

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.

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.

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.  

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.

    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.

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.]

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.  

    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

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

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)."

    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!

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

    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

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.

    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.  

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

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.

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.

    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.

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.

    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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

    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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Regular readers of these posts know that I am an equal opportunity offender, telling it as I see it without fear or favor.  This time I tear off a few pieces from  Don't Let ''Allahu Akbar'' Become A Pejorative by  Jordan Sekulow. [Original at Huffington Post.]  As usual, I will intersperse my comments among excerpts in block quote format.

Islam continues to linger at a crossroads.  After the tragic events of 9/11, the free world has taken pains to differentiate their War on Terror from notions of a war on Islam.  We have repeatedly called Islamic terrorists "extremists" that only represent a small minority within the Islamic faith.  Considering, however, recent news involving Islamic places of worship -- such as the mosque raids and revealed ties between several imams and terrorist cells -- the time is ripe for innocent Muslim-Americans to stand up and prevent "Allahu Akbar" from becoming a pejorative.  In particular, peaceful, innocent adherents to the faith should more strongly challenge members of its leadership who openly condone acts of violence.

    Terrorism is not an enemy, it is a tactic, sanctified by 3:151 & 8:12  and exemplified by 33:26 & 59.2.   The founder of Islam was a terrorist, by his own admission: "made victorious with terror" and "Allah made me victorious by awe" . Moe's recitation and sunna set the standard of Islam; terrorism is the rule, not the exception. Terrorists are zealous believers, obeying Allah & emulating Moe,  not extremists.

    Passive Muslims, who neither approve of, participate in nor support Jihad are hypocrites, not believers. Muslims are explicitly forbidden to question their leaders in the manner suggested.

O8.7

• -4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);

• -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) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;

• -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);

• -16- to revile the religion of Islam;

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

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.

So where is the condemnation?  Where is the outrage?  Sure, we hear from ordinary Muslims who express their disgust at these attacks, but why do we hear nothing from Islamic leaders?  While the controversial Council on American Islamic Relations condemned Hasan's actions, we also learned that a frequent speaker at CAIR events, Zaid Shakir, said that, "Islam doesn't permit us to hijack airplanes filled with civilian people.  If you hijack an airplane filled with the 82nd Airborne, that's something else."

An Imam or a King would write himself out of Islam, signing his death warrant by condemning what Allah commanded and Moe exemplified.

There is no better time for Muslims to engage in what Salman Rushdie called a "Muslim Reformation".  Muslims, especially Muslim-Americans, should unite and collectively take back their religion.  They should demand that their leaders not only condemn acts of terrorism and jihadist violence, but also actively expel radicals from their mosques.  More importantly, if leaders fail to take the appropriate actions, they should be removed.  Covering up true problems within the faith will backfire -- just ask Catholic leaders.  Democracy's War on Islam is exactly the war Islamic terrorists have been hoping to ignite, and we must not let them succeed.

Muslims can not "take back their religion", they have maintained possession of it; it has not been hijacked nor has it been twisted or perverted.  Muslim leaders can not condemn what Allah commanded them to do and Moe exemplified for them to emulate.  

    The faith is the problem; it is evil by design. The relationship between Allah and the Muslims is master: slave. Allah purchased the Muslims with admission to Paradise so they fight in his cause, kill and are killed. Don't take my word for it, read 9:111. Its all about getting the top 20% of the spoils for Moe. Don't take my word for it, read 8:1 & 8:41.

    Islam can not be reformed. Perfection can only be defiled, not improved. Allah's word says "fight them". Allah's word says "cast terror". Allah's word can not be changed.

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. For them are glad tidings, in the life of the present world (i.e. righteous dream seen by the person himself or shown to others), and in the Hereafter. No change can there be in the Words of Allâh, this is indeed the supreme success

18:27. And recite what has been revealed to you (O Muhammad ) of the Book (the Qur'ân) of your Lord (i.e. recite it, understand and follow its teachings and act on its orders and preach it to men). None can change His Words, and none will you find as a refuge other than Him.

30:30. So set you (O Muhammad ) your face towards the religion of pure Islâmic Monotheism Hanifa (worship none but Allâh Alone) Allâh's Fitrah (i.e. Allâh's Islâmic Monotheism), with which He has created mankind. 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]  [Emphasis added for clarity.]

[...]"I will say those people are from me. It will be said, 'You do not know what changes and new things they did after you.' Then I will say, 'Far removed (from mercy), far removed (from mercy), those who changed (the religion) after me! "[...] Sahih Bukhari 9.88.174    [Emphasis added for clarity.]

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

The sixty-fourth session Third Committee Agenda item 67 (a) Elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance A/C.3/64/L.53. echoes certain of its predecessors.   After the customary bs boilerplate& arcane references to external documents, they get down to brass tacks.[Emphasis added, spelling original.]

15. Reaffirms also that, as underlined in paragraph 13 of the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference, any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law, that the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority,  hatred, acts of violence or incitement to such acts shall be declared offences punishable by law, and that these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression;

13. Reaffirms that any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law; reaffirms further that all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts shall be declared offence punishable by law, in accordance with the international obligations of States and that these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression; [http://www.un.org/durbanreview2009/pdf/Durban_Review_outcome_document_En.pdf]

16. Underlines at the same time the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information, can play in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

17. Encourages those States that have made reservations to article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination to give serious consideration to withdrawing such reservations as a matter of priority;

Article 4

States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or promote racial hatred and discrimination in any form, and undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, such discrimination and, to this end, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this Convention, inter alia:

(a) Shall declare an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof;

(b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit organizations, and also organized and all other propaganda activities, which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law;

(c) Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination.

The United States of America does not regard the Convention as creating any obligation incompatible with the United States Constitution. It does not accept any obligation to enact measures under Article 4, which it views these as incompatible with freedom of expression, or under Articles 2, 3, and 5 with respect to private conduct. The Convention is not self-executing in US law.^[4]  [Wikipedia]   [Emphasis added.]

    ¶15 quotes and cites ¶13 of the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference. In reading that text, recall the  report of the preliminary meeting, which equates criticism of Islam with racism: "anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporary forms of racism".

    The terms therein referenced require clear definition. 

• advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred
• constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence
• ideas based on racial superiority,  
• hatred, 
• acts of violence or incitement to such acts

Those terms are broadly defined by the OIC and its factotum. Examine the Secretary General's condemnation of 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.” [Emphasis added for clarity.]

• hate speech
• incitement to violence.

    I invite all parties to carefully consider ICERD's fourth article, which is reproduced above. The signatories condemn all propaganda and organizations based on ideas of racial superiority.  But  racial no longer applies only to skin color, it applies to religion since Durban II conflated them. Those nations which signed ICERD must condemn all propaganda and organizations based on ideas of religious superiority.   Of course, you don't have a clue. I will give you one.

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.

    Sub paragraph a compels signatories to proscribe by law:

• all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred
• incitement to racial discrimination
• all acts of violence or incitement to such acts

• 8:39
• 9:29
• 9:123

• organizations which promote racial discrimination
• all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin

    Of course, ICERD specifies race, it does not specify religion. But ICERD is not the only applicable international human rights covenant.

ICCPR

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

CPPCG

Article 1

Article 2

• (a) Killing members of the group;
• (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
• (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

Article 3

• (a) Genocide;
• (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
• (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
• (d) Attempt to commit genocide;
• (e) Complicity in genocide.

8:37. In order that Allâh may distinguish the wicked (disbelievers, polytheists and doers of evil deeds) from the good (believers of Islâmic Monotheism and doers of righteous deeds), and put the wicked (disbelievers, polytheists and doers of evil deeds) one on another, heap them together and cast them into Hell. Those! it is they who are the losers.

17:16. And when We decide to destroy a town (population), We (first) send a definite order (to obey Allâh and be righteous) to those among them [or We (first) increase in number those of its population] who are given the good things of this life. Then, they transgress therein, and thus the word (of torment) is justified against it (them). Then We destroy it with complete destruction.

17:17. And how many generations have We destroyed after Nûh (Noah)! And Sufficient is your Lord as an All-Knower and All-Beholder of the sins of His slaves.

    Allah  speaks of heaping disbelievers together and casting them into Hell in 8:37.  In 17:16, he brags about making complete destruction. In 17:17 he brags about destroying multiple generations. He is setting a pattern and precedent. Observe how he fleshes it out. 

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.

    In 8:67, Allah sets great slaughter as the prerequisite for releasing captives for ransom, telling Moe that he must put slaughter ahead of profit. That tells us that Allah favors genocide.  This is confirmed in Surah Muhammad.

47:4. So, when you meet (in fight Jihâd in Allâh's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islâm), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allâh to continue in carrying out Jihâd against the disbelievers till they embrace Islâm (i.e. are saved from the punishment in the Hell-fire) or at least come under your protection], but if it had been Allâh's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allâh, He will never let their deeds be lost, 

    "Till when you have killed and wounded many of them" confirms Allah's quest for genocide. Moe besieged the Banu Qurayzah until they surrendered. What he did after they surrendered serves to confirm the message of 8:67 & 47:4. 

Sahih Volume 4, Book 52, Number 280:

Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri:

When the tribe of Bani Quraiza was ready to accept Sad's judgment, Allah's Apostle sent for Sad who was near to him. Sad came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah's Apostle said (to the Ansar), "Stand up for your leader." Then Sad came and sat beside Allah's Apostle who said to him. "These people are ready to accept your judgment." Sad said, "I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners." The Prophet then remarked, "O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah."  [For more complete detail, refer to 5.59.448]

    Moe arbitrarily slaughtered  about 700 prisoners of war.  What he did next should make your blood boil with outrage. 

Abu Dawud Book 38, Number 4390:
Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:
I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

    First he decapitated the men, and cast them into a trench, then he did the same to their adolescent sons. Allah wants genocide and he gets it. Islam's practice of genocide, mandated by Allah, is obviously not in conformity with the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

     The Banu Qurayzah, Armenian, Assyrian  and Hindu genocides demonstrate a pattern of continuing crime against humanity. Islamic prophecy projects it far into the future:  to the end of the world. The following hadith is one of the clearest among several with similar content.

Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4310:

Narrated Abu Hurayrah:

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.

    This saying, distilled to its essence, means that Jesus will return to make genocidal war upon the remaining remnant of Jews & Christians, destroying both populations. Besides being blasphemous, it is a token of Islam's genocidal intent.

[...]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.[...] Eternal Humiliation is Placed on the Jews

Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6985:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

That hadith tells Muslims that they can not obtain admission to Paradise and enjoy their rivers of wine and 72 houris until they exterminate the Jews.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

A press release distributed by Press Zoom  appears to be taken from the records of the Third Committee, describing the debate and voting on several resolutions before the committee.  

   Those resolutions included the five-part draft text on global efforts for the total elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action ( document A/C.3/64/L.54/Rev.1 ), which was introduced by the representative of Sudan, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

32. Calls upon all States, in accordance with the commitments undertaken in paragraph 147 of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action,1 to take all necessary measures to combat incitement to violence motivated by racial hatred,
including through the misuse of print, audio-visual and electronic media and new communication technologies, and, in collaboration with service providers, to promote the use of such technologies, including the Internet to contribute to the fight against racism, in conformity with international standards of freedom of expression and taking all necessary measures to guarantee that right;

33. Encourages all States to include in their educational curricula and social programmes at all levels, as appropriate, knowledge of and tolerance and respect for all cultures, civilizations, religions, peoples and countries, as well as information on the follow-up to and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action; [Emphasis added.]

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.” [Emphasis added for clarity.]

    Paragraph 33 encourages turning our schools into instruments  of propaganda & indoctrination, bordering on proselytizing.  It is impossible for an informed and rational person to tolerate or respect Islam because Islam is supremely intolerant and denies our rights and dignity in addition to declaring perpetual war against us.

Speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, the representative of the United States said his country was deeply committed to fighting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance at home and abroad.  Its founding commitment to the principle that all people were created equal was manifested in its own legislation and its work around the world.  Among other things, the United States had, in October, presented an action plan during the meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee on the elaboration of complementary standards. [Emphasis added for clarity.]

 Emphasizes the urgent need to address the scourges of anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporary forms of racism as well as racial and violent movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas directed at African, Arab, Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other communities; [Emphasis added for clarity, spelling original.]

He said the United States had been unable to support the Durban Review Conference because it supported the 2001 World Conference, in toto.  The United States was deeply concerned about hateful speech, but did not agree that the best way to combat such speech was by its prohibition.  Rather, the United States believed an effective approach was based on three key elements, including robust legal protections against hate crimes, outreach to religious groups and vigorous defence of freedom of expression.  It regretted having to vote “no” on this text and looked forward to working together with the international community.  It remained deeply committed to ongoing, thoughtful dialogue on combating racism and racial discrimination. [Emphasis added for clarity, spelling original.]

    "Hate crimes": if any expression should be criminalized, that is the one. Assaulting, killing or harassing  anyone is a crime, regardless of the victim's identity, religion, gender, etc. There is no group of persons more deserving of protection than any other.

    "Outreach to religious groups" is  code for pandering to Islam, submitting to its outrageous demands. Islam's most outrageous demand is that we submit and become Muslims.  We might as well be bitten by Dracula and become vampires.  Islamic law forbids any and all negative expression about Allah, Moe, the Qur'an & the laws  they issued.  If you doubt this, open Reliance of the Traveller to O8.7 and read the list of acts which entail leaving Islam, the penalty for which is death (O8.2).  For the law's applicability to non-Muslims, see  O11.10(5).

    Far from being a saintly Prophet, Moe was a pedophile who married the six year old daughter of his best friend. He  solicited the murder of critics. He was guilty of  genocide; preaching and practicing it. 

    Far from being a  "great religion of peace", Islam is a mercenary war cult, contrived for the purpose of enriching and empowering its founder by perpetuating war so that he could accrue the spoils.

    Islam's objective in demanding blasphemy laws & censorship is to disarm us in the war of ideas so that, in the words of George Washington,  "dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter".

    If you are a lover of liberty and the rights ensured by the Bill of Rights, then do your part to preserve them by signing and propagating these petitions. Send their links  to everyone you can hope to influence with an exhortation to sign and forward them.

• Free to Believe
• ACLJ
• International Qur'an Petition
  

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

An important message from the  Clarion Fund:

This Year, America has witnessed an increased number of radical extremist incidents. The recent tragedy at Fort Hood is only one of many alarming plots carried out on our soil. The threats are very real.

This Thanksgiving, we commemorate the one year anniversary of the attacks in Mumbai.

We must pause on this day to acknowledge our liberties and recognize those that actively seek to destroy our values. To mark this day, the producers of the award-winning Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West are making the film available for free viewing online.

The free stream campaign will run from Monday November 23 until December 10 at www.radicalislam.org/obsession.

This campaign follows a highly successful free stream of The Third Jihad to mark the anniversary of 9/11. Over 35,000 viewers watched the film over the course of the 2 1/2 week campaign.

Together, these films represent the best educational tools available for informing the public about the true threats of radical Islam.

• Islamic Terror.chm [30.4KB] A 6 part series from Freedom Ain't Free. 
• Jihad.chm [45KB] A 6 part series from Freedom Ain't Free. 
• What's Wrong With Islam/Muslims.chm [23KB]. New 10/11/08
• Islamic Supremacism [49KB] A 3 part series from Freedom Ain't Free
• FOMIJihad.chm [163.4KB] The Offensive Jihad thread from the once defunct FOMI anti Islam forum. This thread contains several significant quotes from Fiqh, both ancient and modern.
• EgregiousAyat.chm: 4 tables containing the most egregious Qur'anic verses [Hilali & Khan];  1 table containing the most egregious sayings. & the most important segment of Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Ch. 9.  6.723MB Zipped.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Paul R. Hollrah, O.E.
The Twenty-Eighth Amendment
November 24, 2009

    Since the horrific Fort Hood Massacre of Nov. 5, '09, suggestions that Islam should be outlawed increased in frequency and intensity.  The latest call for delegitimization of Islam does not come from a blog or comment, it comes from a freelance writer and think tank fellow,  published by New Media Journal. 

    I found three interesting quotes in the preamble; they are reproduced below, in block quotes, followed by my commentary.

But it is the violent and criminal acts of Muslims...acts which they see as religious imperatives, while to Christians and Jews they are repugnant acts of violence...that concern us most. We are told again and again that Islam is a religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims want nothing more than to live in peace. Although this may be true in most cases, it is entirely irrelevant so long as peace-loving Muslims fail to stand up and expose the radicals in their midst. The Muslim who claims to love peace, but who ignores the radicalism he sees and hears in his mosque is just as guilty of terrorism as those who carry out terrorist attacks against innocents.

    I am not concerned as much by the violent acts as by the immutable, intrinsic doctrines of Islam which motivate and perpetuate a succession of violent acts. The violence prone zealots who obey Allah & emulate Moe have the weapons and will to use them.  The meek wind up dead in a ditch. 

    The Muslim who knows, believes and tacitly accepts the demonic doctrines which sanctify and mandate conquest, genocide & terrorism are just as guilty as those who carry out those evil acts. The ignorant or peace loving Muslim of good will who goes along with the flow is almost as much a victim of Islam as those the terrorists seek to harm. 

 

Today, it is the fanatics who rule Islam; who war against non-Muslims; who slaughter Christians and Jews around the world; who bomb, behead, murder, and honor-kill; who take over mosque after mosque and radicalize its members; who stone and hang rape victims and homosexuals; and who teach young men that they will have eternal joy in paradise...to say nothing of seventy-two virgins...if only they will strap bombs to their bodies and detonate them in crowded marketplaces. These are the things that the Koran teaches.

    Because the Koran teaches those things, the men who preach & practice them are not fanatics, radicals or extremists;  they are believers.  Those who do not preach  & practice Jihad are hypocrites, not good Muslims.

If Islam, as we know it today, had existed in the day of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, and had Muslims been present in large numbers during the early years of our Republic, religious liberty would today be an entirely different matter.

     Islam, as we know it today, existed in  Thomas Jefferson's day. It plundered American merchantmen, killed or enslaved the crews and demanded tribute, which the new nation paid until 1805 when Jefferson summoned his resolve and sent the Marines to Tripoli. Anyone who doubts this should read about the Barbary War.

    Jefferson's contemporary, J.Q. Adams  understood Islam, as demonstrated by this quote. 

“In the seventh century of the Christian era a wandering Arab, of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, combing the powers of transcendent genius with the preternatural energy of a fanatic and the fraudulent spirit of an imposter, proclaimed himself as a messenger from heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth.

Adopting, from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God, he connected indissolubly with it the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war as part of his religion against all the rest of mankind. The essence of his doctrine was violence and lust; to exalt the brutal over the spiritual part of human nature.

Between these two religions, thus contrasted in the characters, a war of more than twelve hundred years has already raged. That war is yet flagrant; nor can it cease but by the extincture of that imposture, which has been permitted by Providence to prolong the degeneracy of man. While the merciless and dissolute are encouraged to furnish motives to human action, there never can be peace on earth and good will toward men. The hand of Ishmael will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him.” John Adams, 1830

–John Quincy Adams, “Christianity—Islamism.” “Unsigned essays dealing with the Russo-Turkish War, and on Greece,” originally published in The American Annual Register for 1827—1829 (New York, 1830), Chs. X-XIV: 267—402. (source)

    The text of Paul R. Hollrah's  proposed amendment follows. 

“The right of the People to be secure in their persons and property shall not be abridged, and no person, or group of persons, may interfere or attempt to interfere in the right of others to pursue life, liberty, religious practice, or freedom of expression. No religious sect or denomination may advocate violent opposition to any other religious sect or denomination, or to the members thereof. Any religious sect or denomination which utilizes its religious freedoms in pursuit of political ends averse to the general welfare, at home or abroad, shall be in violation of this provision, shall forfeit the right to peaceably assemble, and shall not maintain places of worship.”

   Unfortunately, that text would be in conflict with the existing First Amendment. In my view, it is necessary to exclude Islam from membership in the set of recognized religions.  An institution which is not a religion is not protected by the First Amendment's free exercise clause and may be proscribed by law. 

    Closing Mosques, Islamic Centers & Madrassas is not sufficient action to solve the problem. So long as individual Muslims are present among us, free to indoctrinate their children and proselytize, the threat will not be reduced, it will increase.  Resident Muslims constitute a fifth column, each one a sleeper cell of one, capable of activation at any time, unpredictably.  We remain at risk until they die, emigrate or sincerely & finally abjure the doctrines of Islam. 

    Islam is what Moe preached and emulated, enshrined in the Koran & hadith; codified in Shari'ah.  Until you will read a sufficient sample of Islam's canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence, your knowledge of Islam is speculative and probably false.  Islam is not moderate, it is aggressive, intolerant and violent by design.  

    A Muslim described as moderate, who neither participates in nor approves of Jihad, is one whom Islam's founder described as a hypocrite, whose Islam goes no deeper than his throat. 

    Shari'ah requires Muslims to participate in annual attacks against disbelievers; neglecting to do so when it is possible is sin. I refer doubters & dissenters to Reliance of the Traveller, O9.1   It is the duty of the caliph to make war upon Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians until they become Muslim or pay the jizya as prescribed in 9:29. Let doubters & dissenters read O9.8.  It is the duty of the caliph to fight all other people until they become Muslim as prescribed in 8:39. Let doubters & dissenters read O9.9.  Once you have opened and loaded the file, you can use the Windows search function to find the reference letter & numbers  using the Ctrl f key combination. 

    Islam is supremely intolerant. 3:85. And whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.    Islam denies your right to live and own property.  Let doubters & dissenters read Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387. "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."

    Given the fact that Islam is intolerant & violent, dedicated to the destruction of our system of government & economy and Hellbent on enslaving us,  tolerating Islam is suicidal idiocy. 

    The first corrective measure known to me was proposed by Pedestrian Infidel in the spring of '07: A Proposed Constitutional Amendment.  Although I disagree with the fourth article of that proposal, I  have endorsed it, because it was the first and  remains the best option. 

    The Outlaw Islam! petition languishes with 124 signatures. I urge lovers of life & liberty to sign it, copy it and send it to everyone they can hope to influence with an exhortation to forward it.  When you have signed the petition, use the facilities of http://www.congress.org/ to send a link to the petition to your Representative & Senators. 

Read and post comments | Send to a friend