Islam Must Be Stopped

How to Achieve Energy Security and Lower Gas Prices

2011-05-28T01:31:00.000-07:00

THE FOLLOWING email was sent to ACT! for America members by Kelly Cook, ACT's National Field Director. We at "Islam Must Be Stopped" fully support ACT's commitment to this issue, and we urge you to help make this happen. The stakes could not be higher. And now, Kelly Cook's message:

Face it. We’ve been played.

OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) is playing a deadly game with America. Their oil price fixing mechanism is legendary in the unjust world of anti-trust schemes.

The fact is that oil prices in the $15 to $20 a barrel range provide plenty of fair and reasonable profits for any oil exporting nation. Then why are oil prices today over $100 per barrel? OPEC is laughing all the way to the bank.

Here’s the game: OPEC, through the willingness to price fix among its 12 nation partners, gradually ratchets up the price of oil through secretly agreed-to reductions in supply. They don’t care if they’re not producing as much oil. The skyrocketing prices on the oil they do produce are more than enough to provide for their lavish lifestyles and...their generous donations to worldwide Islamic jihadist operations.

As soon as the American public starts to really feel the pain at the pump and begin to lobby their members of Congress to do something about it, oil supplies “magically” increase and the price of gas settles down just enough to prevent the outrage that was about to boil over. And so the cycle goes — by design!

We at ACT! for America are tired of being played in this deadly game of supplying the enemy with the resources to attack us. This is why we are fully supporting the Open Fuel Standard ACT of 2011. We are calling for Members of Congress to enthusiastically co-sponsor this vital legislation.

Why the Open Fuel Standard Act? Imagine you’ve got a flex fuel car — a car that has been retro-fitted to accept at least 2 different kinds of fuel. You notice the price of regular gas just hit $4.10 per gallon. Because you can also run on methanol (or electricity, natural gas, etc), you check the current price for methanol which is approximately $1.65! Now that you’ve got “Fuel Choice,” you fill up with methanol! Methanol can be produced from natural gas and biomass (common trash, plant wastes, landfill materials, etc). Therefore, it’s a potential environmental winner as well.

What happens when tens of millions of consumers start taking advantage of fuel choice and switch to other fuels? OPEC is forced to bring down its prices in order to compete. Game over. The price of oil per barrel would plummet down to its natural market trading range of $10 to $25 per barrel.

How can we be so sure of this? Brazil has already done it — back in the 80’s and it’s still working for them! Do you know that two of the major car suppliers to Brazil’s flex fuel market are GM and Ford? Brazil’s proven success demonstrates that a single nation can employ this strategy successfully as a solitary nation against the forces of worldwide markets.

Why shouldn’t the U.S. and other major oil consuming countries follow suit? The transition costs are minimal when compared to the tremendous savings and security we all will enjoy through fuel choice!

I know some of you are asking: “What about Drill Baby Drill”? We are enthusiastically in favor of developing all strategies to disarm OPEC and their deadly allies. We need to develop all forms of energy, especially our unfathomable supplies of oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear energy technologies. Encouraging fuel choice through the Open Fuel Standard ACT of 2011 will only enhance these and other needed developments.

***Action Items***

1) Invest 5 minutes to support fuel choice for your gas tank and for the nation! Contact your member of Congress and urge them to be a co-sponsor for H.R. 1687, the Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011. We are starting to pick up real momentum in this process! Please make sure your member of Congress is a co-sponsor. Click Here to complete this simple process.

2) Check out the amazing new website dedicated to the passage of the Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011. Please sign up for email updates and find out the many reasons we need to actively promote this bill. The resources this site has amassed are considerable. There are many factors involved that we just don’t have the space to cover in a single email. Please avail yourself to this vital information. Click Here for this creative new website!

The Method

2009-02-07T15:13:00.000-08:00

The following is an excerpt from the article, Wilders Prosecution is a Welcome Opportunity to Expose Islam:

Tarek Ramadan visited the Islamic Center in Bilelefeld, Germany (May 21, 2008) and gave a speech. Before he began his speech, he asked if there were any journalists in audience. As the answer was negative, he said, “OK, now I feel free to say what I really want.” Ramadan is well-known for telling his infidel audience something and his Muslim audience another thing.

Ramadan said, “My brothers and sisters, we must exploit the so-called democracy and freedom of speech here in the West to reach our goals. Our Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and the Koran teach us that we must use every conceivable means and opportunity to defeat the enemies of Allah. Tell the infidels in public, we respect your laws and your constitutions, which we Muslims believe that these are as worthless as the paper they are written on. The only law we must respect and apply is the Shari’s.”

Ramadan added, “The Germans claim that they want to integrate you in their society. We tell them we are going to integrate them in our Umma (Muslim world) after converting them to Islam.”

The New Muslim Invasion

2009-02-07T15:09:00.000-08:00

The following is an excerpt from the article, Wilders Prosecution is a Welcome Opportunity to Expose Islam:

Zaghlul Al Najjar rejoices in the rise and spread of Islam across the globe. He writes in the Egyptian daily Al Ahram (Nov. 14, 2008), “Islam now is everywhere. Gorgeous mosques are build everywhere in the heart of Europe, in Rome and Cologne. The number of Muslims all over the world is also rising. More than 20 million Muslims live now in Europe. Alone in Germany there are 3.5. Demographers estimate that the majority of citizens in Germany will be Muslims in the year 2050. Two decades ago very few women wore the Hijab (headscarf). Now you can see them everywhere. Sooner or later, Islam will be in control of the whole world. This time, we don’t need to fight the infidel West with our troops as we did at the gates of Vienna. This time we’ll infiltrate the West and convert it to Islam, willy-nilly.”

Why Muslims Kill Non-Muslims

2009-02-07T14:42:00.000-08:00

The following is an excerpt from the article, Wilders Prosecution is a Welcome Opportunity to Expose Islam:

Ali Gom’a, the grand mufti of Egypt, the highest Muslim religious authority in the world, supports murdering non-Muslims. In the daily Al Ahram (April 7, 2008), he says, “Muslims must kill non-believers wherever they are unless they convert to Islam.” He also compares non-Muslims to apes and pigs, not only the Jews.

Muhammad Sayyid Al Tantawi, president of Al Azhar University also approves of killing and maiming Christians, Jews, and other infidels. He added, “This is not my personal view. This what the Shari’a Law says, the law of Allah, the only valid law on the earth.”

Yousef Al Qaradhawi, the spiritual leader of the fundamentalist organization, the Muslim Brothers, urged on Al Jazeera TV (Jan. 9, 2009) Muslims to kill the Jews, not only in Israel but also worldwide. He added, “No peace can be made between us (Muslims) and the non-believers. This what our holy book says. This what Allah says.”

Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti, Sheikh Abdulaziz Bin Abdullah Bin Mohammed al Sheikh said on Iqra’ TV channel, “Killing producers who show women unveiled is legal.”

The Saudi Sheikh Saleh Al-Lehadan, head of the Supreme Judiciary Council, told Al Watan daily, (March 25, 2008) “After getting rid of the Jews in our Arab land, we must turn to the Christians. They have three options: either they convert to Islam, or leave, or pay Jizia (protection taxes). Further, there is not such a thing as Shiites, Sufis, etc. There are only Sunnis. All these sects must renounce their pagan beliefs and return to Sunna, the right path of Islam.”

Focus and Motivation

2009-02-06T17:38:00.000-08:00

How about a shot of courage and motivation? Here's an excerpt from a blog called Crush Pessimism:

IN THE MOVIE, Terminator 2 - Judgment Day, John (the kid) finds out the bad terminator is probably going to kill his mom. John wants to find her and warn her. The good terminator says, “Negative. It is not a mission priority.”

The kid starts yelling. The good terminator (Arnold) says, “This does not help our mission.”

Throughout the movie, Arnold plays a machine that has only one goal and never lets go of it, never gets distracted from it, never comes up with a new goal, and never gets discouraged by setbacks. During the whole movie, he evaluates every possible action with only that criteria: Does it help my goal or doesn’t it? If it doesn’t, he has no time for it. He doesn’t waste any time fuming about someone else’s behavior. He doesn’t waste any time thinking about what he “should have” done. He just stays on his purpose.

Good article. Read the rest: Does This Help My Goal?

Violent Jihad in the Qur'an

2009-02-06T13:30:00.000-08:00

The following was posted by Archimedes as a comment after this article: The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict In Brief.

Note: When it is written as two numbers, such as 9:33, that means it is from the Qur'an, chapter nine, verse thirty-three.

According to the Koran it is wrong (in general) for Muslims to kill other Muslims (4:93). I focus here generally on violent jihad, which is directed toward non-Muslims.

Extra rewards for jihad/fighting/killing in the name of Allah 2:149, 2:215, 2:244-245, 3:163, 3:169, 3:195, 4:57, 4:69, 4:74, 4:97, 9:20, 9:81, 37:40-49*, 48:19, 48:28-29, 61:2-4, 61:9-12. *Note that 37:40-47 says the true pure slaves of Allah will be rewarded with (among other things) lovely-eyed virgins of modest gaze.

Rewards for sheltering those who fight for Allah (8:74).

Believers must terrorize the disbelievers 3:151, 9:5, 59:13. Also see 33:35-36, 59:2, 21:97.

Entrap and “dismay” (some translations say “terrorize”) the disbelievers (8:59-60).

Along with prophets and saints, martyrs are best company and favoured by Allah (4:69).

Allah grades (or ranks) the honour among believers (4:95, 4:96, 8:4). He favours those who are active in promoting Islam rather than mere sedentary believers (4:95). Only single-minded slaves of Allah will escape eternal doom (37:127-128).

When believers kill non-believers, it is Allah that is doing the killing (8:17)

“Little do you remember My warning. How many towns have We destroyed as a raid by night? Our punishment took them suddenly while infidels slept for their afternoon rest. Our terror came to them; Our punishment overtook them.”(7:3)

The disbelievers should not think that they can bypass Islam; surely they cannot escape.
Koran 8:59 (see all of 8:57-59)

Believers must kill and be killed for Allah (9:111). Exhort the believers to fight the unbelievers (8:59-70, esp. 8:65).

Must not turn away from fighting the disbelievers, otherwise go to hell (8:15-16). Must fight, or receive a painful doom from Allah (9:39). Believers must wage war for Allah, whether they like it or not (2:216). Fight the disbelievers using your weapons (heavy or light) or your wealth (9:41), your wealth and your lives (61:11). Fight for Allah against the disbelievers (4:76)

Allah tests believers by compelling them to kill unbelievers (8:17); true believers will kill or be killed for Allah. Allah could punish the disbelievers directly, but instead he tests some people (believers) by using other people (disbelievers); those believers who are slain in battle will be rewarded (47:4). Allah uses the prospect of battle to find out what is in men’s hearts; disbelievers stay away from the fight, but believers go into the fight. Those who die fighting for Allah will be rewarded (3:154-159; 3:167-172).

Do not call for peace when you have the upper hand (47:35).

“Killing disbelievers is a small matter to us…” Tabari IX:69.

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror.’” Bukhari: vol. 4, book 52, no. 220

Bukhari: vol 4 Book 53, no. 386. Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah alone or pay us the Jizyah tribute tax in submission.

Muslim vol. 9, book 1, no. 31. I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify to the fact that there is no god but Allah.

Tabari VI:138. Those present at the oath of Aqabah had sworn an allegiance to Muhammad. It was a pledge of war against all men. Allah had permitted fighting.

When Allah gave permission to his Apostle to fight, the second Aqaba contained conditions involving war which were not in the first act of submission. Now we bound themselves to war against all mankind for Allah and His Apostle.
Ishaq:208

‘Men, do you know what you are pledging yourselves to in swearing allegiance to this man?’ ‘Yes. In swearing allegiance to him we are pledging to wage war against all mankind.’
Ishaq:204

If you come upon them (infidels), deal so forcibly as to terrify those who would follow, that they may be warned. Make a severe example of them by terrorizing Allah’s enemies.
Ishaq:326

We have been dealt a situation from which there is no escape. You have seen what Muhammad has done. Arabs have submitted to him and we do not have the strength to fight. You know that no herd is safe from him. And no one even dares go outside for fear of being terrorized.
Tabari IX:42

Devotion to Allah.

A Muslim man’s wives and children are mere temptations and should not distract him from his devotion to Allah (63:9, 64:14-15)

“The life of this world is but comfort of illusion.” (3:185).

Policy Toward Disbelievers.
(“Disbeliever” generally refers to all non-Muslims).

The worst possible sin is disbelief in or denial of Allah 10:17, 11:18-19, 18:15, 32:22. Disbelief or turning away from Allah is a persecution worse than warfare (2:217) or slaughter (2:191). Allah boasts as having carried out multiple genocides throughout history to wipe out the disbelievers (17:16-17). Allah brings death through disaster upon those who disbelieve and dismiss his words as fable (16:22-26), causing the roof of their building to collapse on them.

If maintained, the sin of disbelief is not forgiven 4:48, 4:116. There are at least 250 verses wherein Allah condemns disbelievers to hell-fire, torture, etc., in the afterlife.

What Muslims should know about disbelievers and how they should regard/ act toward them (also see jihad):

fight/oppose/shun/strive against/regard as the enemy/never help/never befriend/sever family ties with/never compromise with/never obey/never forgive/chastise/curse/be ruthless toward/be stern toward/ etc. (not in order) 3:118; 3:28, 3:56; 3:87-88, 4:50, 4:63, 4:101, 4:139-140, 4:144, 5:54, 5:57, 8:65, 9:14, 9:23, 9:29, 9:73-74, 9:123, 25:52, *28:86, 31:7, 33:48, 45:7-8, 48:28-29, 53:29, 58:5, 58:22, 60:1, 60:4, 60:10, 60:13, 63:6, 66:9, 68:8-9, 76:24, 84:24.

Note that the ‘never help the disbelievers’ (*28:86) command means that Muslims’ good works should be limited to helping other Muslims or to otherwise pursuing Islam’s interests.

60:4 says followers of Allah will hate the disbelievers forever until they believe in Allah only.

4:144 "Believers, do not choose the unbelievers rather than the faithful as your friends. Would you give Allah a clear proof against yourselves?"

3:118 "Oh you who believe! do not take for intimate friends from among others than your own people; they do not fall short of inflicting loss upon you; they love what distresses you; vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater still; indeed, We have made the communications clear to you, if you will understand."

Disbelievers make a jest of the believers and Allah will punish/doom them for it (2:211-2:212). Those who malign the prophet and Allah will be damned (33:57), those who malign Muslims will be doomed, hypocrites and alarmists will be slain wherever they are found (33:58-61).

Kill the disbelievers wherever you find them 4:89-91. In those verses, ‘disbelievers’ refers to hypocrites and apostates, who turned back instead of following in the way of Allah (with Mohammad), and to disbelievers generally, who are not protected. Those protected would include taxed dhimmis, slaves owned by Muslims, or those with whom Muslims have some temporary strategic treaty.

Disbelievers: are “worst of created beings” (98:6), are “miscreants” (2:99, 24:55), are the worst beasts in Allah’s sight (8:55), are “a folk without intelligence”/ “most ignorant” (8:65, 6:111), “evil” is upon them (16:27), evil (2:91, 2:99), liars/they lie (2:10, 9:42, 16:39, 16:105, 59:11), the “wrong-doers” (2:254, 5:45), on the side of the devil (Satan) and are fighting for him (4:76-77); “enemy” and “perverted” (63:4); “wicked” (80:42, 9:125); hypocrites, i.e., those who only pretend to be religious (4:61); losers who are deceived by Allah (2:6), and deceived by Satan (4:60); have a “diseased heart” (2:10, 9:125); are ill (84:20); are “guilty” for disbelieving (45:31, 83:29); deaf, dumb, and blind, and have no sense (2:171); have no sense (5:103); their fathers were unintelligent and had no knowledge or guidance (2:170, 5:104); Allah assigns them devils for protecting friends (7:27); they choose devils for protecting friends (7:30); disgraced lives (22:9); “losers” (7:179); foolish and liars (7:66), liars and losers (58:18-19), false pride and schism (38:2); are partisan against Allah (25:55).

Disbelievers who do good works do so in vain, because they are going to hell anyway (5:5, 18:104-106, also 18:30, 33:19, 47:1, 47:32). Their works are as ashes blown away by the wind; they have no control over what they have earned (14:18).

Disbelievers are deceived by Allah, then Allah punishes them for it (17:97).

Those who lead Muslims away from Allah will receive hell-fire/ painful doom (22:9, 58:14-15)

Those who deny Mohammad’s revelations are evil (7:177).

When disbelievers are allowed to join together, there will be confusion and corruption in the land (8:73); believers must counter this by joining up together in opposition to the disbelievers.

Muslims should not believe non-Muslims (3:73).

Act hard against the disbelievers (non-Muslims) but be merciful to other believers (48:29).

Islamic Imperialism and Supremacism From The Qur'an

2009-02-06T13:24:00.000-08:00

The following was posted by Archimedes as a comment after this article: The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict In Brief.

Note: When it is written as two numbers, such as 9:33, that means it is from the Qur'an, chapter nine, verse thirty-three.

Allah sent Mohammad to conquer all other religions (9:33, 48:28, 61:9). Ultimate goal: kill/convert/subdue all disbelievers until all religion is for Allah 2:193, 8:39. Muslims must commit to the goals of Islam during their lifetime.

Muslims are the best people the world has ever seen (3:110) because of their belief in Allah only and strict adherence to Islam. Allah speaks Arabic (20:113, 41:3). (Arabic is one of the youngest languages and was not used for the books of the Judeo-Christian Bible).

Land Policy

Allah reduces the land occupied by the disbelievers (13:41, 21:44), and he makes (some) believers live in the land of the disbelievers (14:13-14), land known as Dar al Harb (land/house of war). This land of the disbelievers is granted by Allah to be inherited by believers so they (believers) may establish the authority of Allah (24:55) making it Dar al Islam. Once land is Dar al Islam, it remains so forever as far as Allah is concerned; if lost to the enemy, it must be regained. Non-Muslims must be banned from any land that was ever Islamic (21:95).

Treaties

Mohammad’s treaties/peace agreements with non-Muslims were merely temporary tactical moves; they could be overruled at any time by the greater goal of destroying non-Muslims (e.g., see 9:1-17). The tradition continues.

Final Policy Toward the Jewish People

A report narrated by a man named Muslim from Abu Hurayrah, the prophet said:
“The hour (of the Day of Judgement) will not begin until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them. A Jew will hide behind a rock or a tree, and the rock or tree will say ‘Oh Muslim, O slave of Allah! There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!’ — except for the gharqad (bow thorn), for it is one of the trees of the Jews.” (Reported by Muslim, 2922). This passage was also quoted by Osama bin Laden, May 28, 1998, in an interview with John Bell of ABC News.

Hadith: Book 19, Number 4366: Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab:

"Umar heard the Messenger of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) say: 'I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Penninsula and will not leave any but Muslims.'"

Policy Toward Christians and Jews and Other Religious People

(They are viewed as disbelievers, except if they publicly (and presumably privately) convert to Islam fully and exclusively (i.e., must deny “partners” such as priests, rabbis, monks, Jesus, Mary, Ezra?!--Mohammad claims the Jews worship Ezra?!, and must accept Mohammad’s validity as a prophet). Note: People of the Book are Christians and Jews.

They (people of the book) disbelieve in Allah and confound truth with falsehood (3:70-3:71). Christians lie when they talk about the son of God (18:4-5).

Jesus taught them compassion and mercy in the Gospels, but Christians turned to monasticism…many of them are evil-livers (57:27).

Fight against them, kill, convert, or subdue them and (only if it is beneficial to Islam) force them to pay a tax that Muslims do not have to pay (9:29-35). If they refuse to pay, kill them. (Other option is slavery).

Condemned to hell/cursed/doomed/bad/evil/turned into swine or apes, etc. (2:61, 4:48, 4:50, 4:116, 4:47-52, 4:55, 4:157, 4:160, 5:12-5:13, 5:37, 5:51, 5:53, 5:59-60, 5:72-73, 5:79, 9:29-35, 18:52, 33:26, 59:14, 98:1).

Jews will face Allah’s wrath because they made friendships with those who disbelieve (5:80).

Must convert to Allah only, or else be doomed (2:62-65, 3:85). Note that 3:85 refers explicitly to the Islamic religion as the “Surrender.” Jews are wrong-doers who will face a painful doom unless they believe in Allah (4:160-161).

He who ascribes partners to Allah is lost, as if a bird has snatched him out of the air and taken him away (22:31)

Mohammad (Allah) says Jews look ugly and they are foolish (62:5). Jews are greedy (2:91), and are evil-livers (5:59).

Allah will mock Christians when they burn in Hell, asking them Where are your partners now? (40:73).

Priests and Rabbis do “evil work” (5:63). Many Jews guilty of evil conduct (5:81). Jews act like Christians when they are around Christians (5:82).

Some of them (people of the scripture) are believers, but most of them are evil-livers (3:110), wretchedness is upon them because they disbelieved, slew the prophets wrongfully, were rebellious and transgressed (3:112).

Muslims won’t get hurt fighting them (the people of the book), who will turn and flee and afterwards will not be helped (3:111)

The Jews and Christians flung the scripture behind their backs and gained evil (3:187)

Christians and Jews who disbelieve scripture are the worst creatures in Allah’s sight (98:6) and will receive hell-fire.

Idolaters are unclean (9:28). Turn away from idolaters (6:106). Don’t pray for idolaters (9:113). Let the idolaters kill their own children (6:137).

Islam's Shariah cited in 7 of 10 worst nations worldwide

2009-02-05T13:52:00.000-08:00

(U.S.) Islam's Shariah cited in 7 of 10 worst nations worldwide
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87894

"Islam is the majority religion in seven of the top 10 countries: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, Maldives, Yemen and Uzbekistan"
http://newsblaze.com/story/20090203123053zzzz.nb/topstory.html

Open Doors 2009 World Watch List
http://www.opendoorsusa.org/UserFiles/File/Open%20Doors%20World%20Watch%20List%202009.pdf

The U.S. Should Apologize to the Muslim World?

2009-02-01T16:47:00.000-08:00

Every once in awhile someone writes a piece so clear and so persuasive, it is spontaneously shared far and wide and changes peoples' minds. Or at least loosens their self-righteous certainty, opening the way for new knowledge to leak in. Charles Krauthammer's article, Outreach, Yes. Apology, No. is just such a piece.

The article is about two comments Obama made, and how those comments reflect Obama's and many others' lack of knowledge about recent history. Obama's comments implied that the United States should apologize to the Muslim world for our disrespect of them. Here are a few excerpts from Krauthammer's piece:

In these most recent 20 years — the alleged winter of our disrespect of the Islamic world — America did not just respect Muslims, it bled for them. It engaged in five military campaigns, every one of which involved — and resulted in — the liberation of a Muslim people: Bosnia, Kosovo, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq.

The two Balkan interventions — as well as the failed 1992-93 Somalia intervention to feed starving African Muslims (43 Americans were killed) — were humanitarian exercises of the highest order, there being no significant U.S. strategic interest at stake. In these 20 years, this nation has done more for suffering and oppressed Muslims than any nation, Muslim or non-Muslim, anywhere on Earth. Why are we apologizing?

Read the whole article (and please share it): Outreach, Yes. Apology, No.

FBI Cuts Off CAIR Over Hamas Questions

2009-01-30T15:40:00.000-08:00

From ACT! For America:

!!! ACTION ALERT – CONTACT CONGRESS !!!

Finally, the FBI has figured out that CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations) is not an organization it should be dealing with. This “better late than never” bombshell is reported in the Investigative Project on Terrorism story below.

Not only is this wonderful and welcome news that should encourage us that we are in fact seeing progress made in the effort to roll back the tide of Islamofascism. The timing is impeccable.

We have learned that CAIR is planning a lobbying blitz in Congress next week. ACT! for America members, it’s time to take ACTION !!!

STEP ONE:

Send emails and faxes, starting today and continuing through the weekend, to your Member of Congress and two Senators asking that they not meet with CAIR given that the FBI has severed contacts with CAIR. Include the story below in your emails and faxes. (Click here to find contact information for your Member of Congress and Senators).

STEP TWO:

On Monday or Tuesday place a follow-up call to your Member of Congress and two Senators. Ask to speak to their Defense or National Security Legislative Assistant (LA). When you have the LA on the phone, ask (1) if they got your email or fax and the article; (2) if they read it; (3) if the Member of Congress or Senator is aware of the issue. If the LA has not seen or read the email or fax, send it again if necessary.

If you don’t reach the LA, leave a message and phone number, and if you don’t hear back by the next day, call again!

LET’S SEND A RESPECTFUL, CLEAR MESSAGE TO CONGRESS: THE FBI HAS CUT OFF CONTACT TO CAIR DUE TO ITS TIES TO HAMAS. CAIR WAS AN UNINDICTED CO-CONSPIRATOR IN THE HOLY LAND FOUNDATION TRIAL. MEMBERS OF CONGRESS SHOULD NOT MEET WITH CAIR.

Forward this email to everyone you know! And email us at info@actforamerica.org to let us know what response you get from your contacts to Congress.

www.actforamerica.org

FBI Cuts Off CAIR Over Hamas Questions
by Mary Jacoby
IPT News
January 29, 2009
http://www.investigativeproject.org/article/985

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has cut off contacts with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) amid mounting concern about the Muslim advocacy group's roots in a Hamas-support network, the Investigative Project on Terrorism has learned.

The decision to end contacts with CAIR was made quietly last summer as federal prosecutors prepared for a second trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), an Islamic charity accused of providing money and political support to the terrorist group Hamas, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

CAIR and its chairman emeritus, Omar Ahmad, were named un-indicted co-conspirators in the HLF case. Both Ahmad and CAIR's current national executive director, Nihad Awad, were revealed on government wiretaps as having been active participants in early Hamas-related organizational meetings in the United States. During testimony, FBI agent Lara Burns described CAIR as a front organization.

Hamas is a US-designated foreign terrorist organization, and it's been illegal since 1995 to provide support to it within the United States.

The decision to end contacts with CAIR is a significant policy change for the FBI. For years, the FBI worked with the national organization and its state chapters to address Muslim community concerns about the potential for hate crimes and other civil liberty violations in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

But critics said the FBI improperly conferred legitimacy on CAIR by meeting with its officials, even as its own investigative files contained evidence of CAIR leaders' ties to Hamas.

Last autumn, FBI field offices began notifying state CAIR chapters that bureau officials could no longer meet with them until CAIR's national leadership in Washington had addressed issues raised by the HLF trial, according to people with knowledge of the notifications.

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper declined to comment Wednesday when the IPT called for comment. Before hanging up, Hooper said "We're more than happy to cooperate with legitimate media. But we don't cooperate with those who promote anti-Muslim bigotry."

In one letter obtained by IPT News, James E. Finch, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's Oklahoma City field office, canceled a meeting of the local Muslim Community Outreach Program, a state-federal program designed to enlist Muslims in terrorism prevention and investigate reports of civil liberties violations.

"Regrettably, due to circumstances beyond my control, the meeting will be postponed until further notice as a result of the planned participation by the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations," Finch's Oct. 8, 2008 letter to Muslim groups in the Oklahoma outreach program said.

Finch made clear the Oklahoma office valued its relationship with local Muslims. He said the stumbling block to further outreach was CAIR's national leadership.

"[I]f CAIR wishes to pursue an outreach relationship with the FBI, certain issues must be addressed to the satisfaction of the FBI. Unfortunately, these issues cannot be addressed at the local level and must be addressed by the CAIR National Office in Washington, D.C.," the letter said.

A spokesman for the FBI's Oklahoma City office referred questions about the letter to the FBI's national press office. In Washington, FBI spokesman John Miller said, "We've certainly been in contact with CAIR chapters" about the un-indicted co-conspirator designation. "The letter speaks for itself."

Letters with similar wording were sent in other states, people with knowledge of the matter said. It is not known how many letters were issued, but the FBI has had strong working relationships with CAIR chapters in states including Ohio, Michigan, Arizona and Florida.

Hamas was formed in 1987 as the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, the global Islamic political movement that aims to spread the rule of Shariah, or Islamic law, throughout the world.

A North American branch of the Brotherhood supervised HLF, CAIR and other organizations to build political, financial and public relations support for Hamas, evidence at the HLF trial showed.

The U.S.-based Brotherhood formed a Palestine Committee, headed by Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzook, in 1988 during the first intifada uprising in Palestinian territories against Israel. Hamas's stated policy is for the destruction of Israel.

CAIR co-founders Ahmad and Awad were early active members of the Palestine Committee, evidence showed. Wiretaps recorded the two CAIR leaders participating in strategy meetings of the committee in the 1990s, and both were also on a phone list of its members, the evidence showed.

The first HLF trial in Texas ended in a mistrial in October 2007. In November 2008, the second trial resulted in convictions of five former HLF officials on all counts of providing material support to Hamas.

It is unclear what changed between the first and second HLF trials to make the FBI rescind its policy of outreach to CAIR. The un-indicted co-conspirator designations were made on May 27, 2007 in connection with the first HLF trial. Moreover, much of the evidence linking the CAIR officials to Hamas was aired in an earlier public trial in 2006.

CAIR, however, vigorously challenged the un-indicted co-conspirator designation as a violation of its First and Fifth Amendment rights, accusing the government of "demonization of all things Muslim" in a brief filed in the summer of 2007 with the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Click here to continue reading this article.

Speech By Robert Spencer

2009-01-30T02:38:00.001-08:00

A Practical Way To Support Freedom Of Speech, Stop Islam's Relentless Encroachment, And Help a Good Man

2009-01-28T00:17:00.001-08:00

THE FOLLOWING is a message from an excellent activist organization, somewhat like Amnesty International but specifically aimed at stopping Islam's relentless encroachment. It is called SITA. Here is their latest cause, which we would all do well to participate in:

Geert “Winston” Wilders, the Dutch Parliment member (and leader of the Party of Freedom) is fighting Islamic supremacism. He is one of the few politicians in the world who is speaking honestly about Islam. (See more about Geert Wilders here.)

Wilders is being prosecuted by dhimmis (a dhimmi is someone who accepts Islam's dominance) because he warned the European people about Islamic supremacism with his movie Fitna (watch the video here). The dhimmis harassing him obviously have a defective memory.

Let’s remember that both Winston Churchill and Adolf Hitler had the same opinion about Islam: It is a totalitarian and violent religion. Churchill denounced and warned about that ideology while Hitler admired it.

Today Winston Churchill, the most stalwart anti-Nazi, would be arrested in Holland for incitement to hate and racism whereas Hitler would be free to promote Islam and recruit Muslims into his Nazi party unmolested.

As reported by the BBC, the Dutch court has ordered prosecutors to put elected politician Geert Wilders on trial for making anti-Islamic statements.

“The Amsterdam appeals court has ordered the prosecution of member of parliament Geert Wilders for inciting hatred and discrimination, based on comments by him in various media on Muslims and their beliefs,” the court said in a statement.

“The court also considers appropriate criminal prosecution for insulting Muslim worshippers because of comparisons between Islam and Nazism made by Wilders,” it added.

Things have changed for the worse since Europe defeated Nazism in 1945.

Winston Churchill, the most prominent European fighting Nazi tyranny, had this to say about Islam :

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.

The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.

Far from being moribund, Islam is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science -the science against which it had vainly struggled- the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

Nazi leader Himmler had this to say about Islam :

“Muslims responded to the call of Muslim leaders and joined our side because of their hatred of our joint Jewish-English-Bolshevik enemies, and because of their belief and respect for, above all — Our Fuehrer.”

In his memoirs, Albert Speer wrote about Hitler’s appreciation of Islam, reporting a discussion which captures Hitler’s effusive praise for Islamic supremacism:

“…a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and subjugating all nations to that faith. Such a creed was perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament.”

Hitler, according to Speer’s account, repeatedly expressed the conviction that :

“The Mohammedan religion…would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?”

Churchill likened Islamic terrorism to Nazism :

“In truth though, just as the British stoicism recalls the same from 65 years ago, so too, there is a deep and instructive similarity between the Nazis and the Islamic-fascist forces that attacked then and attack today. The fact of the matter is that even more important than invoking the famous British “stiff upper lip,” to fight this current war to victory requires understanding and accepting the similarities between the Nazis and the Arab-Islamic terrorist armies.”

Geert Wilders, among many others, likened the Koran to Mein Kampf. Jihad means “personal (supposedly) struggle.” Mein Kampf means “my struggle.” During WWII Muslims themselves — when they were completely free to make their own choice — did choose the Nazi side.

People trying to silence Geert Wilders need to be brought back to crude reality. Let’s explain to them, loud and clear, that European people will NEVER accept to lose freedom of expression, and even less to lose democracy.

HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT:

Doing something real and effective to support Geert Wilders — and freedom of expression above all — is very simple with the Amnesty International-SITA method: a letter in a stamped envelope, sent by snail-mail. Amnesty International has a strong record of success with this method.

For the letter itself, it is even simpler: A basic-rate stamp allows sending at least two sheets of paper. Here are some possible things you could include:

1. Print out the first two pages of this article (one sheet front and back). Dutch people commonly read English in addition to Dutch. (Note than another article supporting Geert Wilders is available too). So that's one page. For the second page...

2. You can add another sheet with information to help people better understand and face Islam. A small cartoon is worth a thousand words, and does not need any translation. For example you can print a Steph Bergol cartoon depicting the situation well. Here's another one.

Or you could include a leaflet about Islam, like this one (PDF document).

Or you might include the first two pages of chapter XXII from the 1923 book “Islam and the psychology of the Musulman” by André Servier.

Or how about including a letter to mankind from Ali Sina?

Or how about including two pages of comments chosen among the thousands on the internet petition for virtual support to Geert Wilders?

WHERE DO YOU SEND THE LETTER?

1. To the dhimmi lawyer who initiated that “legal” Jihad is Gerard Spong. Here's the web site of his office. And this is his postal address:

Gerard Spong
P.O. Box 15812
1001 NH Amsterdam
the Netherlands

Dhimmi lawyers are very sensitive to snail-mails. You might also want to send a message to his associates so they can choose if they really want to still work with somebody fighting democracy to install an Islamic dictatorship. Here are the names of Gerard Spong's associates. Send your letters to the same PO Box above, but with the associates' names.

2. It is the Amsterdam district which rules the case (court of appeal and public prosecutor’s department), so another place to send your letters is to them.

Here is their mailing address:

Gerechtshof Amsterdam
Postbus 1312
1000 BH Amsterdam
Telefoonnummer (020) 541 21 11

E-mail:
info@gerechtshof-amsterdam.nl

You can find the names of the three judges here.

3. Regarding the public prosecutor’s department, an article gives the name of a spokesperson, Otto van der Bijl, allowing to go back to the page giving all the names of the main people for the public prosecutor’s department of Amsterdam here:

Dhr. F. (Franklin) Wattimena
Mw. S.Q. (Sanne) van Meeteren
Dhr. D.M. (Dino) Daal
Dhr.mr. O.J.M (Otto) van der Bijl
Mw. mr. H.A.B. (Hanneke) Festen
Mw. mr. A. (Alexandra) Oswald

Send letters to them so that they can fully realize the tremendous mistake they made when accusing Geert Wilders. He will have no more escape than demonstrating publicly, in front of all the medias (thanks to them!) to the extent that the Qur'an is indeed an hypocrite hate book, and Islam is a fascist underhanded ideology, completely incompatible with Western democracy.

Use this mailing address for the six names above (this is the all-purpose address for the public prosecutor’s department of Amsterdam):

(put the person's name here)
Parnassusweg 220
Postbus 84500
1080 BN Amsterdam

4. And finally, the Minister and State Secretary of Dutch Justice must take a stand. If they stand against Geert Wilders they will have to face the consequences. You can send to them your letter supporting Geert Wilders in order to incite them to protect freedom of expression in Europe by politely sending back to their deserts the bedouins lost here in our infidel lands. Here is how to write to them:

The Minister:

Dr. E.M.H. Hirsch Ballin
Postbus 20002
2500 EA Den Haag

The State Secretary:

Mw. mr. N. Albayrak
Postbus 20002
2500 EA Den Haag

Choose someone to write to (or better yet, choose several), print the article, put it into an envelope, stamp it (”Europe” rate) and send it.

Support Geert Wilders against Islam to protect your freedom of expression (among other values). It is that simple.

Eventually, you can register your action on the Sitathon, to encourage more people to do as you did. You can also register for the newsletter (if you can read French) to be told about the future actions.

Take a stand: Spend a letter!

PS: In addition, Geert could use our financial help to face this “legal harassment jihad." If you can contribute, do not hesitate to make a donation on Geert’s website.

The above is a fleshed-out, edited version of SITAmnesty's article. Now here's an explanation of the Geert Wilders' situation by Pat Condell (five minutes, nineteen seconds long):

Support Geert in whatever way you can! Sooner is better than later. Convince your friends and family to support Geert. Even if you fail to motivate them to take action, your effort will help introduce them to what Islamic supremacists are up to, making them more open to information in the future (if you do it calmly and matter-of-factly, and think in terms of small bits and long campaigns). Let's help Geert Wilders and advance the cause!

In The Last Three Weeks...

2009-01-27T20:39:00.000-08:00

The following is from a message from Brigitte Gabriel, founder of ACT! For America:

In just the past three weeks we have seen:

A violent Islamic protest in Britain, where an angry mob shouting “Allahu Akbar” chased – yes, chased – dozens of British policemen for blocks. You must see this video to believe it! (Please be warned – there is offensive language and profanity). Click here to see this shocking video.

Pro-Hamas, anti-Israel Muslims conducting demonstrations here in America, shouting praises to Hitler for what he did to the Jews, yelling “go back to the ovens,” and at times physically attacking counter-protestors.

The Amsterdam Court of Appeals ordering the prosecution of Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders because he has made statements deemed “insulting” and harmful to “the religious esteem” of Muslims.

Austrian parliamentarian Susanne Winter convicted of “incitement,” because of public statements she has made, including the claim that the prophet Mohammed was a pedophile.

Muslim protest marches in Italy that ended with the protestors, in an obvious act of intimidation, conducting mass prayer vigils directly in front of Catholic places of worship.

The release of an official U.S. government report stating that Hezbollah is forming terrorist cells here in the U.S. that could become operational.

The UN continuing to move ahead with the “Durban II” conference and its document that is little more than an anti-Israel rant that calls for suppressing public “defamation” of religion – notably Islam. This has run parallel to an effort by the Organization of the Islamic Conference to get the UN Human Rights Commission to pass a resolution condemning public “defamation” of Islam.

The Most Successful Military Campaign In American History

2009-01-25T23:32:00.001-08:00

This from the Gateway Pundit: Before President George W. Bush leaves office it's only fitting to give credit to where credit it due. Although you would not know this from the anti-Bush media or democrats, the US military has waged the most successful major military campaign in American history these past 8 years.

The War on Terror has been an amazing success not only in what has been accomplished but in what it has cost in lives. Two brutal regimes were obliterated, Al-Qaeda was decimated, fledgling democracies were established. But, most importantly, the US was able to do this while sacrificing the fewest number of soldiers monthly than in any other military campaign in US history. In fact, the US today is losing fewer soldiers each month in Iraq and Afghanistan combined than the average number of soldiers lost monthly during the Clinton years (~35 to 78).

Here's how the War on Terror stacks up with other US Wars:

The population today in the US is much larger than when these previous wars were fought. If you factor that in it really puts things into perspective.

In Afghanistan:

The US has suffered 604 fatalities in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. The Taliban and Al-Qaeda has suffered 12,000 fatalities. 28,700 militant Islamists have been captured.

In Iraq:

The US has suffered 4227 fatalities in Iraqi Freedom. More than 19,429 Al-Qaeda and Islamic militants have been killed. Over 18,900 insurgents have been captured.

Not only that but as Vice President Dick Cheney said this week we've achieved most of the objectives in Iraq that were established in the spring of '03:

We've got the violence level down to its lowest level since '03. We've had three national elections, a constitution written, a new government stood up, new army recruited and trained, the Iraqis increasingly able to take on responsibility for themselves. And we've now entered into a strategic framework agreement with the new Iraqi government that will provide for the ultimate withdrawal of U.S. forces.

You could not have asked for much more than that in terms of the policies that we started on in '03.

It's only fitting that this is reported before President Bush leaves office.

Obviously, you won't hear this from the liberal media.

It certainly doesn't fit their narrative that Bush's War was the worst foreign policy mistake in US history.

UPDATE: Terry Gain adds this:

1. More innocent Iraqis were being killed and dying because of sanctions when Hussein was in power than have been killed during the liberation of Iraq. The war has saved lives even as it’s being fought.

2. The vast majority of the killing of innocent Iraqis has been by the domestic insurgents and foreign terrorists. Americans have killed a small percentage of the innocents who’ve been killed.

3. The American war against Iraq ended on April 9, 2003. The war against Iraq by domestic insurgents and al Qaeda followed. That war is also largely over. The pacification of Iraq is continuing apace.

4. The pacification is also proceeding inexorably. Iraqis show every sign of keeping the gift of democracy they have received from the United States.

5. Calling for an end to the war – as have Reid and Pelosi – when it is insurgents and al Qaeda who are continuing the war is a brain -dead Democrat talking point. Even Obama understands that if the United States withdraws prematurely the hard won victory over the insurgents may be reversed.

6. Premature withdrawal will cause the war to continue, not end.

UPDATE 2: Bill Kristol added this on Bush's legacy today:

But I don’t think keeping us safe has been Bush’s most impressive achievement. That was winning the war in Iraq, and in particular, his refusal to accept defeat when so many counseled him to do so in late 2006. His ordering the surge of troops to Iraq in January 2007 was an act of personal courage and of presidential leadership. The results have benefited both Iraq and the United States. And the outcome in Iraq is a remarkable gift to the incoming president, who now only has to sustain success, rather than trying to deal with the consequences in the region and around the world of a humiliating withdrawal and a devastating defeat.

The above article was written by the inimitable Gateway Pundit.

C-SPAN Junkie

2009-01-25T21:50:00.000-08:00

This is a site that has tons of clips from C-SPAN. Find out what's going on. Check out C-SPAN Junkie.

Geert Wilders Is In Trouble And You Can Help

2009-01-23T12:10:00.000-08:00

GEERT WILDERS is the chairman of the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands and one of the few politicians in the world willing to speak honestly about the controversial issue of Islamic supremacism and the third jihad. (Read more about him, read a great speech of his, and see some interviews with him here.) This is from ACT! For America:

In a stunning decision, a Dutch court has ruled that Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders has committed criminal “hate speech” due to his public criticisms of Islam, and should be prosecuted. (See the International Free Press Society release below).

When a court takes such a step in a country as “progressive” as the Netherlands, every person who cherishes liberty and the right of free speech should shudder.

Mr. Wilders has, at the risk of his own life, courageously spoken out against Islamofascism and everything that comes with it. The decision of the Amsterdam Court of Appeals is a crushing blow to free speech and a victory for radical Islamists who are bent on suppressing any public criticism of their ideology.

This is why we keep issuing warnings and action alerts to you about how politically correct governmental actions, in league with radical Islam, are moving us ever closer to the day where we cannot speak out against an evil that has produced 270 million deaths and caused untold suffering over the past 14 centuries.

This is why we must build a powerful, informed and organized citizen action network that will stand in unity against the evil of Islamofascism and the political correctness that aids and abets it. Whether we are Democrats, Independents or Republicans…conservatives, moderates or liberals…there is no choice. We cannot allow America to sink to a place where an American prosecutor would obtain an indictment against a Member of Congress for criticizing Islam.

If you would like to help us further this effort, whether by making a contribution or helping to start or get involved in a local chapter, please log on to www.actforamerica.org today.

While the Dutch court seeks to censor, through unjust criminal prosecution, the kind of political speech that has been the hallmark of free countries, it looks the other way when radical Muslims in its country call for the death of infidels and praise Hitler for what he did to the Jews.

The message is clear. It’s okay for a radical Muslim to call for your death, but don’t you dare criticize the Muslim for doing so.

And this is from the International Free Press Society:

January 22, 2009 - Washington, DC and Copenhagen, Denmark: A Dutch court yesterday ordered the criminal prosecution of Geert Wilders, Dutch parliamentarian and leader of the Freedom Party (PVV), for his statements — written, spoken and filmed -regarding Islam. The Amsterdam Court of Appeals has deemed such statements "insulting," declaring that they "substantially harm the religious esteem" of Muslims.

Clearly, the effect of this Dutch court order is to set new limits to public debate in Dutch society, in this case about the highly controversial but nonetheless crucially important subject of Islam. This makes the prosecution of Geert Wilders an unacceptable breach of the sanctity of freedom of speech in Western society.

Having ordered a criminal prosecution for the opinions of a duly elected leader of a legitimate political party, Dutch authorities have dealt a devastating blow to political expression. While Dutch prosecutors prepare their indictment and Geert Wilders' future hangs in limbo, who in The Netherlands will dare discuss political and cultural matters related to Islam - Islamic law, Islamic integration, Islamic crime, Islamic policy - openly, freely and fearlessly? The chilling effect is instantaneous. If, indeed, Wilders is ultimately convicted, free speech will cease to exist in the heart of Europe.

The International Free Press Society believes this court-ordered prosecution against Geert Wilders, a central figure in the fight against the Islamization of the West, amounts to a dangerous concession to the strictures of Islamic law, which prohibits all criticism of Islam, over Western traditions of, and rights to robust and unfettered debate. As such, it is tantamount to a surrender to totalitarian influences that undermine all Western freedoms. And as such, it must be resisted.

It is important to recall recent history. Two Dutchmen, Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh, have been murdered for their outspoken opposition to Islamization in The Netherlands. Another Dutch politician, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, has been infamously forced into exile. Wilders alone now carries this debate over Islam in Dutch society forward — forcefully but logically, outspokenly but reasonably, and always peacefully. In order to do so, this member of Dutch parliament lives in a virtual prison, consigned to 24-hour guard by Islamic death threats against his life. Now, Dutch authorities have ordered him to be prosecuted for the Orwellian crime of committing "insulting" words.

As Wilders puts it, "If I have to stand trial, I will not stand trial alone, but also with the hundreds of thousands of Dutch people who reject the Islamization of The Netherlands." He will also stand trial with those in The Netherlands and beyond who reject government prosecutions of free speech. In recognition of this dire situation, the IFPS immediately calls on every supporter of free speech to come to the aid of Geert Wilders. To assist in this effort, the IFPS has launched an international campaign in defense of Geert Wilders and his freedom of speech.

To support these efforts, we urge you to contribute to the Geert Wilders Defense Fund. Donation information can be found at the IFPS website at http://www.internationalfreepresssociety.org.

Let's use Geert Wilders' prosecution to bring this vital issue to a wider audience. Help him win this case and let's publicize it and talk about it to everyone we know. His case is a clear example of the goals and methods of Islamic supremacists. This is long-range jihad.

Afghan Girls Defy Islamic Subjugation

2009-01-18T21:14:00.000-08:00

We can only hope they will grow up to be proud apostates! Or at least Islamic apatheists. But for now, they are defying the Taliban, and that takes some courage. Below is the story from the New York Times. I'd like to thank the inimitable Damien for alerting me to this article:

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — One morning two months ago, Shamsia Husseini and her sister were walking through the muddy streets to the local girls school when a man pulled alongside them on a motorcycle and posed what seemed like an ordinary question.

“Are you going to school?”

Then the man pulled Shamsia’s burqa from her head and sprayed her face with burning acid. Scars, jagged and discolored, now spread across Shamsia’s eyelids and most of her left cheek. These days, her vision goes blurry, making it hard for her to read.

But if the acid attack against Shamsia and 14 others — students and teachers — was meant to terrorize the girls into staying home, it appears to have completely failed.

Today, nearly all of the wounded girls are back at the Mirwais School for Girls, including even Shamsia, whose face was so badly burned that she had to be sent abroad for treatment. Perhaps even more remarkable, nearly every other female student in this deeply conservative community has returned as well — about 1,300 in all.

“My parents told me to keep coming to school even if I am killed,” said Shamsia, 17, in a moment after class. Shamsia’s mother, like nearly all of the adult women in the area, is unable to read or write. “The people who did this to me don’t want women to be educated. They want us to be stupid things.”

In the five years since the Mirwais School for Girls was built here by the Japanese government, it appears to have set off something of a social revolution. Even as the Taliban tighten their noose around Kandahar, the girls flock to the school each morning. Many of them walk more than two miles from their mud-brick houses up in the hills.

The girls burst through the school’s walled compound, many of them flinging off head-to-toe garments, bounding, cheering and laughing in ways that are inconceivable outside — for girls and women of any age. Mirwais has no regular electricity, no running water, no paved streets. Women are rarely seen, and only then while clad in burqas that make their bodies shapeless and their faces invisible.

And so it was especially chilling on Nov. 12, when three pairs of men on motorcycles began circling the school. One of the teams used a spray bottle, another a squirt gun, another a jar. They hit 11 girls and 4 teachers in all; 6 went to the hospital. Shamsia fared the worst.

The attacks appeared to be the work of the Taliban, the fundamentalist movement that is battling the government and the American-led coalition. Banning girls from school was one of the most notorious symbols of the Taliban’s rule before they were ousted from power in November 2001.

Building new schools and ensuring that children — and especially girls — attend has been one of the main objectives of the government and the nations that have contributed to Afghanistan’s reconstruction. Some of the students at the Mirwais school are in their late teens and early 20s, attending school for the first time. Yet at the same time, in the guerrilla war that has unfolded across southern and eastern Afghanistan, the Taliban have made schools one of their special targets.

But exactly who was behind the acid attack is a mystery. The Taliban denied any part in it. The police arrested eight men and, shortly after that, the Ministry of Interior released a video showing two men confessing. One of them said he had been paid by an officer with the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, the Pakistani intelligence agency, to carry out the attack.

But at a news conference last week, Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, said there was no such Pakistani involvement.

One thing is certain: in the months before the attack, the Taliban had moved into the Mirwais area and the rest of Kandahar’s outskirts. As they did, posters began appearing in local mosques.

“Don’t Let Your Daughters Go to School,” one of them said.

In the days after the attack, the Mirwais School for Girls stood empty; none of the parents would let their daughters venture outside. That is when the headmaster, Mahmood Qadari, got to work.

After four days of staring at empty classrooms, Mr. Qadari called a meeting of the parents. Hundreds came to the school — fathers and mothers — and Mr. Qadari implored them to let their daughters return. After two weeks, a few returned.

So, Mr. Qadari, whose three daughters live abroad, including one in Virginia, enlisted the support of the local government. The governor promised more police officers, a footbridge across a busy nearby road and, most important, a bus. Mr. Qadari called another meeting and told the parents that there was no longer any reason to hold their daughters back.

“I told them, if you don’t send your daughters to school, then the enemy wins,” Mr. Qadari said. “I told them not to give in to darkness. Education is the way to improve our society.”

The adults of Mirwais did not need much persuading. Neither the bus nor the police nor the bridge has materialized, but the girls started showing up anyway. Only a couple of dozen girls regularly miss school now; three of them are girls who had been injured in the attack.

“I don’t want the girls sitting around and wasting their lives,” said Ghulam Sekhi, an uncle of Shamsia and her sister, Atifa, age 14, who was also burned.

For all the uncertainty outside its walls, the Mirwais school brims with life. Its 40 classrooms are so full that classes are held in four tents, donated by Unicef, in the courtyard. The Afghan Ministry of Education is building a permanent building as well.

The past several days at the school have been given over to examinations. In one classroom, a geography class, a teacher posed a series of questions while her students listened and wrote their answers on paper.

“What is the capital of Brazil?” the teacher, named Arja, asked, walking back and forth.

“Now, what are its major cities?”

“By how many times is America larger than Afghanistan?”

At a desk in the front row, Shamsia, the girl with the burned face, pondered the questions while cupping a hand over her largest scar. She squinted down at the paper, rubbed her eyes, wrote something down.

Doctors have told Shamsia that her face may need plastic surgery if there is to be any chance of the scars disappearing. It is a distant dream: Shamsia’s village does not even have regular electricity, and her father is disabled.

After class, Shamsia blended in with the other girls, standing around, laughing and joking. She seemed un-self-conscious about her disfigurement, until she began to recount her ordeal.

“The people who did this,” she said, “do not feel the pain of others.”

I thought that last comment was interesting. It is the definition of a sociopath. I've often thought that Islamic teachings, if they are internalized, are basically an artificially-induced sociopathy.

Wounding Religious Feelings — Should That Be Forbidden?

2009-01-18T16:14:00.000-08:00

Christopher Hitchens wrote an article in Vanity Fair about the western media censoring itself out of fear of violent Muslim retaliation.

This fear is justified. Writers have been killed, publishing houses have been firebombed, and death fatwas have been declared, leaving writers and cartoonists living in fear for their lives. Hitchens writes:

Sometimes this fear—and this blackmail—comes dressed up in the guise of good manners and multiculturalism. One must not wound the religious feelings of others, many of whom are poor immigrants in our own societies. To this I would respond by pointing to a book published in 1994. It is entitled For Rushdie: Essays by Arab and Muslim Writers in Defense of Free Speech. Among its contributors is almost every writer worthy of the name in the Arab and Muslim world, ranging from the Syrian poet Adonis to the Syrian-Kurdish author Salim Barakat, to the late national bard of the Palestinians, Mahmoud Darwish, to the celebrated Turkish writers Murat Belge and Orhan Pamuk. Especially impressive and courageous was the list of 127 Iranian writers, artists, and intellectuals who, from the prison house that is the Islamic Republic, signed their names to a letter which said: “We underline the intolerable character of the decree of death that the Fatwah is, and we insist on the fact that aesthetic criteria are the only proper ones for judging works of art.… To the extent that the systematic denial of the rights of man in Iran is tolerated, this can only further encourage the export outside the Islamic Republic of its terroristic methods which destroy freedom.” In other words, the situation is the exact reverse of what the condescending multiculturalists say it is. To indulge the idea of religious censorship by the threat of violence is to insult and undermine precisely those in the Muslim world who are its intellectual cream, and who want to testify for their own liberty—and for ours. It is also to make the patronizing assumption that the leaders of mobs and the inciters of goons are the authentic representatives of Muslim opinion. What could be more “offensive” than that?

Read the whole article>>

Islam: What The West Needs To Know

2009-01-17T01:28:00.000-08:00

This is the most informative video I've yet seen on what non-Muslims should know about Islam. Below is the entire video, broken up into ten parts. I encourage you to share this page with others, or better yet, to buy several copies of the DVD, Islam: What the West Needs to Know, and share them with your friends (or both).

Islam: WTWNTK Part 1

Islam: WTWNTK Part 2

Islam: WTWNTK Part 3

Islam: WTWNTK Part 4

Islam: WTWNTK Part 5

Islam: WTWNTK Part 6

Islam: WTWNTK Part 7

Islam: WTWNTK Part 8

Islam: WTWNTK Part 9

Islam: WTWNTK Part 10

Islam: What The West Needs To Know - Part 10

2009-01-17T01:24:00.000-08:00

Click here to go to the page with a link to all ten parts.

Islam: What The West Needs To Know - Part 9

2009-01-17T01:23:00.000-08:00

Click here for Part 10
Or click here to go to the page with a link to all ten parts

Islam: What The West Needs To Know - Part 8

2009-01-17T01:21:00.000-08:00

Click here for Part 9
Or click here to go to the page with a link to all ten parts

Islam: What The West Needs To Know - Part 7

2009-01-17T01:20:00.000-08:00

Click here for Part 8
Or click here to go to the page with a link to all ten parts

Islam: What The West Needs To Know - Part 6

2009-01-17T01:18:00.000-08:00

Click here for Part 7
Or click here to go to the page with a link to all ten parts

Islam: What The West Needs To Know - Part 5

2009-01-17T01:17:00.000-08:00

Click here for Part 6
Or click here to go to the page with a link to all ten parts.

Islam: What The West Needs To Know - Part 4

2009-01-17T01:16:00.001-08:00

Click here for Part 5
Or click here to go to the page with a link to all ten parts

Islam: What The West Needs To Know - Part 3

2009-01-17T01:14:00.000-08:00

Click here for Part 4
Or click here to go to the page with a link to all ten parts.

Islam: What The West Needs To Know - Part 2

2009-01-17T01:13:00.000-08:00

Click here for Part 3
Or click here to go to the page with a link to all ten parts.

Islam: What The West Needs To Know - Part 1

2009-01-17T01:11:00.000-08:00

Click here for Part 2
Or click here to go to the page with a link to all ten parts.

How The KGB Helped Create Hamas

2009-01-16T19:28:00.000-08:00

This is a very interesting article about how the Soviet Union created "Liberation Fronts" around the world to fight against "imperialists" (read "free countries"). Here is an excerpt from the article:

Arafat was particularly struck by Ho Chi Minh’s success in mobilizing left-wing sympathizers in Europe and the United States, where activists on American campuses, enthusiastically following the line of North Vietnamese operatives, had succeeded in reframing the Vietnam war from a Communist assault on the south to a struggle for national liberation. Ho’s chief strategist, General Giap, made it clear to Arafat and his lieutenants that in order to succeed, they too needed to redefine the terms of their struggle. Giap’s counsel was simple but profound: the PLO needed to work in a way that concealed its real goals, permitted strategic deception, and gave the appearance of moderation:

“Stop talking about annihilating Israel and instead turn your terror war into a struggle for human rights. Then you will have the American people eating out of your hand.”

At the same time that he was getting advice from General Giap, Arafat was also being tutored by Muhammad Yazid, who had been minister of information in two Algerian wartime governments (1958–1962): wipe out the argument that Israel is a small state whose existence is threatened by the Arab states, or the reduction of the Palestinian problem to a question of refugees; instead, present the Palestinian struggle as a struggle for liberation like the others. Wipe out the impression that in the struggle between the Palestinians and the Zionists, the Zionist is the underdog. Now it is the Arab who is oppressed and victimized in his existence because he is not only facing the Zionists but also world imperialism.

To make sure that they followed this advice, the KGB put Arafat and his adjutants into the hands of a master of propaganda: Nicolai Ceausescu, president-for-life of Romania.

Read the whole article>>

Song: The Black Cloud of Islam

2009-01-16T19:02:00.000-08:00

Roy Harper wrote a song about Islam. As Pastorius of the Infidel Bloggers Alliance wrote, "We are not that familiar with Roy Harper here in America, but he a kind of legend in Britain. You could probably liken him to someone like Leonard Cohen. In other words, he is not tremendously well-known, but he is a beloved legend nevertheless."

He is the man who sang the lead vocals on Pink Floyd's song "Welcome to the Machine."

He was also featured on the album Led Zeppelin III. In fact, Led Zeppelin titled one song on that album, "Hats Off To Roy Harper."

Here's some info on Roy Harper from Wikipedia:

Roy Harper (born June 12, 1941), is an English rock/folk singer-songwriter/guitarist who has been a professional musician since the mid 1960s.

As a musician, Harper is known for his distinctive, sophisticated fingerstyle playing and lengthy, complex compositions. He has released a large catalogue of albums as an artist, most of which are available on his own record label Science Friction.

His career and influence have been respected by many musicians including; Jimmy Page and Robert Plant, both members of the 1970s band Led Zeppelin, Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull and more recently Californian harpist Joanna Newsom. Harper is also known for his guest lead vocals on Pink Floyd's song "Have a Cigar."

Harper has been referred to as “the longest running underground act in the world”.

Here is an audio of the song, and below it, the lyrics.

The Black Cloud of Islam

Well I'm sick to the teeth of the news on the screen
of the Hezbollah scum and Jihad the obscene
whose men plant the bombs and then live feeling free
to watch women and children be killed on TV.

Which Satan delivers a child a death curse
in the name of a worn out collection of verse?
I've not read the book so I cannot recite
but I'd b More..et Salman Rushdie is just about right
underneath the black cloud of Islam

What kind of publicity needs so much blood
that's not for some sad diabolical god
selling himself as a two-bit Macbeth
as the expert in sentencing cousins to death

And what kind of god can this be anyway
that you have to prostrate to it five times a day
with hate in your heart and a gun in your hand
is force the only thing to understand
underneath the black cloud of Islam?

And the butchers who've got all this blood on their hands
are the ones who need god to be stood where he stands
blessing this kidnapping, murder and war
with books written hundreds of ages before

And women in veils walking paces behind
doesn't sit easy in my kind of mind
it speaks of oppression and no other choice
than rigid compliance with the loudest voice
underneath the black cloud of Islam

And you can put a lead bullet clean through this guitar
'cos I'm not overjoyed with the story so far
sharing a world with the nutters of god
is as good as being six feet under the sod

And words that are written are all here to stay
and these are the latest there are anyway
and I am the prophet so don't believe me
I'm the same as the old ones except that I'm free
to give you a piece of my mind which is this
you're the worst of Jehovah's blind witlessnesses
with your feet in the door of the deepest abyss
which is underneath, which is underneath,
which is underneath the Black Cloud Of Islam

How Strong Is The Arab Claim To Palestine?

2009-01-16T02:02:00.000-08:00

I thought this little article was pretty good. It certainly puts the issue in perspective:

There is a myth hanging over all discussion of the Palestinian problem: the myth that this land was "Arab" land taken from its native inhabitants by invading Jews. Whatever may be the correct solution to the problems of the Middle East, let's get a few things straight:

§ As a strictly legal matter, the Jews didn't take Palestine from the Arabs; they took it from the British, who exercised sovereign authority in Palestine under a League of Nations mandate for thirty years prior to Israel's declaration of independence in 1948. And the British don't want it back.

§ If you consider the British illegitimate usurpers, fine. In that case, this territory is not Arab land but Turkish land, a province of the Ottoman Empire for hundreds of years until the British wrested it from them during the Great War in 1917. And the Turks don't want it back.

§ If you look back earlier in history than the Ottoman Turks, who took over Palestine over in 1517, you find it under the sovereignty of the yet another empire not indigenous to Palestine: the Mamluks, who were Turkish and Circassian slave-soldiers headquartered in Egypt. And the Mamluks don't even exist any more, so they can't want it back.

Read the rest of the article.

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

2009-01-15T12:50:00.001-08:00

This is a good article to share with people who don't know much about the root cause of the conflict. Here's a quote from the article:

At that point these Arab states encouraged any Arabs remaining within Israel — around 400,000 — to leave. The refugee status of these unfortunates was prolonged by the Arab states’ general refusal to allow them to settle in their countries, despite the absence of any serious ethnic or linguistic differences between them and the people of Jordan, Syria, and Egypt. (Jordan did grant Jordanian citizenship to the Arabs of the West Bank when it annexed this territory in 1950.) The Arab states wanted to use the refugee problem as a propaganda weapon against Israel, and thus had no interest in seeing these refugees settled in new homes.

Read the rest>>

Muslims Have a European Problem

2009-01-14T13:43:00.001-08:00

I really like the way the Sultan Knish writes. In a recent article entitled, Whatever You Do, Don't Upset The Muslims, he writes:

While Europeans occasionally dare to speak about a Muslim problem, they won't for long. If you let the cockroach problem in your house get bad enough, you stop having a cockroach problem, and the cockroaches start having a people problem. Soon enough Europe won't have a Muslim problem, Muslims will have a European problem... and if anyone wonders how they will take care of it, a short look at the way Sudan, Indonesia, not to mention most of the Middle East have taken care of their Christian problem should answer that question. Men may have qualms about killing cockroaches, but cockroaches have no qualms about killing men.

To President Obama

2009-01-14T13:30:00.001-08:00

Tom Trento has a declaration to Obama about Israel and Hamas here: Trento's Declaration. He asks us to sign it. Here is what it says:

WE AFFIRM AND DECLARE TO ALL

• SUPPORT - for the state of Israel and for all Palestinians who agree with the United States that HAMAS is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization as detailed in Section 219 of the American Immigration and Nationality Act.

• SUPPORT – for the actions of the State of Israel to use all necessary military force to stop HAMAS’ illegal and immoral rockets attacks aimed at innocent Israeli civilians.

• SUPPORT - Israel to use every effort to target only HAMAS members and property and to minimize all collateral damage to the Palestinian population.

• DEMAND – that HAMAS immediately stop the torture and murder of their Palestinian brethren.

• DEMAND - that HAMAS recognize the right of Israel to exist and until such recognition HAMAS assumes complete moral responsibility for any and all deaths of Palestinians killed by Israeli military actions.

• CHALLENGE - all Americans to fully support Israel and reject the global Islamist propaganda machine that uses the doctrine of victimization to re-focus attention from the fundamental source of this conflict, the ideology of radical, political Islam.

It says this declaration will be delivered to Obama and Congress. Knowing Tom, he will probably deliver it in person with the cameras rolling. If you want to sign it, go here: The Declaration.

Politicians Are The Weak Point

2009-01-12T13:40:00.000-08:00

The following is from the Sultan Knish:

Let's get one thing straight, terrorism is not a successful military tactic, it's a successful political tactic.

Viewed from a purely military perspective, terrorist tactics may be devastating to a civilian population, but achieve next to nothing strategically. A suicide bomber detonating himself in a crowd accomplishes nothing except to spread terror.

Terrorism exploits not a military weakness, but a political one...so when terrorists are winning, don't blame the soldiers — blame the politicians.

...

At home and abroad, politicians when confronted with Islamic terror, choose halfhearted measures and appeasement, rather than confronting and dealing with the threat. The weak link in the chain remains the political link...

Read the whole article.

Refugee Resettlement Watch

2009-01-12T13:24:00.000-08:00

This is interesting. It is a community organization that works to prevent Muslim immigration in a unique way. To explain their work, Ann Corcoran wrote:

A year ago, it came to our attention in Washington County MD that a non-profit group (Virginia Council of Churches) had been bringing refugees into the city of Hagerstown (county seat) for a couple of years. Some problems arose and citizens started to take an interest and ask questions about how this federal program works. Our local paper had no interest in finding the facts, so we decided to find them ourselves.

One of the many startling things we found out about this very quiet effort is that these non-profit groups bring to the US on average each year 15,000 (FY90-FY03) Muslim refugees from the Middle East, Africa, the Balkans, etc, almost completely funded by the US Government through grants and contracts to these non-government agencies. Of the 168 refugees brought to our county since 2004, 125 are Muslim. Although we all have sympathy for persecuted and suffering people there are real questions to be answered about the wisdom of this policy.

It turns out that there are hotbeds of this refugee resettlement controversy throughout the US. We have identified some of those. Because the issue is much more complicated than we initially realized, we have set up this online community organizing center at:

http://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com

If you have information or questions from your communities about Refugee Resettlement please get in touch with Ann Corcoran at Ann@vigilantfreedom.com.

An Analysis of Petition to Stop Muslim Immigration

2009-01-12T00:56:00.000-08:00

The following is an analysis by Dajjal of the article I wrote to promote the new petition to stop Muslim immigration:

WE HAVE NO way of determining which Muslims subscribe to pure Islam.
If they are Muslims, then they subscribe to the whole doctrine set; otherwise, they are Mushrikun or hypocrites.
If they don't subscribe to Jihad, then they suffer from extreme cognitive dissonance — as out of place as a prude in a whore house.
The reason this matters is that pure Islam is seditious. Islamic doctrine is more political than religious, and its sole political goal is the domination of Islam over all over religions and all governments.
Islam demands a monopoly on faith, practice and government. It is under a permanent mandate to conquer the entire world so that only Allah is worshiped and 'people of the book' are subjugated, humiliated and extorted.
8:39
The Order to fight to eradicate Shirk and Kufr
9:29
The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah
24:55
When Muslims move to a country, a certain percentage of them start agitating for special considerations. They start to organize and influence the nation politically in a way that is good for Islam and bad for freedom and equality. When the percentage of the Muslims in a nation's population becomes high enough, they gain so much political power that freedoms and rights begin to disappear. (Watch this video to learn more.)
They tend to form enclaves and avoid assimilation, retaining their culture and practices. They complain about any porcine symbolism, contact with dogs, even leader dogs for the blind and demand extra breaks from work for their prayer schedule.
As their numbers rise, violence begins and increases, as it has in Australia, France & Sweden.
Given all this, until we have a way of determining who is dedicated to pure Islam, no more Muslims should be allowed to immigrate into free countries.
Any and every believing, faithful, pious Muslim is a threat to civil society because he is obligated to join the Jihad when called. Even if he is not a Salafi, he will always have potential for radicalization under the influence of media, friends and clerics.
Does this seem extreme? It's not as bad as it might seem. We already choose who can immigrate and who cannot. We make the rules. This is our country, after all. We are not under any obligation to allow anyone to immigrate who wants to. They do it with our blessing or they don't do it.So this policy is simply adding to the already-existing filter.
Filtering out our sworn enemies is common sense. In recent decades, Nazi prison camp guards were still being deported.
This is not racist. Islam is not a race; it's an ideology. The policy of stopping Muslim immigration is simply acknowledging the reality of the Islamic teachings. I know there are Muslims who reject the violent and intolerant verses of the Qur'an. But Islam also teaches taqiyya and we have no way of knowing who is sincere and who is deliberately deceiving us.
Islam had an Arabic genesis, but conquered Africans, Asians & Europeans, forcibly converting many. It is, in fact, an ideology, not a race; it victimizes people of several races.
The reality of Islamic teachings is clear on the face of Islam's canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence. Book O, Chapter 9 of Reliance of the Traveller sets forth the rules of Jihad, including its definition. Allah commanded:
perpetual conquest: outcome oriented imperatives to fight
pagans until all resistance ceases and only Allah is worshiped on a global scale 8:39
'people of the book' until they are subjugated, humiliated and make annual extortion payments 9:29
genocide: 'great slaughter' is set as a prerequisite to holding prisoners for ransom 8:67
terrorism: Commanded in 8:12 and exemplified in 33:26 & 59:2
confirmed by Moe's bragging: Bukhari 1.7.331, 4.52.220
If you reject Jihad, genocide & terrorism, you are not a good Muslim, you are a hypocrite, and you ought to reject the entire institution.
2:225, 3:28, 5:89 & 16:106 are cited as foundations of al-taqeyya
(unless you indeed fear a danger from them) meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' Ibn Kathir
We should not take the chance, at least until we find some way to discern between people who genuinely reject the political goals of Islam and those who do not. In the meantime, we should stop all immigration into free countries by Muslims while we can. You can get the process started right now by signing this petition.
There is no real possibility of sorting the hypocrites from the zealots. There isn't much chance of that petition having much effect, either, but it is a way to apply pressure, show solidarity and build a contact base.
Does signing a petition do any good? According to ThePetitionSite (the organization I used to create this petition), the answer is: "Yes — often, but the answer really depends on a number of factors. In general, the more a target organization is impacted by public opinion, the more effective are the petitions. In addition, ThePetitionSite enhances the credibility of online petitions by centralizing signature collection, structuring/regulating signature data collection and output, facilitating communication of petitions via fax, email, etc. and by using fraud-reduction technology. Remember — the effect of a petition usually goes far beyond the actual list of signatures. Journalists write stories about the petitions, signers get inspired to take additional actions, and other "potential targets" conform their behavior to avoid being a target."

Petitions can also exert an influence through two powerful principles of influence: Social proof and commitment and consistency. Petitions have been known to ignite important public debates.
When this petition reaches 50,000 signatures, I will make sure each member of the House and the Senate finds out about it. And I will make sure newspapers and magazines all over the country find out about it. Your signature will make a difference. Sign the petition today: No More Muslim Immigration.
446, a gain of only 78 signatures.
While there are other valid objections to Islam, my objection is based on the violent imperatives to conquest, genocide & terrorism. Islam has long history of rapine, beginning with razzia against returning trade caravans in 623 and continuing through the major conquests and has its modern manifestation in reconquista & terrorism. It is sanctified as outlined above, exemplified in the Jihad hadith of the four major collections and codified in Sharia & Fiqh. Two hadith bring the whole matter to the surface with extreme clarity I will quote the relevant portion of the first and the entirety of the second.

When Umar sent the army to the great nations to fight disbelievers shortly after Moe's death, his General was asked, by a Persian General, for the casus beli.

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386
[...]Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."[...]

Abu Dawud Book 23, Number 3455:
Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar:

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

There is only one rational conclusion to draw from that: Jihad is their religion. What is Jihad? Examine the definition given in Reliance of the Traveler.

Chapter O9.0: Jihad

(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the lesser jihad.

- The above analysis was written by Dajjal.

Stop Female Genital Mutilation

2009-01-08T01:36:00.001-08:00

In looking at my petition, I saw another one that is really worth signing:

Stop Female Genital Cutting

It's about stopping Female Genital Mutilation. It doesn't say anything about Islam, but just getting rid of this hideous practice would probably help restrain Islamic encroachment. Even if it doesn't, stopping FGM is worth doing regardless.

This is one of those causes that can help force multiculturalists to choose between multiculturalism and human rights — a choice and a distinction that should be made. When they conflict, human rights should trump multiculturalism, as this issue makes crystal clear. If this hierarchy of values was clearer to more people, I believe much of the resistance we meet in telling people about Islam's relentless encroachment would evaporate.

Rocket Scientists at Gaza

2009-01-07T22:58:00.000-08:00

Mark Steyn wrote an excellent article on events at Gaza. He made some great points. Among them are these:

Christmas Eve, Samuel Huntington died at his home at Martha's Vineyard. A decade and a half ago, in his most famous book "The Clash Of Civilizations," professor Huntington argued that Western elites' view of man as homo economicuswas reductive and misleading – that cultural identity is a more profound behavioral indicator than lazy assumptions about the universal appeal of Western-style economic liberty and the benefits it brings.

Very few of us want to believe this thesis.

"The great majority of Palestinian people," Condi Rice, the secretary of state, said to commentator Cal Thomas a couple of years back, "they just want a better life. This is an educated population. I mean, they have a kind of culture of education and a culture of civil society. I just don't believe mothers want their children to grow up to be suicide bombers. I think the mothers want their children to grow up to go to university. And if you can create the right conditions, that's what people are going to do."

Thomas asked a sharp follow-up: "Do you think this or do you know this?"

"Well, I think I know it," said Secretary Rice.

"You think you know it?"

"I think I know it."

I think she knows she doesn't know it. But in the modern world there is no diplomatic vocabulary for the kind of cultural fault line represented by the Israeli/Palestinian dispute, so even a smart thinker like Dr. Rice can only frame it as an issue of economic and educational opportunity. Of course, there are plenty of Palestinians like the ones the secretary of state described: You meet them living as doctors and lawyers in Los Angeles and Montreal and Geneva … but not, on the whole, in Gaza.

In Gaza, they don't vote for Hamas because they want access to university education. Or, if they do, it's to get Junior into the Saudi-funded, Hamas-run Islamic University of Gaza, where majoring in rocket science involves making one and firing it at the Zionist Entity. In 2007, as part of their attempt to recover Gaza from Hamas, Fatah seized 1,000 Qassam rockets at the university, as well as seven Iranian military trainers.

At a certain unspoken level, we understand that the Huntington thesis is right, and the Rice view is wishful thinking.

....

So when Britain's Channel 4 says that we don't get the chance to see these fellows speak for themselves, it would be more accurate to say that they speak for themselves incessantly but the louder they speak the more we put our hands over our ears and go "Nya nya, can't hear you." We do this in part because, if you're as invested as most Western elites are in the idea that all anyone wants is to go to university, get a steady job and settle down in a nice house in the suburbs, a statement such as "England's demise is on our agenda" becomes almost literally untranslatable. When President Ahmadinejad threatens to wipe Israel off the face of the map, we deplore him as a genocidal fantasist. But maybe he's a genocidal realist, and we're the fantasists.

The civilizational clashes of professor Huntington's book are not inevitable. Culture is not immutable. But changing culture is tough and thankless and something the West no longer has the stomach for. Unfortunately, the Saudis do, and so do the Iranians. And not just in Gaza but elsewhere the trend is away from "moderation" and toward something fiercer and ever more implacable.

The Sultan Knish On Islam

2009-01-04T23:07:00.001-08:00

Victoria Brown sent me a link to the following article, and I really liked it. It is by the Sultan Knish (I love that name). He was born in Israel and lives in New York and something about his article is really fresh and good. I have his permission to reprint the entire article here:

Living with Cancer, Living with Islam

99 percent of Muslims are Muslims because their many times over great-grandfather was living in a village someplace when a group of men with swords marched in, and declared that they were all going to become Muslims now, or die horribly. Unless he was smart enough to get on board by being one of the men with the swords, and take home his share of the loot and slaves.

Today these people would be known as Muslim extremists. Back then they were just known as Muslims.

But there's a new Gold Rush in the West now as Western scholars, academics and politicians look around for something that isn't there — a way to co-exist with Islam. Except it's not a Gold Rush but a Fool's Gold Rush, because when it comes to Islam, co-existence has never been on the table. Islam is a religion that from its earliest days was spread by the sword of Mohammed, and then by various Caliphs, Emirs, Sultans, assorted warlords and rulers.

Religions that spread like that are no more interested in achieving co-existence, than telemarketers are interested in Do Not Call lists. It puts them out of business. Even the current boom due to "interest in Islam" can be traced back to 19 Muslims flying several planes into two major US cities with a death toll in the thousands. Minus the planes and with a much higher death toll, that is generally how people get "interested" in Islam in the first place.

When Muslim leaders talk about co-existence, what they really mean is "Stop bombing us long enough to let us destroy you."

This of course hasn't stopped well meaning Westerners from trying to find ways to get along with cancer. Like living with Cancer, living with Islam is a dead end proposition. You either go for Chemotherapy or sooner or later you wind up lying face up on a steel table with a toe tag on your foot. Except in this case the toe tag will be a Koran.

Like Cancer, Islam is a devouring entity that exists to consume, leaving destruction and misery in its wake. You cannot live with it, your choices are to either die, or force it out of your body. The West has currently pushed Button 1 while assuming that any moment now, the Cancer will turn moderate, and become willing to talk about how it can be integrated with the rest of the body.

France has banned Hijabs, Holland is looking at immigration, America has selected a leader from a Muslim background, and Cancer is laughing its ass off at the whole spectacle. It knows all this is nothing more than one of the Kubler-Ross stages of death, and that the West is still stuck on Bargaining.

We'll give you complete equality, social services, a good deal of respect, a seat at the table, the privilege to censor anything that offends you and the right to beat and rape as many women as you want — so long as you agree to be our friends. That kind of thing naturally doesn't work.

Giving people who already view you as subhuman, carte blanche to do whatever they want, isn't going to endear them to you. Just ask the Jews sitting in ghettos during WW2 and hoping that cooperating with the Nazis would avoid the worst from happening. Submission to people who already place no value on your life is death. When you do that you might as well take an ad out in the Dhimmi Personals Section.

There is of course such a thing as a Moderate Muslims, but moderate Muslims aren't a movement, they're just individuals who aren't very good Muslims — much like Jews who eat Pork or Catholics who have abortions. There are plenty of both, particularly in well off countries where religion isn't a big deal anymore, but self-indulgence is. By no coincidence those are also the places you're likely to find moderate Muslims, whose moderation consists of not being very good Muslims.

You can co-exist with Moderate Muslims because they really do want most of the same things you do, a house in the suburbs, a steady paycheck and Cable TV. Of course then their sons head to a Madrassa in Pakistan, and next thing you know they're on the plane back with a box cutter.

And that's the problem with confusing self-indulgence with moderation. The pendulum on self-indulgence always swings back to the extreme sooner or later, just as it did in Iran, just as it will in Egypt. Prosperity always breeds discontent and disgust among the very sons of those who enjoy it. It certainly did in the West producing the likes of Lenin and Ayers.

The problem is that Western anti-materialists are socialists. Muslim anti-materialists are Muslims. And so while Socialists and Muslims do their best to shake hands, the Muslim has a dagger palmed in his hand. The socialist has a copy of Das Kapital in his. It wasn't even an even match in the early 20th century. It certainly isn't an even match now, as even a casual observer of the European scene can't help but notice.

While we think of Muslims as a cultural problem, they think of us as a demographic problem. We think the solution is teaching them to be moderate. They think the solution is teaching those of us who survive to be slaves. And guess who's currently ahead on points?

Vindication By An Indian Guru

2009-01-03T14:34:00.000-08:00

My 27 year-old son was just visiting. He was here for a week. Of course, I talked about Islamic supremacism quite a bit, and being 27 (and from Southern California), my son was trying to find every way he could to not believe it. I could tell from his responses that he was thinking, "This can't be true; Dad must be exaggerating or reading only a small fringe source of information or something."

One night as we were talking, he got on my laptop and asked me, "How do you spell Mohammad?" And then, "How do you spell Qur'an?" I didn't know what he was doing, but then he said, "I'll be damned."

He was looking on Osho's web site. He is a big fan of Osho, a spiritual teacher from India who writes on every religion, revealing the shared, universal, spiritual nature at the core of every religion (or as we found out, almost every religion).

My son assumed that since Osho has written a book on every religion (and praised the core teachings of every one of them), Osho must have written one on Islam, and my son was going to read it and get "the other side of the story." But what he found was that Osho has not written about Islam, and not only that, he explained why he hasn't. Here is what Osho said:

Mohammed was an absolutely illiterate man, and the Koran, in which his sayings are collected, is ninety-nine percent rubbish. You can just open the book anywhere and read it, and you will be convinced of what I am saying. I am not saying on a certain page — anywhere. You just open the book accidentally, read the page and you will be convinced of what I am saying.

Whatsoever one percent truth there is here and there in the Koran is not Mohammed's. It is just ordinary, ancient wisdom that uneducated people collect easily — more easily than the educated people, because educated people have far better sources of information — books, libraries, universities, scholars. The uneducated, simply by hearing the old people, collect a few words of wisdom here and there. And those words are significant, because for thousands of years they have been tested and found somehow true. So it is the wisdom of the ages that is scattered here and there; otherwise, it is the most ordinary book possible in the world.

Muslims have been asking me, "Why don't you speak on the Koran? You have spoken on The Bible, on the Gita, this and that." I could not say to them that it is all rubbish; I simply went on postponing. Even just before I went into silence, a Muslim scholar sent the latest English version of the Koran, praying me to speak on it. But now I have to say that it is all rubbish, that is why I have not spoken on it — because why unnecessarily waste time?

- From Unconciousness to Consciousness
Chapter 5 by Osho

To those of us who study Islam, this is very mild criticism, but coming from Osho, it is severe and harsh, and made an impression on my son.

We're In Trouble If This Spreads

2008-12-28T00:22:00.000-08:00

He was not allowed to read a particular book in the presence of his co-workers. On a campus in the United States. Unbelievable.

Will those of us teaching about Islamic supremacism be suppressed? Will people READING it be suppressed?

Pat Condell Rides Again

2008-12-26T23:48:00.001-08:00

Chris Simcox On Guarding Our Borders

2008-12-26T02:45:00.000-08:00

This is a 17-minute talk by Chris Simcox, the founder of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (citizens helping patrol the Mexico-U.S. border to prevent illegal entry). His talk is full of surprising facts about who is coming across the border and why, and what it has to do with the third jihad.

Robert Spencer On Stealth Jihad

2008-12-26T02:03:00.001-08:00

The talk below is pretty long (33 minutes) and he gets a slow start. But he gives some great examples of stealth jihad. The second video (below) is a question-and-answer session that is really worth listening to (16 minutes):

Tom Trento On The Purpose

2008-12-25T23:44:00.001-08:00

It takes him a bit to get going, but this is a speech worth listening to (12 and a half minutes long):

Stop the Jihad on Campus

2008-12-25T23:14:00.000-08:00

Robert Spencer, author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), speaks at a recent event in Florida for a very productive fifteen minutes:

The First Hundred Years After Mohammed

2008-12-25T15:22:00.000-08:00

In just over one hundred years following the death of Mohammed in 632, the Arab followers of the Prophet had subjugated a territory with an east-west expanse greater than the Roman Empire, and they accomplished it in about half the time. By the mid-eighth century, Arab armies had conquered the thousand-year-old Persian Empire, reduced the Byzantine Empire to little more than a city-state based around Constantinople, and destroyed the Visigoth kingdom of Spain. The cultural and linguistic effects of this early Islamic expansion still reverberate today.

- from the inside flap of the book,
The Great Arab Conquests by Hugh Kennedy

Many conquerors have come and gone, but the Islamic conquest had a devastating impact on the world — arguably a more devastating impact than any conquest before or since, including Alexander the Great, Hannibal, and Ghengis Khan — because it wasn't merely a matter of the new conquerer gaining tribute. The Islamic conquerors took everything from the newly conquered: money, language, culture, traditions, wives, children, values. Everything. The nature of Islam is that it replaces cultures wherever it gets a foothold.

Last Chance to Defend Yourself

2008-12-23T22:49:00.000-08:00

I just read something that surprised me. I was reading the excellent book, The New Concise History of the Crusades when I came across this passage:

Over the course of the previous six centuries, Islam had conquered three-quarters of the Christian world.

In a relatively short time, Islam had conquered seventy-five percent of the Christian world! Now that is something I can use in my conversations with people trying to defend the poor oppressed Muslim world, or putting down the crusaders as bloodthirsty aggressors fighting a war of oppression. The Christian world was truly on the brink of extinction!

If You Keep Trying, Sometimes Luck Will Be On Your Side

2008-12-23T13:04:00.000-08:00

By the time of the crusades, Islam had conquered three-fourths of the Christian world. The crusades were an attempt by the separate European states to set aside their differences to defend themselves from a common enemy — an enemy that sought to subjugate the whole world (and still does). Several times the Byzantine empire — the last remnants of Roman empire, and ostensibly the Christian allies of the European crusaders — were sometimes at odds with crusaders and resisted them or allied with the Muslims.

In 1204, the crusaders were attacking Constantinople, the enormous walled capital city of the Byzantine empire (the Byzantines had become an enemy of the defense of Europe). The following is a quote from the excellent book, The New Concise History of the Crusades:

The crusading army boarded its vessels and attacked Constantinople again on April 12, 1204. The battle raged most of the day with the crusaders gaining very little. By the early afternoon, they had captured a few towers on the harbor walls, but they were so surrounded by Byzantine forces that they dared not advance farther. A small group of about ten knights and sixty sergeants led by Peter of Amiens landed on a narrow strip of ground outside the wall near the shore. There they discovered a postern gate [a small, rear gate] that the defenders had walled up. They fell upon it zealously with whatever implements they had on hand. It was hard going and dangerous, for from above the Greeks (Byzantines) rained down on them immense stones and boiling pitch, which they deflected with their shields. At last, they succeeded in making a small hole. Peering through, they saw a huge crowd of soldiers inside. Surely, it was suicide to enter. One man, an armed priest named Alleumes of Clari, insisted on the honor of being the first to enter Constantinople. No amount of pleading from his comrades would dissuade him. His brother, Robert of Clari, was particularly upset and even tried to prevent him from crawling through the whole by grabbing his legs. It was no use. Alleumes scrambled through to the other side, where he was faced with an armed multitude.

Then an amazing thing happened. With enormous confidence, Alleumes drew his sword and ran toward the Greek troups. They scattered. Once again, the poorly trained Byzantine troops proved themselves unwilling to fight unless the danger to themselves was minuscule. Because most of them were provincials [that is, they were not from Constantinople], they saw no reason to risk their lives for the sake of the capital. Alleumes called to his companions, who now crawled through the hole, drew their swords, and kept their backs to the wall. When Greek troops at other locations saw the flight of those stationed near the walled gate, they panicked and abandoned their positions along the walls. Soon there was a snowball effect as the imperial army abandoned the length of the fortifications in a mad dash to escape the city — all because of the entry of fewer than a hundred crusaders. Mourtzouphlus [the emperor of Constantinople], who watched the debacle with horror, spurred his horse and single-handedly charged the small party. When he saw that they would not retreat, he stopped and returned to his command station. With no one to stop them, Alleumes and his comrades opened the city gates, and the entire crusading army swarmed in.

That evening, the crusaders camped in the open region in the north city that had been burned by the Venetians nine months earlier. Strict orders were given to the host that no one was to venture farther into the city itself. In the winding streets and back alleys of the megalopolis, the mobs could pick off crusaders easily. They resolved to call for the surrender of the city on the morrow. If that was refused, they would begin burning the place down.

With the imperial army in full retreat, Mourtzouphlus could rely only on the Varangian Guard [Viking mercenaries]. It was not enough. Desperately, he rode through the streets exhorting the people of Constantinople to rise up and defend their city from the invading westerners. No one would listen. From their perspective, it was not their city that was at stake, but Mourtzouphlus's crown. They would not suffer further damage to the capital to save his reign [he wasn't very popular]. Instead, they made plans to offer the city peacefully to Boniface of Mohtferrat [a crusader], who they assumed would be the new emperor. Once he had the imperial throne, they expected that Boniface would restrain his army, since it was not in his interest to have his city destroyed. At least that is the way it had worked in all the other armed coups in Constantinople's long history. Without the support of the people or the army, Mourtzouphlus fled the city.

Banks That Use SCF (Sharia Compliant Finance):

2008-12-14T15:42:00.000-08:00

Citibank
HSBC
Dow Jones
Standard & Poor's
UBS
Barclays
Goldman Sachs
Deutsche Bank
Wachovia
Lloyds of London
Morgan Stanley
JP Morgan Chase
Blackstone
Blackrock
Millennium Hedge Fund
Ospraie Capital Hedge Fund
Paulson & Company
Arcapita, Inc. (previously Crescent Capital)
BNP Paribas
Guidance Residential
Zweig-DiMenna

I got this list in an article that also explains what SCF is: Sharia Finance.

Language Reveals Denial

2008-12-10T01:15:00.000-08:00

The following is an excerpt from Daniel Pipes' Still Asleep After Mumbai:

The fact that terrorist fish are swimming in a hospitable Muslim sea nearly disappears amidst Western political, journalistic, and academic bleatings. Call it political correctness, multiculturalism, or self-loathing; whatever the name, this mentality produces delusion and dithering.

Nomenclature lays bare this denial. When a sole jihadist strikes, politicians, law enforcement, and media join forces to deny even the fact of terrorism; and when all must concede the terrorist nature of an attack, as in Mumbai, a pedantic establishment twists itself into knots to avoid blaming terrorists.

I documented this avoidance by listing the twenty (!) euphemisms the press unearthed to describe Islamists who attacked a school in Beslan in 2004: activists, assailants, attackers, bombers, captors, commandos, criminals, extremists, fighters, group, guerrillas, gunmen, hostage-takers, insurgents, kidnappers, militants, perpetrators, radicals, rebels, and separatists – anything but terrorists.

And if terrorist is impolite, adjectives such as Islamist, Islamic, and Muslim become unmentionable. My blog titled "Not Calling Islamism the Enemy" provides copious examples of this avoidance, along with its motives. In short, those who would replace War on Terror with A Global Struggle for Security and Progress imagine this linguistic gambit will win over Muslim hearts and minds.

Post-Mumbai, Steven Emerson, Don Feder, Lela Gilbert, Caroline Glick, Tom Gross, William Kristol, Dorothy Rabinowitz, and Mark Steyn again noted various aspects of this futile linguistic behavior, with Emerson bitterly concluding that "After more than 7 years since 9/11, we can now issue a verdict: Islamic terrorists have won our hearts and minds."

Modes of Taqiyya

2008-12-07T16:18:00.000-08:00

The following is a section of a larger article called Taqiyya: How Jihadis Deceive the West.

There are many modes of taqiyya which has developed as an art form of deception, including:

Outwitting

Islamic spokesmen commonly use taqiyya in the form of "outwitting." The matter under discussion is not to be debated or discussed; the opponent is "outwitted" through taqiyya, by diversion of the subject through the tactical use of honor (feigning "offense") and disparagement of the speaker and religious obfuscation, aided at times by a mystical reference to God or Allah, which is irrelevant to the topic under discussion. Outwitting is regarded as a skill, worthy of praise, often accompanied by smiles and laughter.

An Australian Example of "Outwitting": Sheikh Hilaly's Lebanon visit, 2004

In early February 2004, the Australian media reported that the controversial Mufti of Australia, Sheikh Hilaly of the Lakemba Mosque, New South Wales, had met with notorious terrorist Hezbollah leader, Hasaan Nasrallah, the leader of Lebanon's "Party of God"— the Syrian-Iranian-sponsored terrorist organisation — and on 13 February delivered a "sermon" at the Al Quds mosque in Sidon, Lebanon, calling for jihad and praising the 11 September terror attacks.

The controversy raged. The Sheik was the Mufti of Australia's Muslims, and a mufti by definition can issue fatwas, that is, a considered opinion ranging from an issue of community interest or religious law to peace, war and jihad.

On 18 February, Keysar Trad, the Sheikh's translator, told A.B.C. radio:

"I believe these people have been far too selective in taking information somewhat out of context. The Mufti is a proponent of peace and peaceful solutions to any conflict and his message was in a completely and entirely different context. I spoke to him yesterday and he assured me that the context in which he made his message was not in the way that it was reported by these people."

On 19 February, Keysar Trad affirmed that the remarks about Israel and Hezbollah had been taken out of context. He said he spoken to the Sheikh and his remark about jihad was a rhetorical question.

On 29 February, Keysar Trad also resorted to the Arabic poetic defence, reportedly claiming that the Sheikh had taken "bits from poems which he had incorporated into his sermons." On 1 March Trad used the "lost in translation" defense:

"I believe the context has been lost in the translation ... He's not praising it by any means, he's really condemning these atrocities."

In Australia, the Sheikh's speech was widely reported and criticized by the Prime Minister in Parliament. On 3 March 2004, in an unusually frank interview, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexander Downer commented:

"He talks out of both sides of his mouth. When there was initially a suggestion in the media that he had said — at least he had called for a jihad, a spokesman for Al-Hilaly said that his words had been taken out of context."

The journalist responded to Downer: "That's not true." Downer replied: "Exactly. That did not turn out to be true. We got a copy of the speech, we translated the copy ... and it's pretty obvious that he's been calling for jihad and suicide bombers ... He's been praising September the 11th as God's work."

THE "ARABIC IS POETRY" DEFENSE

Featured on the A.B.C.'s Religion Report on 3 March, Dr. Amir Ali, President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils stated:

"Therefore unless I can see this transcript and unless I get it cleared by Sheikh Hilaly [an infidel cannot judge a Muslim] whether he has said the same thing, I will not be able to comment on what he has said. This sermon was not given in English, it was in Arabic. Now who made the transcript? What's the whole source of this transcript? So unless I see the transcript and I see what he has--listen to this man what he has said, I will not be able to make any comment."

The obviously frustrated interviewer asked:

"Hasn't the time come when the Muslim community has to stop saying that his comments have been misinterpreted or taken out of context?"

Dr. Ali replied frankly: "Yes, it is definitely happening all the time," but disingenuously continued that "this was started by the Middle Eastern Institute from Washington, which is known for twisting and turning what the Muslims say in order to create a bad image."

On 6 March 2004 the chief executive officer of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, Amjad Merhoud, warned he would be seeking an urgent meeting with the Sheikh to clarify his views, and the Federation could discuss stripping his title and claimed: "He could have in hindsight probably used different words to describe what he was trying to say or not used some of the poetry that he was trying to recite." Interviewed on A.B.C. radio on 7 March, Sheikh Hilaly replied to the criticism that he was "saying one thing in English in Australia and something else in Arabic in Lebanon." The Sheikh replied: "Of course, you are talking about two different environments ... I agree with you I am addressing two different environments I'm addressing them differently, it's be (sic) two different environments."

On 8 March 2004, the Sheik reiterated his themes and insisted the terrorist group Hezbollah was misunderstood and that his speech contained poetry that was misinterpreted. Previously he had condemned the Federal Government for proscribing Hezbollah as a terrorist organization:

"What is truth? Actually it was a poetry and in poetry we go a little bit into the imagination of presentation."

However Sheikh Fehmi Naji al Imam, interviewed on 10 March 2004, placed the Sheikh's translation problems in context. The interviewer pointed out:

"Sheikh Hilaly only really speaks Arabic. We hear this talk about flowery, poetic language and him being misunderstood. Do you accept that?"

Sheikh Fehmi responded, laughing: "I don't buy that."

On 10 March 2004 Sheikh Fehmi Naji, one of Melbourne's most senior clerics, claimed Sheikh Hilaly's comments were not misinterpreted and called on A.F.I.C. to withdraw Sheikh Hilaly as the Mufti. However, Trad claimed A.F.I.C. had already met with the Sheikh and they believed his version of events and "they understand that they believe the Mufti, and they will not make any judgment until they see something different in the Arabic tapes themselves."

On 19 March, the Sheikh cleverly criticised Al Qaeda as "a bunch of crazy people" and insisted in a declaration that he did not support the action of terrorists, and in the same context he claimed:

"I can understand why some people would mistranslate my comments because to them they cannot understand my high level of expression and they might feel my words have some ambiguity to them."

Asked if he would choose his words more selectively in the future, the Sheikh, in a humorous example of outwitting, replied: "Of course, mate."

Two of the Sheikh's daughters blamed the complexities of the Arabic language for the controversy. "You cannot just interpret it, just word by word", they said.

An anonymous associate of the Sheikh also pointed out in The Australian:

"We know he [the Sheikh] speaks English quite well, but a translator gives him time to think about his responses and gives him that 'out' if what he says provokes an angry response. And he thinks that if he gives a sermon in his native tongue no one's going to bother to translate anyway."

On 21 April 2004, the A.F.I.C., at its 40th Annual Congress, voted for the Sheikh to retain his position as Grand Mufti of Australia. On A.B.C. Radio, the President, Amir Ali, was asked if the issue of the Sheikh's dismissal had been put to a vote but he assured the interviewer that Sheikh Hilaly was not the main issue:

"Ali: 'In fact we said that the government did not submit the tape, the original tape that was taken. Still we are waiting for the tape to come, so they didn't send the tape.'

Interviewer: 'Oh ... When you told me on this programme that you intended to investigate the matter and get to the bottom of it ...'

Amir Ali: 'Yes, we investigated it and then we saw the translation was wrong.'

Interviewer: 'You never actually got the tape from the government?' Amir Ali: 'No, not the tape, we only got the transcript ... It just died down. Why (would) you want to bring it back?'"

The Muslim worldly and religious community leaders (with the notable exception of the courageous Sheikh Iman of Melbourne) must have known that no government would have exposed its information sources. Significantly, the government transcript of the Sheikh's speech in Lebanon was never accepted by Sheikh Hilaly or his spokesmen, a position which implied that the government was deceitful. The various tactical claims that the Sheikh's sermon was "taken out of context", was a "faulty translation", was "a sermon that could not be translated from Arabic to English", and involved the use of "poetry," raise the inevitable question: Did taqiyya prevail in this controversy?

Role-playing as Victim

A content analysis of Islamic media reveals an unremitting theme: Muslims in Western countries are a victimized minority and allegedly and supposedly victims of racism, xenophobia, "Islamophobia" and religious discrimination.

Terrorist counter-measures, such as specific anti-terrorist legislation and racial profiling, are vehemently opposed by Islamic organizations who would seemingly be content to have no monitoring of their activities at all. Even the most limited counter-terrorist measures enacted by legitimately elected democratic governments add to the Islamic self-image of imputed victimization and are widely misinterpreted as "a war against Islam."

False Claims of Torture

False claims of torture by terrorist suspects generally follow the instructions set down in the Al Qaeda training manual, Declaration of Jihad against the Country's Tyrants Military Series, in its 18th lesson, "Prisons and Detention Centres", which contains precise instructions to suspected terrorists [brothers] concerning [false] allegations of torture.

The manual instructs each Islamic brother to:

"(1) insist on proving that torture was inflicted on them by state security before the judge

(2) complain to the court of maltreatment while in prison

(3) ... do his best to know the names of the security officers who participated in his torture and mention their names to the judge (these names may be obtained from brothers who had to deal with those officers in previous cases)

(4) take advantage of visits to communicate with brothers outside prison and exchange information that may be helpful to them in the work outside the prison ... The importance of hiding messages is self-evident here."

Tauriya

Tauriya, or manipulated ambiguity, involves the use of double entendre, using a word which has an obvious meaning whilst alluding to another more "concealed meaning." The story of the Negus is illustrative. According to bin Ishaq, Islam's earliest biographer of Mohammed, the Negus was compelled by Christians to provide an account of his beliefs in case he had forsaken Christian beliefs. The Negus placed a statement of Islamic faith in his pocket and "outwitted" them, pretending to agree with their beliefs about Christ.

Claiming Harassment

False claims range from accusing law-enforcement organisations of ignoring Islamic customs (interviewing a woman without a female present), stealing money, damaging property and showing disrespect to Islamic women. False reports of harassment and threats are often framed by recourse to a family photograph opportunity to a receptive and often gullible media.

The Flight into Illness

A variation of the "victim of torture" claim is the "flight into illness" made by terrorist suspects involved in legal proceedings. Some law enforcement organizations have defined the condition humorously as "Post-Arrest Islamic Disorder." The most common claims are depression due to unlawful interrogation or incarceration, posttraumatic stress disorder and the most popular Islamic clinical artifact, "the heart attack."

Diversion

Questions relating to the morality of the September 11 terrorists attacks are commonly diverted by counter reference to the plight of the Palestinians, the role of Israel and U.S. foreign policy and support for Israel as "causes" of terrorism. The Islamic hatred of Israel predates the formation of the State of Israel. Islamic anti-Semitism dates back to the Prophet Mohammed himself. The "root causes" of terrorism — allegedly poverty, marginality of youth, lack of opportunities and resources which are adduced as a "cause" of terrorist acts — overlook the fact that the "roots of terrorism" are found in Muslim countries.

Evasion

Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Fadlallah, the so-called "Oracle of Hezbollah", whom some claim to be the spiritual leader and /or youth leader of Hezbollah but who has reportedly traveled in disguise for Hezbollah operational purposes and "blesses" suicide bombers before their missions, is a master of taqiyya in the form of evasion.

Martin Kramer, the distinguished Middle East scholar, has pointed out that "his elusiveness could drive journalists to distraction. Fadlallah perfected two methods of evasion. When it suited him, he delivered long and winding monologues to the simplest question, wearing down the resistance of the most persistent journalists. At other times he spoke in Delphic telegraphy... [A reference to the Delphic oracle who always gave an answer that could be interpreted in two ways]."

Asked if he was the "spiritual guide" of Hezbollah and the Islamic student movement, he replied: "I am all of these and none of them at the same time."

A similar instance was seen when Australia's controversial Sheik Omran, of the Ahl as-Sunnah wal Jamaah, was questioned by a leading Australian journalist:

"Interviewer: 'You are following the "Salhafi" tradition?'

Sheikh Omran: 'I could say yes and I could say no. But this is why we didn't call ourselves Salhaffi, we called ourselves Ahlas-Sunnah wal Jamaah, so we don't have a special flag or banner for us, different to the rest of the Muslims.'

Interviewer: 'Do you think that some Muslims in Australia are uncomfortable with your tradition?'

Sheikh Omran: 'Well, I don't think maybe. I don't want to say no. It could be yes ...'

Interviewer: 'Have any supporters from your group gone and trained in camps overseas, military camps?'

Sheik Omran: 'Maybe, yes, maybe. But this has nothing to do with the group.'"

Demanding "Evidence"

Islamic spokesmen and their legal advisors practice a form of taqiyya by repetitive and extreme requests for "evidence" and impossible standards of "proof" of alleged terrorist acts, which they know cannot be disclosed without revealing intelligence sources and methods. The demand for evidence is an attempt to identify intelligence sources and methods and personnel and obtain official documents for counter-intelligence purposes.

Tactical Denial

Admitting that a critical proposition concerning Islam may be even partly true would involve a loss of honor and invoke shame and reveal true intentions. For example the platitude: "It is impossible to be a Muslim and a terrorist", is clearly false. "Islam forbids suicide", is true, but irrelevant as suicide martyrdom attacks are not forbidden in the Koran or by the Prophet as they are believed to provide rapid entry to paradise and are an integral element of the history of Islam and are currently conducted in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon and against Israel. The fact that Islam forbids personal suicide, as do all major religions, did not impede the September 11 Islamic terrorists who launched four coordinated suicide martyrdom attacks.

EXPLOITING COGNITIVE DISSONANCE

The constant repetition of taqiyya themes induces a state of cognitive dissonance. The target audience attempts to resolve the claim that Islam is a peaceful religion with the dissonant reality of Islamic terrorist acts and operations. Christians and other participators seeking dialogue "with our Muslim brothers" are reminiscent of the "peace pastors" who, during the Cold War , believed that meeting with representatives of the Soviet Union somehow promoted peace.

THE HIJACKING OF ISLAM

The platitude that small groups of fundamentalists have "hijacked a great religion" is a masterly example of taqiyya. The timely, skilful, misleading and diversionary theme of the "hijacking" of Islam was introduced into public, political and media discourse by Islamic spokesmen in the United States shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks.

The claim that the September 11 terrorist attacks were "un-Islamic" and contrary to the teachings of Islam is taqiyya. As Bernard Lewis observed in his recent study, The Crisis of Islam: "Most present-day terrorists are Muslims and proudly identify themselves as such."

Examples of Taqiyya

2008-12-07T16:16:00.001-08:00

Taqiyya: How Jihadis Deceive the West

2008-12-07T16:11:00.000-08:00

'Taqiyya': how Islamic Extremists Deceive the West
Original source: National Observer - Australia and World Affairs

ON 19 NOVEMBER 2003, in the United States District Court Eastern District of Michigan Southern Division, Judge Steven Whalen concluded a four-page indictment against Mahmoud Youseff Kourani.

The indictment described Kourani as a dedicated member of Hezbollah who had received specialized training in radical Shiite fundamentalism, weaponry, spy craft and counter-intelligence in Lebanon and Iran and a dedicated member/fighter/recruiter and fundraiser for Hezbollah: (1)

"While in the United States,
Kourani employed 'taqiyya': a Shia
Muslim doctrine of concealment,
pretense and fraud. This meant
amongst other things that Kourani
would, when he thought it necessary,
avoid going to mosques, not
attend Shiite religious rituals, shave
his beard, and otherwise keep his
true beliefs secret while inside what
he considered to be hostile territory
— the United States of America."

What is taqiyya, as referred to in the indictment? The Islamic tradition of taqiyya stretches back to the sixth-century A.D. when, following disputes over succession after the Prophet Mohammed's death, the minority Shiites developed taqiyya, or "holy deception", to conceal their "true" beliefs from the Sunni majority and to maintain operational security for their jihad/ terrorist missions in the Dar el Haab — The Domain of War. (2)

Taqiyya is inspired by the example and sayings of the Prophet Mohammed praised in the Hadiths (the sayings of the Prophet) as "the greatest deceiver", and praised in the Koran. Muslims have used taqiyya (pronounced tark-e-ya) described variously as "precautionary dissimulation," "religiously-sanctioned deception," "lying" or "deception" and "keeping one's convictions secret" and "tactical dissimulation" or "holy deception".

Two texts in the Koran specifically refer to taqiyya. The Prophet Mohammed, the founder of Islam reportedly said: (3)

"[H]e who keeps secrets shall soon attain his objectives ... All War is a ruse" and "Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers; if any do that, they shall have no relation left with Allah except by way of precaution ... [taqiyya] that ye may guard yourselves". [Koran 3:28 and 40.28, emphasis added]

Early Islamic texts refer to the covert nature of taqiyya: (4)

"Al Taqiyya is with the tongue only; not the heart. A believer can make any statement as long as the 'heart is comfortable ..."; "God gave the believers freedom of movement by takiyya; therefore conceal thyself ..."; "Takiyya is a cloak for the believer: he who has no religion has no takiyya, associate your opponents only outwardly and oppose them inwardly".

Related terms include: protection of the secret (hifz-al sirr), secrecy (katm or kitman), deception (making something ambiguous) and hiding the real state of one's convictions (talbis). Early Muslim sects, the Najadt and the Kharjites, referred to particular regions outside their communities as "the abode of dissimulation" (dar al taqiyya).

A contemporary definition of taqiyya is religiously-sanctioned deception for the purposes of concealing terrorism. German terrorism expert and Middle East scholar, Basam Tibi, defined taqiyya as: "You are two-faced. You hate me, but you smile at me."

Bernard Lewis — the pre-eminent Middle East historian and scholar, Cleveland E. Dodge Professor of Near East Studies Emeritus at Princeton University — defined taqiyya in his early study of the Assassins (1090-1275), a prototypical Islamic terrorist organization which is discussed in greater detail below. He said: (5)

"The term taqiyya, caution, precaution, denotes an Islamic concept of dispensation — the idea that under compulsion or menace, a believer may be dispensed from fulfilling certain conditions of religion ... It was used to justify the concealment of beliefs likely to arouse the hostility of the authorities or the populace."

Taqiyya informs Shia and Sunni political and religious discourse. The Sunni Moroscos survived in Spain by using taqiyya and washing off holy water after attending mass. Cox and Marks in their monograph, The West, Islam and Islamism, note that taqiyya is referred to in Sunni religious and political discourse and cite Surrah 16: 106, about which al Atabari, the famed Sunni commentator, said: "If anyone is compelled and professes unbelief with his tongue, while his heart contradicts him, to escape his enemies, no blame falls on him, because God takes his servants as their hearts believe". Cox and Marks also note: (6)

"Thus, in extreme circumstances, deception and lying are permitted and the end justifies the means. These doctrines can clearly provide religious justification for deliberate deception — provided that the situation is perceived as threatening, which many Islamists believe is currently the case. The doctrine [taqiyya] could apply to those, for example, who quote a peaceful or tolerant verse from the Koran to show Islam as a religion of peace but fail to mention other verses which are warlike or intolerant".

Taqiyya is also used by many Middle Eastern ruling elites and sects, including the Yezdi, Alaawites (the present Syrian ruling family), Sabaeans and the Druze whose use of taqiyya dates back to c. 966-1021. In the harsh Middle East environment, taqiyya became a necessary protection to conceal esoteric beliefs or terrorist plans and maintain operational security.

As previously noted, the Islamic tradition of taqiyya stretches back to the sixth century A.D. when, following disputes over succession after the Prophet's death, the minority Shiites developed taqiyya or "holy deception" to conceal their "true" beliefs from the Sunni majority and to maintain operational security for their jihad/ terrorist missions in the Dar el Haab--The Domain of War. Daniel Pipes locates the spirit of taqiyya in the Syrian Alawis (also known as the Nusayris), a Shiite sect, saying: (7)

"We are the body and other sects are but clothing. However a man's dress does not change him. So we always remain Nusayris, even though we externally adopt the practices of our neighbors. Whoever does not dissimulate is a fool, for no intelligent person goes naked in the market".

According to Pipes:

"Taqiyya permits a Shi'i to pray with Sunnis, even while silently cursing the Sunni caliphs, and to raise children falsely to tell strangers they are Sunnis."

THE ASSASSINS AND AL QAEDA

The Assassins (1090-1275), like Al Qaeda "sleeper agents", infiltrated the target milieu and waited patiently for many years for the signal for a surprise assassination. The Assassins were the prototypical Islamic terrorist organisation and during their most successful operational phase threatened the governments of Persia and Syria.

As the late and widely respected scholar in comparative history, culture and international law Professor Adda Bozeman points out in her comparative studies of statecraft, covert action, deception, intelligence collection and assassination have a long tradition in the Middle East and Islamic history: (8)

"In the vast Arab/Islam domain of West Asia and North Africa, war was idealized and institutionalized in many forms, notably in jihad or 'holy war' ... Reflections on present and historical records suggest that secrecy, dissimulation, and covert activities are part of the general lifestyle; that social and political relations are marked by intrigue, deception, and conflict; that the image of 'the enemy' is highly developed; that fighting is viewed positively as a noble undertaking; and that people tolerate high levels of violence ...

Such questions as 'Can covert action be just?' would not even suggest themselves in the context of Mohammedan law and ethics ... The clandestine life of the Middle East has obviously always been suffused with 'intelligence' and appropriate communication networks. Assassination and related ways of checking enemy lives and activities were common practices."

Since the Prophet's death in 632 — from natural causes — assassination of political and religious leaders has been the primary source of regime change in the Middle East.

Of the 55 Caliphs (successors list), including the first four caliphs, an estimated 18 to 26 were assassinated. The Assassins pioneered Islamic "martyrdom operations", whose volunteers called themselves fidaen from the Arabic fidaii--a person ready to sacrifice his life for Islam. The fidayiyaah (fidais or fidawis), or the "self-sacrificers", specialised in targeted assassination of elite political, religious or military leaders.

Like Al Qaeda, the assassins used scattered mountain sites as bases and a network of sympathy and support cells in urban centers. Using taqiyya, the Assassins became masters of disguise and often assumed the shape of the enemy. The reputation of the Assassins for surprise attacks was so formidable that the threat, or implied threat, of assassination was also used as a form of terror.

Using taqiyya the assassins posed as servants, advisors, soldiers, Sufis or Christian monks and ascetics to gain access to their target and humiliated and shamed the victim.

A favoured Assassin's tactic was "deceptive triangulation" which persuaded the target that jihad was not aimed at him but at another enemy. The real target would be deceived and destroyed. Another tactic was to deny that jihad was being waged. The fate for such faulty assessments was death.

Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda derive from the tradition of the Assassins. The elite of Al Qaeda were drawn from Egyptian terrorist groups, primarily the secretive Muslim Brotherhood and Al Takfir wal Hijra, often assessed as the most clandestine terrorist group in the world.

One of the most influential tracts on modern terrorism, and especially in relation to jihad and taqiyya, was The Neglected Duty, which redefined jihad as "war against the unbelievers", written by Muhammad Abd al Salaam Faraj (1954-1982). (9) Faraj was one of the key figures in the assassination of Egyptian President Sadat in October 1981 and was subsequently executed on 15 April 1982.

Faraj formally defined jihad as the sixth pillar of Islam and extended it to include taqiyya and quoted the medieval writer, Al-Tabari: "Lying is essentially permitted, but it is better to limit oneself to speaking ambiguously" and advised jihadists to operate in accordance with the heading "Deceiving the Infidels: One of the Arts of Fighting in Islam".

The terrorist group, Al Takfir Wal Hijra, who reportedly merged in the 1990s with Al Qaeda, are immersed in taqiyya techniques. Takfiris are "super sleepers" committed to becoming embedded in the target society and have operated in Lebanon, Sudan, Algeria, Jordan, Libya, England and through Western Europe since the 1990s. They are "permitted" to drink alcohol, live together, pray together, eat during Ramadan, dress in Western style and socialise with women, to avoid suspicion or detection. All outsiders, even Muslim brothers are regarded as takfir (infidels), and takfiris are reportedly even feared by Al Qaeda and other extremist Muslims. Takfiris specialise in "quality" large-scale terrorist operations, particularly assassinations and bombings.

The key figures and planners in the 11 September terrorist attacks are believed to be takfiris, including Ayaman Al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's second in command; Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, now in U.S. custody; and the "commander" of the 11 September terrorist attacks, Mohamed Emir Atta. As Takfiris specialise in "quality" large scale terrorist operations--particularly assassinations and bombing, they are regarded as one of the world's most ruthless terrorist groups.

MODES OF TAQIYYA

There are many modes of taqiyya which has developed as an art form of deception, including:

Outwitting

Islamic spokesmen commonly use taqiyya in the form of "outwitting". The matter under discussion is not to be debated or discussed; the opponent is "outwitted" through taqiyya, by diversion of the subject through the tactical use of honour (feigning "offence") and disparagement of the speaker and religious obfuscation, aided at times by a mystical reference to God or Allah, which is irrelevant to the topic under discussion. Outwitting is regarded as a skill, worthy of praise, often accompanied by smiles and laughter.

An Australian Example of "Outwitting": Sheikh Hilaly's Lebanon visit, 2004

In early February 2004, the Australian media reported that the controversial Mufti of Australia, Sheikh Hilaly of the Lakemba Mosque, New South Wales, had met with notorious terrorist Hezbollah leader, Hasaan Nasrallah, the leader of Lebanon's "Party of God"--the Syrian-Iranian-sponsored terrorist organisation--and on 13 February delivered a "sermon" at the Al Quds mosque in Sidon, Lebanon, calling for jihad and praising the 11 September terror attacks.

The controversy raged. The Sheik was the Mufti of Australia's Muslims, and a mufti by definition can issue fatwas, that is, a considered opinion ranging from an issue of community interest or religious law to peace, war and jihad.

On 18 February, Keysar Trad, the Sheikh's translator, told A.B.C. radio: (10)

"I believe these people have been far too selective in taking information somewhat out of context. The Mufti is a proponent of peace and peaceful solutions to any conflict and his message was in a completely and entirely different context. I spoke to him yesterday and he assured me that the context in which he made his message was not in the way that it was reported by these people".

On 19 February, Keysar Trad affirmed that the remarks about Israel and Hezbollah had been taken out of context. He said he spoken to the Sheikh and his remark about jihad was a rhetorical question.

On 29 February, Keysar Trad also resorted to the Arabic poetic defence, reportedly claiming that the Sheikh had taken "bits from poems which he had incorporated into his sermons." On 1 March Trad used the "lost in translation" defence:

"I believe the context has been lost in the translation ... He's not praising it by any means, he's really condemning these atrocities."

In Australia, the Sheikh's speech was widely reported and criticised by the Prime Minister in Parliament. On 3 March 2004, in an unusually frank interview, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexander Downer commented: (11)

"He talks out of both sides of his mouth. When there was initially a suggestion in the media that he had said--at least he had called for a jihad, a spokesman for Al-Hilaly said that his words had been taken out of context."

The journalist responded to Downer: "That's not true." Downer replied: "Exactly. That did not turn out to be true. We got a copy of the speech, we translated the copy ... and it's pretty obvious that he's been calling for jihad and suicide bombers ... He's been praising September the 11th as God's work."

THE "ARABIC IS POETRY" DEFENSE

Featured on the A.B.C.'s Religion Report on 3 March, Dr. Amir Ali, President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils stated: (12)

"Therefore unless I can see this transcript and unless I get it cleared by Sheikh Hilaly [an infidel cannot judge a Muslim] whether he has said the same thing, I will not be able to comment on what he has said. This sermon was not given in English, it was in Arabic. Now who made the transcript? What's the whole source of this transcript? So unless I see the transcript and I see what he has--listen to this man what he has said, I will not be able to make any comment."

The obviously frustrated interviewer asked:

"Hasn't the time come when the Muslim community has to stop saying that his comments have been misinterpreted or taken out of context?"

Dr. Ali replied frankly: "Yes, it is definitely happening all the time", but disingenuously continued that "this was started by the Middle Eastern Institute from Washington, which is known for twisting and turning what the Muslims say in order to create a bad image."

On 6 March 2004 the chief executive officer of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, Amjad Merhoud, warned he would be seeking an urgent meeting with the Sheikh to clarify his views, and the Federation could discuss stripping his title and claimed: "He could have in hindsight probably used different words to describe what he was trying to say or not used some of the poetry that he was trying to recite". Interviewed on A.B.C. radio on 7 March, Sheikh Hilaly replied to the criticism that he was "saying one thing in English in Australia and something else in Arabic in Lebanon". The Sheikh replied: "Of course, you are talking about two different environments ... I agree with you I am addressing two different environments I'm addressing them differently, it's be (sic) two different environments." (13)

On 8 March 2004, the Sheik reiterated his themes and insisted the terrorist group Hezbollah was misunderstood and that his speech contained poetry that was misinterpreted. Previously he had condemned the Federal Government for proscribing Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation: (14)

"What is truth? Actually it was a poetry and in poetry we go a little bit into the imagination of presentation."

However Sheikh Fehmi Naji al Imam, interviewed on 10 March 2004, placed the Sheikh's translation problems in context. The interviewer pointed out: (15)

"Sheikh Hilaly only really speaks Arabic. We hear this talk about flowery, poetic language and him being misunderstood. Do you accept that?"

Sheikh Fehmi responded, laughing: "I don't buy that."

On 10 March 2004 Sheikh Fehmi Naji, one of Melbourne's most senior clerics, claimed Sheikh Hilaly's comments were not misinterpreted and called on A.F.I.C. to withdraw Sheikh Hilaly as the Mufti. However, Trad claimed A.F.I.C. had already met with the Sheikh and they believed his version of events and "they understand that they believe the Mufti, and they will not make any judgment until they see something different in the Arabic tapes themselves". (16)

On 19 March, the Sheikh cleverly criticised Al Qaeda as "a bunch of crazy people" and insisted in a declaration that he did not support the action of terrorists, and in the same context he claimed: (17)

"I can understand why some people would mistranslate my comments because to them they cannot understand my high level of expression and they might feel my words have some ambiguity to them."

Asked if he would choose his words more selectively in the future, the Sheikh, in a humorous example of outwitting, replied: "Of course, mate."

Two of the Sheikh's daughters blamed the complexities of the Arabic language for the controversy. "You cannot just interpret it, just word by word", they said.

An anonymous associate of the Sheikh also pointed out in The Australian: (18)

"We know he [the Sheikh] speaks English quite well, but a translator gives him time to think about his responses and gives him that 'out' if what he says provokes an angry response. And he thinks that if he gives a sermon in his native tongue no one's going to bother to translate anyway."

On 21 April 2004, the A.F.I.C., at its 40th Annual Congress, voted for the Sheikh to retain his position as Grand Mufti of Australia. On A.B.C. Radio, the President, Amir Ali, was asked if the issue of the Sheikh's dismissal had been put to a vote but he assured the interviewer that Sheikh Hilaly was not the main issue: (19)

"Ali: 'In fact we said that the government did not submit the tape, the original tape that was taken. Still we are waiting for the tape to come, so they didn't send the tape.'

Interviewer: 'Oh ... When you told me on this programme that you intended to investigate the matter and get to the bottom of it ...'

Amir Ali: 'Yes, we investigated it and then we saw the translation was wrong.'

Interviewer: 'You never actually got the tape from the government?' Amir Ali: 'No, not the tape, we only got the transcript ... It just died down. Why (would) you want to bring it back?'"

The Muslim worldly and religious community leaders (with the notable exception of the courageous Sheikh Iman of Melbourne) must have known that no government would have exposed its information sources. Significantly, the government transcript of the Sheikh's speech in Lebanon was never accepted by Sheikh Hilaly or his spokesmen, a position which implied that the government was deceitful. The various tactical claims that the Sheikh's sermon was "taken out of context", was a "faulty translation", was "a sermon that could not be translated from Arabic to English", and involved the use of "poetry", raise the inevitable question: Did taqiyya prevail in this controversy?

Role-playing as Victim

A content analysis of Islamic media reveals an unremitting theme: Muslims in Western countries are a victimised minority and allegedly and supposedly victims of racism, xenophobia, "Islamophobia" and religious discrimination.

Terrorist counter-measures, such as specific anti-terrorist legislation and racial profiling, are vehemently opposed by Islamic organisations who would seemingly be content to have no monitoring of their activities at all. Even the most limited counter-terrorist measures enacted by legitimately elected democratic governments add to the Islamic self-image of imputed victimisation and are widely misinterpreted as "a war against Islam".

False Claims of Torture

False claims of torture by terrorist suspects generally follow the instructions set down in the Al Qaeda training manual, Declaration of Jihad against the Country's Tyrants Military Series, in its 18th lesson, "Prisons and Detention Centres", which contains precise instructions to suspected terrorists [brothers] concerning [false] allegations of torture.

The manual instructs each Islamic brother to:

"(1) insist on proving that torture was inflicted on them by state security before the judge ...

(2) complain to the court of maltreatment while in prison ...

(3) ... do his best to know the names of the security officers who participated in his torture and mention their names to the judge (these names may be obtained from brothers who had to deal with those officers in previous cases) ...

(4) take advantage of visits to communicate with brothers outside prison and exchange information that may be helpful to them in the work outside the prison ... The importance of hiding messages is self-evident here."

Tauriya

Tauriya, or manipulated ambiguity, involves the use of double entendre, using a word which has an obvious meaning whilst alluding to another more "concealed meaning". The story of the Negus is illustrative. According to bin Ishaq, Islam's earliest biographer of Mohammed, the Negus was compelled by Christians to provide an account of his beliefs in case he had forsaken Christian beliefs. The Negus placed a statement of Islamic faith in his pocket and "outwitted" them, pretending to agree with their beliefs about Christ.

Claiming Harassment

False claims range from accusing law-enforcement organisations of ignoring Islamic customs (interviewing a woman without a female present), stealing money, damaging property and showing disrespect to Islamic women. False reports of harassment and threats are often framed by recourse to a family photograph opportunity to a receptive and often gullible media.

The Flight into Illness

A variation of the "victim of torture" claim is the "flight into illness" made by terrorist suspects involved in legal proceedings. Some law enforcement organisations have defined the condition humorously as "Post-Arrest Islamic Disorder". The most common claims are depression due to unlawful interrogation or incarceration, posttraumatic stress disorder and the most popular Islamic clinical artifact, "the heart attack".

Diversion

Questions relating to the morality of the September 11 terrorists attacks are commonly diverted by counter reference to the plight of the Palestinians, the role of Israel and U.S. foreign policy and support for Israel as "causes" of terrorism. The Islamic hatred of Israel predates the formation of the State of Israel. Islamic anti-Semitism dates back to the Prophet Mohammed himself. The "root causes" of terrorism--allegedly poverty, marginality of youth, lack of opportunities and resources which are adduced as a "cause" of terrorist acts--overlook the fact that the "roots of terrorism" are found in Muslim countries.

Evasion

Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Fadlallah, the so-called "Oracle of Hezbollah", whom some claim to be the spiritual leader and /or youth leader of Hezbollah but who has reportedly travelled in disguise for Hezbollah operational purposes and "blesses" suicide bombers before their missions, is a master of taqiyya in the form of evasion.

Martin Kramer, the distinguished Middle East scholar, has pointed out that "his elusiveness could drive journalists to distraction. Fadlallah perfected two methods of evasion. When it suited him, he delivered long and winding monologues to the simplest question, wearing down the resistance of the most persistent journalists. At other times he spoke in Delphic telegraphy... [A reference to the Delphic oracle who always gave an answer that could be interpreted in two ways]"20

Asked if he was the "spiritual guide" of Hezbollah and the Islamic student movement, he replied: "I am all of these and none of them at the same time."

A similar instance was seen when Australia's controversial Sheik Omran, of the Ahl as-Sunnah wal Jamaah, was questioned by a leading Australian journalist: (21)

"Interviewer: 'You are following the "Salhafi" tradition?'

Sheikh Omran: 'I could say yes and I could say no. But this is why we didn't call ourselves Salhaffi, we called ourselves Ahlas-Sunnah wal Jamaah, so we don't have a special flag or banner for us, different to the rest of the Muslims.'

Interviewer: 'Do you think that some Muslims in Australia are uncomfortable with your tradition?'

Sheikh Omran: 'Well, I don't think maybe. I don't want to say no. It could be yes ...'

Interviewer: 'Have any supporters from your group gone and trained in camps overseas, military camps?'

Sheik Omran: 'Maybe, yes, maybe. But this has nothing to do with the group.'"

Demanding "Evidence"

Islamic spokesmen and their legal advisors practice a form of taqiyya by repetitive and extreme requests for "evidence" and impossible standards of "proof" of alleged terrorist acts, which they know cannot be disclosed without revealing intelligence sources and methods. The demand for evidence is an attempt to identify intelligence sources and methods and personnel and obtain official documents for counter-intelligence purposes.

Tactical Denial

Admitting that a critical proposition concerning Islam may be even partly true would involve a loss of honour and invoke shame and reveal true intentions. For example the platitude: "It is impossible to be a Muslim and a terrorist", is clearly false. "Islam forbids suicide", is true, but irrelevant as suicide martyrdom attacks are not forbidden in the Koran or by the Prophet as they are believed to provide rapid entry to paradise and are an integral element of the history of Islam and are currently conducted in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon and against Israel. The fact that Islam forbids personal suicide, as do all major religions, did not impede the September 11 Islamic terrorists who launched four coordinated suicide martyrdom attacks.

EXPLOITING COGNITIVE DISSONANCE

The constant repetition of taqiyya themes induces a state of cognitive dissonance. The target audience attempts to resolve the claim that Islam is a peaceful religion with the dissonant reality of Islamic terrorist acts and operations. Christians and other participators seeking dialogue "with our Muslim brothers" are reminiscent of the "peace pastors" who, during the Cold War , believed that meeting with representatives of the Soviet Union somehow promoted peace.

THE HIJACKING OF ISLAM

The platitude that small groups of fundamentalists have "hijacked a great religion" is a masterly example of taqiyya. The timely, skilful, misleading and diversionary theme of the "hijacking" of Islam was introduced into public, political and media discourse by Islamic spokesmen in the United States shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks.

The claim that the September 11 terrorist attacks were "un-Islamic" and contrary to the teachings of Islam is taqiyya. As Bernard Lewis observed in his recent study, The Crisis of Islam: "Most present-day terrorists are Muslims and proudly identify themselves as such." (22)

(1.) U.S. Indictments: U.S.A. v. Mahmoud Youssef Kourani, 2003, No. 03-81030.

(2.) Taqiyya, The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Volume X 2000, E.J. Brill, Leiden, 2000, pages 134--136; Encyclopaedia of the Quran, Volume One A-D, J.D. Mc McAuliffe (General Editor) Brill, Leiden-Boston-Koln, 2001, pages 540-542; Parts 1-3 in "Islamic Sects and Followings, Shi'ite Beliefs and Practices", A Shiite Encyclopaedia, Vahid J. Majd and Ali Abbas, October 1995; Hans Wehr, Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, Beirut/London, 1980; Secrecy and Concealment Studies in the History of Mediterranean and Near Eastern Religions, Leiden, 1995. H.G. Kippenberg and G.G Stroumsa (Eds.); "Some Imami-Shi'I Views on Taqiyya", Etan Kohlberg, Journal of American Oriental Studies 95(1975) pages 395-402; Reproduced in Belief and Law in Imami Shi'ism, Aldsershot, 1991; The Neglected Duty: The Creed of Sadat's Assassins and Islamic Resurgence in the Middle East, Johannes G. Jansen, Macmillan Publishing Co., New York, 1986, pages 210-211. Note: there are many variant spellings of "taqiyya". The most commonly accepted form is "taqiyya" , as used by Professor Bernard Lewis in his many publications.

(3.) Koran 3: 28 and 40: 28. [Emphasis added.]

(4.) See footnote 2, supra.

(5.) Bernard Lewis, The Assassins, New York, 1987, page 25; W.B. Bartlett, The Assassins: The Story of Islam's Medieval Sect, Gloucestershire, 2001.

(6.) "The 'West', Islam and Islamism: Is Ideological Islam Compatible with Liberal Democracy?", Caroline Cox and John Marks, Civitas: Institute for the Study of Civil Society, 2003, page 63.

(7.) Daniel Pipes, The Hidden Hand: Middle East Fears of Conspiracy, New York, 1998, pages 292-293.

(8.) "War and the Clash of Ideas: Statecraft and Intelligence in the non-Western World" in Adda B. Bozeman, Strategic Intelligence and Statecraft, Selected Essays, New York, 1992, pages 63-65, 105-107.

(9.) Johannes Jansen, The Neglected Duty: The Creed of Sadat's Assassins and Islamic Resurgence in the Middle East, London, 1986, pages 210-212. See also "Fear and Trembling: Terrorism in Three Religious Traditions", David C. Rapoport, The American Political Science Review, Volume 78, Issue 3, September 1984.

(10.) Sheikh Hilaly: "Sermon at Sidon Mosque", 13 February 2004: Official Transcript from Australian Embassy, Beirut, 2004.

(11.) Transcript of interview, Radio 3AW, The Hon. Alexander Downer, M.P., Minister for Foreign Affairs, Australia, 3 March 2004, pages 1-2. See also "Jihad call reports alarm Canberra", CNN.com, 18 February 2004; "Muslim leader's remarks cause controversy", A.B.C. P.M. Transcript, 18 February 2004; "Outcry over leader's call for jihad", The Age, 19 February 2004; "September 11 is God's work: Mufti", Sydney Morning Herald, 29 February 2004; "Muslim leader's September 11 support appals Downer", The Age, 1 March 2004.

(12.) A.B.C. Radio National, The Religion Report, 3 March 2004, pages 5-7. Dr Ali implied that the official government transcript was unreliable.

(13.) "Plea for a little understanding", The Sydney Morning Herald, 7 March 2004; "Grand Mufti could be stripped of title over remarks", Khaleej Times, 6 March 2004; "Australian Muslims warn: Interview with Sheikh Fehmi", The Religion Report, 10 March 2004; Sheikh Hilaly Interview, A.B.C., Sunday Profile, 7 March 2004. Cited in Dhimmi Watch, 14 March 2004; "Muslims clash over Mufti row", S.B.S. World News Transcript, 10 March 2005.

(14.) The Australian, 8 March 2004.

(15.) The Religion Report, A.B.C., 10 March 2004.

(16.) "Muslims clash over Mufti row", S.B.S. World News Transcript, 10 March 2004.

(17.) SMH.com.au, 19 March 2004.

(18.) The Australian, 19 March 2004.

(19.) The Religion Report, A.B.C., National Radio, 21 April 2004.

(20.) Spokesmen for the Despised: Fundamentalist Leaders in the United States, University of Chicago Press, 1997, page 114.

(21.) "I am behind every Muslim in this country", The Bulletin, 10 September 2003.

(22.) Bernard Lewis, The Crisis of Islam: The Holy War and Unholy Terror, New York, The Modern Library, 2003, page 137.

An Example of Islamic Self-Created Oppression

2008-12-07T15:47:00.000-08:00

Here is an example of CREATING an event that allows Muslims to claim they are "oppressed" and "persecuted." Read more here about why they would want to do such a thing: The Use Of Pretext in Justifying Hostilities:

Six imams were denied access to a U.S. Airways flight in 2006. CAIR, which represented these imams, claimed this was a clear case of discrimination against Muslims. Yet the imams were prevented from flying not because they were Muslim or held a prayer session directly outside the gate (and again on the plane, which is peculiar since even devout Muslims do not pray this frequently), but because they were behaving like hijackers.

The imams demanded to board at the same time even though only two had first-class tickets and then attempted to reseat themselves on the plane in a suspicious formation (two in the tail, two in the mid-section, and two in first class). They muttered loudly in Arabic about jihad and cursed the United States for its involvement in Iraq. They requested seat belt extensions (which can be used as makeshift weapons) even though none was large enough to need it.

Other Muslim passengers on the flight were not harassed. Given their blatantly suspicious behavior it has been suggested by many that the imams were deliberately trying to provoke their removal from the airplane. (source: here)

Iran's Clothing Police Crack Down

2008-12-07T00:17:00.000-08:00

Police have arrested 49 people this week in a northern Iranian city during a crackdown on "satanic" clothes, IRNA news agency reported Thursday.

The measures are the latest in a country-wide campaign against Western cultural influence in the Islamic Republic, where strict dress codes are enforced.

"Police confronted rascals and thugs who appeared in public wearing satanic fashions and unsuitable clothing," Qaemshahr city police commander Mahmoud Rahmani told IRNA.

What is satanic? "men sporting spiky 'Western' hairstyles or women wearing tight trousers and high boots."

Read the whole story: Police detain 49 for "satanic" clothes.

A Message From CAIR

2008-12-04T01:17:00.000-08:00

(LOS ANGELES, CA, 12/3/08) - The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today called on American Muslims and other people of conscience to thank the Fox television network and the creator of "The Simpsons" for a recent episode that used comedy to challenge Islamophobia.

The episode, which aired Sunday evening and is titled "Mypods and Boomsticks," highlights anti-Muslim sentiment by featuring a young Muslim character named Bashir and his family who face prejudice after moving to Springfield. In the program, Homer Simpson wrongly suspects that Bashir's family is involved in a terror plot. Bart Simpson befriends Bashir and defends him from bullies.

To view the entire episode, click here.

CAIR's Greater Los Angeles Area office (CAIR-LA) sent a letter today to the show's creator Matt Groening thanking him for challenging anti-Muslim prejudice.

The letter said Sunday's episode "brought to light how Americans can work toward mutual respect and inclusion by getting to know their neighbors." It went on to state: "The episode also builds on the values that have made America the great nation it is a nation in which citizenship is about finding common ground and building a better society. American Muslims have been doing just that by making daily contributions to our society that often go unrecognized."

"Because of its acceptance in popular culture, comedy is often one of the best vehicles for challenging stereotypes and intolerance," said CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad. "Fox and Matt Groening are to be congratulated for tackling the disturbing phenomenon of Islamophobia."

THIS IS CAIR'S REQUESTED ACTION FOR ITS MUSLIM CONSTITUENTS:

Send a message expressing appreciation for highlighting both anti-Muslim attitudes and the need for mutual respect and inclusion in our society.

E-Mail: peter.liguori@fox.com (Peter Liguori, Chairman, Entertainment, Fox Broadcasting Co.); dana.walden@fox.com (Dana Walden, Chairman, Twentieth Century Fox Television); gary.newman@fox.com (Gary Newman, Chairman, Twentieth Century Fox Television) COPY TO: info@losangeles.cair.com

Citizen Warrior says: I suggest we do just the opposite. Muslims don't need any more politically-correct coddling. They already get far too much special treatment and they do not deserve it. Action requested: Write to those people and tell them a little about Islam. Ask them to read the Qur'an and quit being dhimmis. Ask them to please stop cooperating with taqiyya. Aks them to read up on CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Holy Land Foundation trial, and then try again.

Radical Muslims’ goal is total domination

2008-12-04T01:12:00.000-08:00

Posted on Wed, Dec. 03, 2008 by Cal Thomas

THOMAS: Radical Muslims’ goal is total domination

You’ve got to be taught to hate and fear

You’ve got to be taught from year to year

It’s got to be drummed in your dear little ear

You’ve got to be carefully taught.

— South Pacific, music and lyrics by Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein

DUBLIN, Ireland — Looking at the faces of two young men who were among the purveyors of death at the Taj Mahal and Oberoi hotels, Chhattrapati Shivaji Terminus station and Leopold’s restaurant in Bombay, India, makes Westerners recoil, and not just in horror. We also question how anyone could be so insensitive to the value of human life. See lyric above.

The killers — these and others over many years — use Islam as the foundation for their indoctrination, coupling it with the belief that Western society is unwilling to do what is necessary to defend itself. They have literally bet their lives that the West will meet their force with something less commanding. And that is why they have infiltrated — and are infiltrating — Britain, much of the rest of Western Europe, America (and India) through immigration and high birth rates.

President-elect Barack Obama, who once pledged to "sit down" with America’s enemies, may have second thoughts after watching the carnage.

A caller to one media outlet, a man representing himself as one of the terrorists, said Indian occupation of "Muslim land" was the reason for the attack. How do you negotiate with that? Do we give them all of Earth, move to the moon and start over, controlling who gets to follow? Radical Muslim doctrine considers all land potential, or actual, "Muslim land."

The British media are full of stories claiming that some of the Bombay killers were taught in Islamic schools in Britain and radicalized by fanatical imams before heading to Pakistan for weapons training.

This is nothing new. The terrorists who bombed three London subway trains and a bus in 2005 were found to be part of this web of hate involving Islamic schools, radical mosques, fanatical imams and operational trainers in Pakistan.

Then-Prime Minister Tony Blair attempted to shut down the most offensive mosques and deport the imams of hate. His efforts produced mixed results, thanks to opposition from British civil liberties groups that are more concerned with protecting terrorists than their targets. Some imams were deported, but many others remain, and new terrorists are being incubated in Britain and other European nations.

The Daily Mail online reported Sunday that a banned Islamic terrorist group helped underwrite the Bombay attacks with cash raised in British mosques.

According to the Daily Telegraph, Britain’s security service, MI5, "has identified approximately 2,000 individuals who pose a direct threat to national security and public safety and believes the number of potential terrorists living in this country [Britain] could run to 4,000."

In the Telegraph, columnist Philip Johnston wrote, "It is difficult to prevent someone traveling to Pakistan ostensibly to visit their grandmother or uncle. An estimated 400,000 trips a year are made by Britons of Pakistani origin to their ancestral homeland."

What is needed in Britain — and the United States — is a change in the thinking that naively believes that simply exposing foreign nationals to our way of life means they will "catch" it as they might the flu. Allowing immigrants from nations in which the dominant religion mandates the forced subordination of every other faith (or no faith) and their subjugation through state power under Sharia law, increases the likelihood of more attacks.

At the very least, all non-Western immigrants to Britain and the U.S. should be told before their arrival that our intention is to westernize them.

They must learn English and study and embrace the history of their host nation. If they are Muslim, they will be allowed to worship only in existing mosques. No new ones should be built. Existing mosques must be monitored to make sure that hate is not taught and aggressive behavior toward their host countries is not promoted. If such behavior or speech is detected, the mosques should be closed and the imams arrested or deported.

Diplomacy should precede or follow war.

Once war begins, victory is the only acceptable outcome. The goal of the terrorists is victory. If Britain and America settle for less, they will get less, which is defeat.

Cal Thomas writes for Tribune Media Services. tmseditors@tribune.com

Live Report from Mumbai

2008-12-03T00:59:00.001-08:00

On the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, he does a good three minute bit. Check it out:

Live from Mumbai

The Movie: An American Carol

2008-11-30T23:16:00.000-08:00

Find Out How They Vote

2008-11-28T22:44:00.001-08:00

Track your Senators' and Representative's votes by e-mail.

In a new service provided by Congress.org, they will send you updates in your email. Each week (that Congress is in session) you will receive:

• Key votes by your two Senators and U.S. Representative.

• Links to send e-mail to your members of Congress using pre-addressed forms.

• Upcoming votes for your review and a chance to offer e-mail input before they vote.

Use this weekly vote monitor to track the decisions made by your elected officials on key issues.

Find out how your senators and representative votes on key issues.

Maybe We Can Make Our Own Fuel

2008-11-27T01:23:00.000-08:00

This story may be one of the breakthroughs we've been looking for. We need a fuel that doesn't come from Islamic states and that's cheap enough to compete with it. A good candidate has just been discovered in the Patagonian rainforest.

A team led by a Montana State University professor has found a fungus (see photo) that produces a new type of diesel fuel, which they say holds great promise. Calling the fungus' output "myco-diesel," Gary Strobel and his collaborators describe their initial observations in the November issue of Microbiology.

Another promising aspect is that the fungus can grow in cellulose.

"That's the most common organic molecule on earth," Scott Strobel said. "It's all around us, everywhere."

Scientists in a variety of disciplines should be able to work together to optimize production and find a way to turn what is essentially a vapor into a burnable, liquid fuel, he added.

The discovery may offer an alternative to fossil fuels, said Strobel, MSU professor of plant sciences and plant pathology. The find is even bigger, he said, than his 1993 discovery of fungus that contained the anticancer drug taxol.

“This is the only organism that has ever been shown to produce such an important combination of fuel substances,” said researcher Gary Strobel from Montana State University. “The fungus can even make these diesel compounds from cellulose, which would make it a better source of biofuel than anything we use at the moment”

New Type Of Diesel Fuel Found In Patagonia Fungus

Deep in the Jungle, A Fungus Pumps Out Diesel From Wood

Rainforest fungus makes diesel

Oil Creation Theory Challenged by Fuel-Making Fungus

Bio of Dr. Gary A. Strobel

What The Qur'an Says About Non-Muslims

2008-11-27T00:29:00.000-08:00

You can look up the following passages in any Qur'an. The first number is the chapter or "sura" number, the second number is the verse. Here's what the Qur'an says about non-Muslims:

They (people of the book, meaning Jews and Christians) disbelieve in Allah and confound truth with falsehood (3:70-3:71). Christians lie when they talk about the son of God (18:4-5).

Jesus taught them compassion and mercy in the Gospels, but Christians turned to monasticism…many of them are evil-livers (57:27).

Fight against them, kill, convert, or subdue them and (only if it is beneficial to Islam) force them to pay a tax that Muslims do not have to pay (9:29-35). If they refuse to pay, kill them. (Other option is slavery).

Non-Muslims are condemned to hell/cursed/doomed/bad/evil/turned into swine or apes, etc. (2:61, 4:48, 4:50, 4:116, 4:47-52, 4:55, 4:157, 4:160, 5:12-5:13, 5:37, 5:51, 5:53, 5:59-60, 5:72-73, 5:79, 9:29-35, 18:52, 33:26, 59:14, 98:1).

Jews will face Allah’s wrath because they made friendships with those who disbelieve (5:80).

Must convert to Allah only, or else be doomed (2:62-65, 3:85). Note that 3:85 refers explicitly to the Islamic religion as the “Surrender.” Jews are wrong-doers who will face a painful doom unless they believe in Allah (4:160-161).

He who ascribes partners to Allah is lost, as if a bird has snatched him out of the air and taken him away (22:31)

Mohammad (Allah) says Jews look ugly and they are foolish (62:5). Jews are greedy (2:91), and are evil-livers (5:59).

Allah will mock Christians when they burn in Hell, asking them Where are your partners now? (40:73).

Priests and Rabbis do “evil work” (5:63). Many Jews guilty of evil conduct (5:81). Jews act like Christians when they are around Christians (5:82).

Some of them (people of the scripture) are believers, but most of them are evil-livers (3:110), wretchedness is upon them because they disbelieved, slew the prophets wrongfully, were rebellious and transgressed (3:112).

Muslims won’t get hurt fighting them (the people of the book), who will turn and flee and afterwards will not be helped (3:111)

The Jews and Christians flung the scripture behind their backs and gained evil (3:187)

Christians and Jews who disbelieve scripture are the worst creatures in Allah’s sight (98:6) and will receive hell-fire.

Idolaters are unclean (9:28). Turn away from idolaters (6:106). Don’t pray for idolaters (9:113). Let the idolaters kill their own children (6:137).

U.S. Muslims Taken Aback

2008-11-26T22:33:00.000-08:00

"American Muslim groups responded with uncustomary silence on Tuesday to the news that leaders of a Muslim charity shut down by the federal government had been convicted in a retrial of money laundering, tax fraud and supporting terrorism," says an article in the New York Times.

I love this:

Hina Shamsi, a lawyer with the National Security Project of the A.C.L.U., said, “The Islamic Society of North America does a lot of outreach and interfaith dialogue, and works in cooperation with the F.B.I., and yet, as a result of this stigma, its reputation has been deeply harmed.”

“The irony is obviously that this is the very community whose cooperation the government most needs for effective counterterrorism,” she added.

Yes, of course, everyone knows how helpful it is to have Muslims with intimate ties to terrorists, who are funneling money to terrorists, and who help keep the American non-Muslims confused about Islam, how helpful it is to have those people "helping" the FBI with their counterterrorism efforts! What, is Shamsi on their payroll too?

The Worst Islamic Country in the World

2008-11-25T18:37:00.000-08:00

And we thought the Soviet Union was repressive! The following are excerpts from an article by Forum 18, the organization in Norway that works to help people gain the right to believe and worship as they wish. The Maldives is the most extreme example of religious repression I have ever read about.

The Maldives is one of the few states — such as Saudi Arabia — that allows only one faith to be practiced publicly, and even insists that all citizens must be Muslims.

The Republic of the Maldives is a collection of 1,190 coral reef islands in the Indian Ocean, south west of Sri Lanka. Only 200 islands are inhabited, with 44 used exclusively as holiday resort islands. The Maldives has a population of about 300,000 citizens.

In the Maldives, citizens cannot practice any other religion than Islam, and they have to practice it in the way the government says.

Due to internal and external pressure to give their citizens freedom of religion, the Maldivian government instituted a reform. But here's how they reformed it: Okay, you can practice any religion you want, but if it's not Islam, you are no longer a citizen.

Maldivian non-Muslims and other Maldivians who do not want to practice their faith in the state approved way cannot practice their own faith. They cannot even pray the way they want. Kneeling down, folding hands or using religious symbols like crosses, candles, pictures or statues can lead to government action. Performing movements in the Namaadu (namaz or Islamic ritual prayer) differently to the state-approved way can also lead to arrest by the police.

Maldivians are not allowed to possess religious material — whether holy books, audio and video tapes, CDs and DVDs, pictures or artifacts — that is not approved by the government. Sometimes private houses and mosques are raided by police in their search for non state-approved religious material. When found, all such material is confiscated. Electronic media, radio broadcasts, the internet, and printed material are all censored by the government.

The luggage of Maldivians returning to the country is searched and all unauthorised religious material is confiscated. Foreign citizens arriving in the Maldives — whether as migrant workers or tourists — also have their luggage searched for "un-Islamic" materials. Small quantities of non-Muslim literature for personal use are generally permitted to foreign tourists.

Maldivians are also not allowed to discuss their faith with anyone. No-one is allowed to discuss religion without the explicit permission of the government. They do not even dare to discuss their beliefs with their spouses and children. The political intimidation of the public and the official denigration of religiously non-conformist people have led to widespread mistrust and fear. Children of people who are suspected of holding alternative religious convictions are sometimes interrogated by their teachers about their parents' opinions and convictions.

Constant intimidation and oppression leads people to act contrary to their own convictions and beliefs. Some people feel forced to perform Muslim ritual prayers (in the state-approved way) to avoid any possible suspicion. They also feel forced to teach their children according to the government's will instead of their own conviction. They are forced to observe the fast during the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan. After the first week of this year's Ramadan, which began in early September 2008, a Maldivian radio station announced that the police had already arrested 76 people for not fasting.

Maldivians are — justifiably — fearful that they will face severe consequences if they publicly and identifiably defend everyone's right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief. Because of this fear, Maldivians hope the international community will support their struggle. One step to do this is for states and human rights organizations to urge the Maldivian government to implement the recommendations of the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Asma Jahangir, in her report (A/HRC/4/21/Add.3).

When I read this last paragraph, I thought, "This is one of those situations where someone is going to have to fight and die for freedom." Probably it will be Maldivians. They have more at stake in the matter than anyone else.

We've seen many times that "international pressure" on Muslims has about as much impact as sticking our tongues out at them. What they need is not international pressure, but guns and walkie-talkies.

What Is Happening In Italy

2008-11-25T18:28:00.000-08:00

ON THE ARTICLE, At War With Islam, I got the following comments from Rick of Italy, and I am publishing them as an article with his permission (and with some editing). The Islamization process is much further advanced in European countries than it is in the United States. Their Muslim citizens are a larger percentage of their populations. And here is what at least one man in Italy is experiencing:

The problem is not only American. I am based in Italy and our government and political parties keep stressing the "difference" between so called "moderate" Muslims and integralists.

Integralists are those who're more prone to be terrorists...those who behead people, while "moderate" are those whom, in the safe living room of their safe houses in their safe Western welcoming countries clap at the actions of the integralists. And when they go out they show disregard (rarely) against terrorism.

I can see the increased arrogance of black African Muslims in Italy miles away. Till they were only a bunch of people we all helped them thinking they were needy. Many of us swallowed the pill of multiculturality. Now that they increased in number, they are showing their real colors...for those who can see. Superiority complexes, subtle implies threats about their future dominations, etc. All this in the total blindness of our government, no matter which party.

Seven years in the UK and France showed me enough of Islam and how they treat women and how double-sided they are.

It is so obvious what they are doing that I am amazed at how people can keep thinking they are nice people. And they are the same slowtards whom, later on will say "Who could imagine they would do something like this! My neighbor was so nice and his kids used to play with mine."

They are exactly the same people! More than the media...it's people's blindness. If they only took a world map and saw what Muslims are doing around the world, bribing politicians in the EU to rectify history, bribing more politicians in single countries to get Shari'a enforced, etc. If they saw this they wouldn't be so happy and positive about it.

Mind blindness and lack of mental clarity is one of the worst things a human being can happen to have and at the moment. Most people are biased by the idyllic (and fake) theory that we're all alike (created from scratch after WW 2 just to avoid new Nazism cases in Europe and the world). We are not all alike and Muslims are the best proof of what I am saying. Background, upbringing, religions, family education and brainwashing all make people different from one another. Paradoxically, if we were really ALL ALIKE ALL EQUALS....WE WOULD ALSO BE ALL NAZIS and the ANTINAZIS WOULD BE NAZIS. It's a theory that crumbles down on its own pillars.

WE ARE NOT ALL ALIKE and ISLAM has declared (not so) silent war on the rest of the world.

A Muslim woman interviewed in Italy said, "You don't have to fear; we'll eventually outnumber you and then we'll turn Italy into an Islamic country. It's the natural order and was forecast by Mohammad. After all, for every kid you (Catholics/atheist Italians) make, we (the Muslims) make 3, 4 or 5."

And that's only one. They say it with a satisfied grin on their face, with the self-confident arrogance of those who know nothing can happen to them for the things they say!

[At this point, I told Rick I had just seen the video What Islam is Not, and that one of the ways to wage jihad is to have lots of children.] Then Rick wrote:

I am based very near to Africa in Italy, so we have a lot of "imported" Muslim Africans. There is not even need to watch all those movies (which I have widely seen on other occasions). I simply need to stop one on the street and ask him. He'll tell you what his opinion is, with such a self-confidence you can't even imagine.

Only two things I don't share with your analysis, as I've read around the posts on your blog, and they are:

1) Freedom as a unifying factor. Religion is more powerful than the concept of freedom for many reasons. Religion still is a strong unifying value. And democracy is undergoing a crisis due to corruption, etc. And Muslims are very much aware of this.

2) The fact that you can stop them with "civil" actions.

My personal opinion is that we'll end at war with them, sooner or later. I don't know why our governments are doing what they are doing, but sooner or later someone will begin to act within the government influence or out of it. In Europe there is a growing Islamophobic tendency. It's hidden because they blame you immediately for racism (especially in Northern Europe — in the UK, Netherlands, and Scandinavian countries in particular), but people are really fed up. Fed up of Muslims, fed up of our governments allowing them for oil, and trade, and careers, and personal interests, etc. There is also a rebirth of extreme right movements, inspired by Nazism but with a strong Islamophobic nuance (and of course against Jews too but Muslims are item number one on the agenda).

In my opinion, immigration should be left aside of trade agreements, while at the moment it is a primary item in the agenda and that's not good. You can't mix wolves, lions and sheep together.

My idea is we'll end up at war with those. We have known Muslims for centuries here, and they don't give up until you leave them one chance to do something. Letting them in a country to do what they do can only be because of two factors.

1) Ignorance and/or...

2) Personal interests (Bribing, corruption, career issues, etc.)

People like me will never even wonder what they do in places like Guantanamo or when the U.S. exerts forced "pickups" of Muslim leaders in our countries. People like me wonder WHY GOVERNMENTS KEEP LETTING THEM IN.

For example, Italy it's a Catholic country. ONE WIFE/ONE HUBBY. Muslims are polygamous and polygamy is expressly forbidden. But they keep bringing in their 3 or 4 wives here and all those kids, and then live on the dole with houses, minimum wages, etc. provided by the government.

You ask a police officer, "Why don't you punish him for his 4 wives?" The answer is: "Well if I put him in jail they will claim we're intolerant and will begin to make public manifestations on streets. Plus, communist/left organizations will begin to protect them and we will have to release them."

That's the situation here! We had Imams clearly stating they are here to Islamize Italy. They claimed that on TV, in front of a million people and they are still there.

Hence, I don't think our governments know what they are doing.

[That's what Rick of Italy had to say. I agree with him about governments. Most of the people in politics don't know even the most basic Islamic principles, and even if they did, they probably wouldn't know what to do about it. It's up to ordinary citizens to do something about it, to spread the word, to help educate our fellow citizens, to figure out solutions, and to put pressure on the politicians to do what needs to be done. It's up to us. Like Rick, I don't think our governments know what they are doing.]

Somalia's Islamic Pirates

2008-11-25T17:19:00.001-08:00

The following is from an article called Pirates Exploit Confusion about International Law:

On Saturday, off the coast of East Africa, pirates seized their largest catch ever: a giant Saudi-owned oil tanker called the Sirius Star. The brazen attack came on the heels of the capture of a Ukrainian vessel (loaded with armaments destined for Kenya) by Somali pirates in September. Humanitarian food shipments into Somalia have had naval escort for nearly a year — evidence of how much the security of sea-lanes has eroded. Media reports suggest that Somali pirates have already attacked more than 80 ships in 2008. [You will see in the report below, the number is already up to 95.]

By the 1970s, as a part of a growing chaos in parts of Africa and Asia, incidents of piracy began to pick up. But it was not until the 21st century that piracy has experienced a meteoric rise, with the number of attacks increasing by double-digit rates per year. Last year, according to the International Maritime Bureau, 263 actual and attempted pirate attacks took place. Large maritime areas have now become known as pirate heavens, where mariners can expect to be routinely molested.

Experience — especially that of colonial America — suggests that a few sporadic antipirate efforts will not be enough to solve the problem. Only a dedicated naval campaign, along with a determined effort to close the pirates' safe havens, will succeed in sending piracy back to the history books.

There has been some progress on this front. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has dispatched a formidable multinational force — including British, Italian and Greek ships — to join the American, French, Canadian and Danish vessels already cruising off Somalia's vast coastline. France has also aggressively pursued pirates, freeing captured vessels and hostages.

One thing is certain: As in the war on terror, the new campaign against piracy will test the mettle of Western governments. It will also require them to balance the rights of lawbreakers against the indisputable rights of the law-abiding to not live their lives in danger and fear.

The following is quoted from an article called Somalia's Dangerous Waters:

In the bad old days they used to hang them on the mast. Today the "international community" is worried about their "human rights." But they remain what they have always been — criminals of the high seas or, simply put, pirates. In recent years they have been active in a number of places — Nigeria, the Malacca Straits and, most blatantly, Somalia. The difference is that in the former two cases pirates are mostly freelancers, while in the latter case piracy is the national industry (together with the cultivation of khat, the Somali narcotic of choice). Piracy flourishes along the Somali coast because it is profitable and it can be done at small risk. [Not to mention the fact that imitating the example of Mohammad is obligatory on all Muslims, and Mohammad was a raider of caravans, usually taking the plunder to fund his jihad and ransoming the wealthy people he captured, and enslaving the rest.]

As Mary Harper reported for the BBC: “Whenever word comes out that pirates have taken yet another ship in the Somali region of Puntland, extraordinary things start to happen. There is a great rush to the port of Eyl, where most of the hijacked vessels are kept by the well-armed pirate gangs. People put on ties and smart clothes. They arrive in land cruisers with their laptops, one saying he is the pirates’ accountant, another that he is their chief negotiator. Special restaurants have even been set up to prepare food for the crews of the hijacked ships.”

Reporter Jonathan Clayton, meanwhile, provided this portrait of life in a pirate city: "Activity in Eyl moves up a gear. Clan elders arrive, eager to broker a deal between their young clansmen, who use speedboats to board vessels, and shipping companies eager to pay a ransom for cargoes and staff. The ransoms are sometimes paid into foreign accounts in places such as the United Arab Emirates and even Western Europe, and may also be paid in cash through middlemen in neighboring Kenya. These have spawned more pirate gangs, armed with better weapons and better attack boats.” [This is the same mistake Europe and America made in the 1500's, 1600's and 1700's with the Muslim pirates on the Barbary Coast. They armed and funded the enemy.]

Even Abdullahi Said O’Yusuf, the mayor of Eyl, has admitted that pirates use ransom payments to "buy houses in big cities" in different parts of the country. All of these activities mean local jobs, a share of the loot, delivered through clan elders, and strong popular support. It also involves the shrewd manipulation of Western respect for the law, a concept that does not exist locally.

Since the beginning of 2008, pirates operating off the Somali coast have seized 95 ships, the most spectacular being the Saudi-owned Sirius Star, a supertanker carrying 2 million barrels of oil, more than a quarter of Saudi Arabia’s daily exports and worth about $100 million. Insurance companies have so far paid hundreds of millions of dollars in ransoms for ships and crews, with the rate per ship varying from $300,000 to $1.5 million. As a result, insurance premiums have gone up by 10 percent and the increasingly frequent change of ship routes, from the Suez Canal to that around the Cape of Good Hope, is 30 percent longer and 20,000-30,000 Euros a day more expensive.

Something can and should be done about this, and the rest of the article goes into detail about what needs to be done.

Intimidation and Violence

2008-11-25T16:12:00.000-08:00

The cartoon riots successfully intimidated many news sources in the "free world" into silence, as you can read about here: Muslim Violence Censors Western Media.

But along these lines, I thought I'd share this interesting observation form an article by Daniel Pipes:

The violence by Muslims responding to comments by the pope fit a pattern that has been building and accelerating since 1989. Six times since then, Westerners did or said something that triggered death threats and violence in the Muslim world. Looking at them in the aggregate offers useful insights.

1989 – Salman Rushdie's novel, The Satanic Verses prompted Ayatollah Khomeini to issue a death edict against him and his publishers, on the grounds that the book "is against Islam, the Prophet, and the Koran." Subsequent rioting led to over 20 deaths, mostly in India.

1997 – The U.S. Supreme Court refused to remove a 1930s frieze showing Muhammad as lawgiver that decorates the main court chamber; the Council on American-Islamic Relations made an issue of this, leading to riots and injuries in India.

2002 – The American evangelical leader Jerry Falwell calls Muhammad a "terrorist," leading to church burnings and at least 10 deaths in India.

2005 – An incorrect story in Newsweek, reporting that American interrogators at Guantánamo Bay, "in an attempt to rattle suspects, flushed a Qur'an down a toilet," is picked up by the famous Pakistani cricketer, Imran Khan, and prompts protests around the Muslim world, leading to at least 15 deaths.

February 2006 – The Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten publishes twelve cartoons of Muhammad, spurring a Palestinian Arab imam in Copenhagen, Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban, to excite Muslim opinion against the Danish government. He succeeds so well, hundreds die, mostly in Nigeria.

September 2006 – Pope Benedict XVI quotes a Byzantine emperor's views that what is new in Islam is "evil and inhuman," prompting the firebombing of churches and the murder of several Christians.

These six rounds show a near-doubling in frequency: 8 years between the first and second rounds, then 5, then 3, 1, and ½.

The Islamic Situation in Sweden

2008-11-25T14:24:00.001-08:00

Muslim Pirates Against America

2008-11-25T13:35:00.000-08:00

Michael Savage, a member of the top twelve Islamophobes, gives us a little history lesson:

Sponsored by Morocco and the city-states of Tunis, Algiers and Tripoli, the pirates preyed on civilian vessels, plundering their cargoes and kidnapping their crews. "It was written in the Koran...that it was their [the pirates'] right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners," the emissary of Tripoli's pasha told a startled John Adams and Thomas Jefferson in London in 1785. The emissary demanded $1 million from the United States — one-tenth of the national budget — to suspend the assaults or face losing the valuable Mediterranean trade, representing one-fifth of all American exports.

Read more: How To Deal With Pirates and Pirates Exploit Confusion About International Law.

Racist Confusion

2008-11-25T12:31:00.000-08:00

In an article on the Infidel Bloggers Alliance, The Cultural Invasion Project, which was about a document found in a raid that showed a long-term plan by the Muslim Brotherhood to eventually replace our culture with Shari'a law and Islamic culture, the article received the following comments:

muslim from brooklyn said...

You people are really paranoid. Not to mention stupid and bigoted. I'm a proud Muslim and a proud American. Being from Brooklyn, I also don't put up with dumbass cracker bullshit like this. Get with the program people — this is America in the 21st century — all of your white power, this is exclusively a "Judeo-Christian" nation crap is outdated.
I responded...: Muslim from Brooklyn: It seems strange that you would come here and make a racist comment.

I'm glad you're a proud American. But I'm sorry to hear you're racist. We don't need any more racism in America.

Please read more about what seems "paranoid" to you:

The Muslim Brotherhood's US Network

You must not know what the Muslim Brotherhood is doing or you wouldn't think our legitimate concern is paranoid. You are not alone. Most of America doesn't know yet.
Then another commenter, white=stupid said...: Dear hate-filled Jews and Christians: give it up!

Judge Rules That Suspects Cannot Be Detained Because of Ethnicity

A federal judge in Brooklyn ruled on Monday that the United States government could not use ethnicity as justification for detaining two Egyptian-born men who were questioned for four hours after a cross-country flight in 2004.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/25/nyregion/25lawsuit.html?ref=nyregion
I replied...: White=Stupid, I am neither a Jew or Christian, and I completely agree that someone should not be detained because of ethnicity.

However, as it says in the article you gave us, they were detained for questioning because they had "had acted strangely during their flight." The "two counterterrorism agents had observed them switching seats, checking their watches often and speaking in Arabic."

This sounds very much like a setup similar to the case of the six imams who were denied access to a U.S. Airways flight in 2006. CAIR, which represented these imams, claimed this was a clear case of discrimination against Muslims. Yet the imams were prevented from flying not because they were Muslim or held a prayer session directly outside the gate (and again on the plane, which is peculiar since even devout Muslims do not pray this frequently), but because they were behaving like hijackers. The imams demanded to board at the same time even though only two had first-class tickets and then attempted to reseat themselves on the plane in a suspicious formation (two in the tail, two in the mid-section, and two in first class). They muttered loudly in Arabic about jihad and cursed the United States for its involvement in Iraq. They requested seat belt extensions (which can be used as makeshift weapons) even though none was large enough to need it. Other Muslim passengers on the flight were not harassed. Given their blatantly suspicious behavior it has been suggested by many that the imams were deliberately trying to provoke their removal from the airplane. (source: here)

This is a classic use of the principle of pretext in provoking a hostile response so Muslims can "defend Islam." (read more about that)

I don't really know what their real intentions were, of course, and neither do you. I can say something about you, however. You seem to be prejudiced against Jews, Christians, and people with fair skin. In other words, you appear to be hate-filled and that hate is directed toward ethnicity. What seems equally strange is that we here at the IBA have taken a stand against exactly that sort of thing. (read more)
My guess is that the two commenters either really don't know anything about the cultural invasion now underway, or they are actually members of the Muslim Brotherhood using a little taqiyya. Or they could have been simply Muslims trying to "defend Islam."

Either way, it was a surprisingly hostile and bigoted response to an article that had nothing to do with race.

A Victory For Freedom

2008-11-24T15:39:00.000-08:00

In the Netherlands, they've had a blasphemy law on the books since the 1930's. Muslim immigrants started using those laws to censor speech and writings critical of Islam's political, totalitarian, and suppressive teachings.

So the Dutch government repealed the blasphemy laws on November 1st, 2008. Religious criticism is a legitimate activity in a free country.

You can read more about this important victory here: Blasphemy Law Dropped in Netherlands. Here are a few excerpts from the article:

Blasphemy will no longer be a crime in the Netherlands, the Dutch government announced last week. On Nov 1 Justice Minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin said the country’s coalition government would repeal a 1930s blasphemy law in favor of strengthening the current anti-discrimination legislation.

Religion not be given a privileged place above free speech.

The push to reform the blasphemy laws comes in response to heightened tensions with the Netherland’s Muslim minority. Criticism of Islamists and Islam by comedians, cartoonists, filmmakers and politicians has led to threats of prosecution for offending Muslim sensibilities.

They Keep Pushing

2008-11-24T15:02:00.001-08:00

The Home Secretary in Britain announced a new measure that prevents foreign Jihadis from coming to Britain to promote hatred. The Jihadis in Britain responded by having an event where Omar Bakri Muhammad spoke to the British crowd with a live feed. Omar was in Lebanon. The event was covered in an article in the Evening Standard. Here are some excerpts from the article:

More than 250 Muslims at a packed public meeting in Tower Hamlets were told by organizer Anjem Choudary, (a lawyer): "We have a special surprise, a special treat for you. Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad will be joining us on a live feed from Lebanon." He added: "As Muslims, we will not submit to any man-made law, any government, or any prime minister — Bush or Brown — or [to] Jacqui Smith. We submit to Allah."

"It is our religious obligation to prepare ourselves both physically and mentally and rise up against Muslim oppression and take what is rightfully ours," Choudary said. "Jihad is a duty and a struggle and an obligation that lies upon the shoulders of us all. We will not rest until the flag of Allah and the flag of Islam is raised above 10 Downing Street."

To loud cheers of "Allah Akbar" [God is great], he railed: "There are three types of Muslims, those in prison, those of us that are on our way [to prison] and non-practicing Muslims. Brothers and sisters, if you do not fear your home being raided by the Kufar [non-believer] police, you are not enforcing the Sharia."

Apart from a group of elders with long groomed white beards sitting in the front row, most of the 200 men in attendance were Muslims in their late teens or early 20s, mostly dressed in shalwar kameez with westernized accessories — trainers, hoodies and jackets. At the back of the hall, segregated by partitions, were more than 50 women wearing burkhas.

Besides Bakri, there were three other speakers. Each spoke for 40 minutes, their talks interspersed with video clips from Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo that were designed to fuel the meeting's "grievance theme" of Muslims being oppressed by Britain and the West.

Abu Muaz spoke out against UK imams, claiming they are too soft and tolerant. He said that "speech was not enough" and that it was time to "take action". "You must destroy the West," he declared.

But the most provocative was student leader Abu Rumaysah, who spoke to the crowd as if they were trainee terrorists. "Delete unnecessary material from your computers, take precautions not to attract attention to yourself and prepare your family for [police] raids," he said. He added that they should support the families of Muslims who were arrested and that Islam will only take over the UK if Muslims are proactive and enforce Sharia law in their own communities.

When a woman in a burkha asked how he could justify this when Islam was supposed to be a religion of peace, the crowd mocked her. But it was Choudary who rose to put her in her place. "Islam is not a religion of peace," he said. "It is a religion of submission. We need to submit to the will of Allah."

Read the whole article here: Islamic Radicals Make Mockery of Hate Laws.

Moral Equivalence

2008-11-24T02:07:00.000-08:00

The definition of "moral equivalence," according to Answers.com: It is a term used in political debate, usually to characterize (in a negative way) the claim that there can be no moral or ethical hierarchy decided between two sides in a conflict, nor in the actions or tactics of the two sides.

I just watched The Kingdom. It's not a true story, but it's about a terrorist attack that occurs in a non-Muslim compound in Saudi Arabia, killing lots of people. I liked the movie until the very end, and I'll tell you why in a minute, but I have to set it up for you a little.

Jamie Foxx plays an FBI agent. Foxx and his team go to Saudi Arabia to solve the crime. At the end they successfully hunt down the mastermind terrorist and shoot him. As he is dying, he whispers something into a child's ear.

Earlier in the movie, when Foxx breaks the news to his team that their good friend was killed in the original terrorist attack, a woman on his team starts crying. Foxx whispers something in her ear and she stops crying.

At the end of the movie, you find out what the mastermind terrorist whispered to the kid and what Foxx whispers to the woman. They said the same thing: Don't worry, we're going to kill them all.

This was supposed to be some kind of moral point. Something like: Hate is the real problem. Otherwise, we're all the same. Or maybe, "People, don't you see? This is like the Hatfields and McCoys. It just goes on and on, one side taking revenge on the other, and them taking revenge for the revenge."

What the moviegoers probably don't recognize is something that you probably recognized immediately: They don't mean the same by the word "all."

Foxx meant, "We're going to kill the men who perpetrated this heinous crime. We're going to kill all the men who were involved in killing our friend."

The mastermind terrorist meant, "We're going to kill every last one of the filthy infidels of the world." Or at the very least, "We will kill every infidel who lives in Saudi Arabia."

Of course, this isn't the moral equivalence they were trying to portray. It wouldn't surprise me to find out this movie was funded with Saudi money.

Without that last scene, it would have been a great movie. With that last scene, it just makes it more of the confusing taqiyya and politically correct multicultural spew we've come to expect from Hollywood.

If It Has Never Been Missing, You Don't Miss It

2008-11-23T20:17:00.000-08:00

I just watched a movie with my wife called An American Rhapsody. It was not my kind of movie, really. Sort of slow-moving and emotional. But it was a great demonstration of an important principle. It's a true story of a family that escapes Communist Hungary in 1950. They escape with one of their daughters but they can't take their infant daughter because they have to sneak out of their country, and babies make noise.

For six years they tried to get their baby, and finally succeeded. But of course, the child was being raised by somebody all that time. As it turned out, she was raised by two very kind, very loving people.

So Suzy, the American name for the girl, shows up at six years old in America to live with her family in a nice neighborhood and it's a whole new world for her. From that point on she grows up feeling out of place, alienated, and she misses "home." At fifteen years old, she convinces her parents to at least visit Hungary.

When she gets to Hungary, she finds out what life is like behind the Iron Curtain, something her parents have gone out of their way not to tell her about.

She discovers that people in Hungary don't have enough of anything. They can't get what they want. People try very insistently to buy her blue jeans off of her, because those are hard to come by. The couple who raised her for the first six years of her life now live in a small apartment because five years ago the government took their little farm so someone in the government could use it for a summer home.

She visits her mother's mother and finds out why her parents moved away — because one day Suzy's mother, grandmother and grandfather were sitting in a cafe when a Russian soldier came over to the table and manhandled Suzy's mother. The grandfather stood up to defend her, and the soldier shot him dead.

Suzy learned a lot on her visit to Hungary and decided to go back to America to stay.

She walked her grandmother back to what used to be a beautiful house. Her grandmother's house. Now there were fifteen families living there with her grandmother. Government's orders.

Suzy came back to America a changed person.

How I wish many more young people could have a similar experience. So many young people have the same kind of unappreciative rebelliousness and even hatred for their country that Suzy had before her trip. They have no understanding of how much freedom and equality they enjoy because they've never been without it. So they take it completely for granted.

I can't say I was much different at fifteen. But by the time someone is twenty-five, they should damn well know better.

I know full well America is not perfect. But to despise the government and to hate our culture can only be done from a profound ignorance of the world as it is and as it has been through history.

Muslims Control the Streets of London

2008-11-23T17:58:00.000-08:00

The guy in the film is Abu Izzadeen, born as Trevor Brooks, is a spokesman for Al Ghurabaa, a Muslim organization banned under the Terrorism Act 2006 for the glorification of terrorism, that operated in the United Kingdom.

Abu Izzadeen was arrested because of these films placed on an internet site. The police also arrested five others during the same raid. He was convicted on charges of terrorist fund-raising and inciting terrorism overseas on 17th April 2008, and sentenced to four and a half years in jail. He is currently serving his sentence.

Abu Izzadeen is a British man born in Hackney, East London to a family originally from Jamaica. Brooks converted to Islam a day before he turned 18, on the 17 April 1994, changing his name to Omar, but preferring to be called Abu Izadeen. He is fluent in Arabic.

He trained and once worked as an electrician. He and his Arab-born wife Mokhtaria were married in 1998; they have three children.

In 2006, he placed a personal advertisement on an Islamic matrimonial website, seeking to marry up to three more wives in order to father more than nine children. Polygamy is illegal in the UK. Izzadeen did not respond to questions from the Evening Standard about the ad and it has since been removed.

Abu Izzadeen met Omar Bakri Muhammed and Abu Hamza al-Masri at Finsbury Park Mosque in the 1990s; this is when he is thought to have been radicalized.

He visited Pakistan in 2001, before the September 11 attacks, as part of Al-Muhajiroun; he claims he went there to give a series of lectures. He also claimed to have attended terror training camps in Afghanistan.

He described the 7/7 suicide bombers in London as "completely praiseworthy".
On the eve of the anniversary of the 7/7 attacks in London, he was filmed preaching to a group of Muslims in Birmingham (UK) mocking and laughing at the victims of 9/11 and threatening further terror attacks in the UK.

He has openly stated that he wishes to die as a suicide bomber.

On 20 September 2006, Abu Izadeen and Anjem Choudary disrupted Home Secretary John Reid's first public meeting with Muslims since his appointment. He called Reid an "enemy" of Islam.. John Humphrys interviewed Izzadeen on the 22 September 2006 edition of BBC Radio 4's Today programme. In a heated discussion Abu Izadeen stated that his aim was for the UK to become an Islamic state and that this should be achieved without following the democratic process.

In early February 2007, ITV broadcast a video made in the summer of 2004 that was discovered on a password-protected website by Glen Jenvey. In the video Abu Izadeen told his audience in Regents Park Mosque, to murder British and American Muslim soldiers:

"Whoever allies himself with the Kaffirs against the believers - he is one of them. So those so-called enemies to Allah who join the British Government - 'cos remember the British Government, my dear Muslim brothers, are crusaders... crusaders come to kill and rape Muslims. Whoever joins them - he who joins the British Army, the American Army, he is a mortal kaffir and his only hukum (punishment) is for his head to be removed. Indeed, whoever changes his deen (religious way of life); kill him."

Glen Jenvey found the tape soon after it was recorded, handed it to the police at New Scotland Yard but it was not acted upon, just like in the Abu Hamza case. Glen Jenvey was behind the evidence which led to the arrest of Abu Hamza.

February 2007
British police arrested Abu Izadeen on charges of inciting terrorism on 2007-02-08. A spokesman for Scotland Yard said the arrest is related to an "on-going inquiry," involving a speech Abu Izadeen gave in the West Midlands area in 2006, which predates the 20 September 2006 incident. the video was downloaded by Glen Jenvey

April 2007
He was arrested again in a pre-dawn police raid on 2007-04-24 under the Terrorism Act 2000 "in connection with inciting others to commit acts of terrorism overseas and terrorist fundraising". The police raid came after information was past via www.glen-jenvey.com website released a video to a TV network. The video was uncovered by Glen Jenvey.

April 2008
On 2008-04-17 Izzadeen was among six men convicted at Kingston Crown Court of supporting terrorism, while the jury failed to reach a verdict on a third charge of encouraging terrorism. He was subsequently jailed for four and a half years.

Thomas Paine on Common Sense

2008-11-23T15:30:00.001-08:00

The Cultural Invasion Project

2008-11-23T02:47:00.000-08:00

In an article entitled, The Muslim Brotherhood "Project," Patrick Poole had some illuminating insights into what Islamic supremacists are doing legally within the United States to ultimately replace the pluralistic, individualistic, freedom-and-equality-loving culture we now enjoy with Islam. Let me say that again. They have been working a plan for over twenty years to eventually replace our culture with theirs. And they've been doing it so cleverly that most of us don't even know it's happening.

"International law enforcement authorities and Western intelligence agencies," writes Poole, have "discovered a twenty-year old document revealing a top-secret plan developed by the oldest Islamist organization with one of the most extensive terror networks in the world to launch a program of 'cultural invasion' and eventual conquest of the West that virtually mirrors the tactics used by Islamists for more than two decades..."

The document "was recovered in a raid by Swiss authorities in November 2001, two months after the horror of 9/11." They raided "a luxurious villa in Campione, Switzerland...The raid was conducted by Swiss law enforcement at the request of the White House in the initial crackdown on terrorist finances in the immediate aftermath of 9/11."

"Included in the documents seized during the raid of Nada’s Swiss villa was a 14-page plan written in Arabic and dated December 1, 1982, which outlines a 12-point strategy to 'establish an Islamic government on earth' — identified as The Project. According to testimony given to Swiss authorities by Nada, the unsigned document was prepared by 'Islamic researchers' associated with the Muslim Brotherhood."

"What makes The Project so different from the standard 'Death of America! Death to Israel!' and 'Establish the global caliphate!' Islamist rhetoric is that it represents a flexible, multi-phased, long-term approach to the 'cultural invasion' of the West. Calling for the utilization of various tactics, ranging from immigration, infiltration, surveillance, propaganda, protest, deception, political legitimacy and terrorism, The Project has served for more than two decades as the Muslim Brotherhood 'master plan.' As can be seen in a number of examples throughout Europe — including the political recognition of parallel Islamist government organizations in Sweden, the recent 'cartoon' jihad in Denmark, the Parisian car-burning intifada last November, and the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London — the plan outlined in The Project has been overwhelmingly successful."

Just to give you an idea of what The Project entails, here are some features of the plan:

Using deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it doesn’t conflict with shari’a law;
Avoiding social conflicts with Westerners locally, nationally or globally, that might damage the long-term ability to expand the Islamist powerbase in the West or provoke a lash back against Muslims;
Conducting surveillance, obtaining data, and establishing collection and data storage capabilities;
Building extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;
Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
Instrumentally using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;
Drafting Islamic constitutions, laws and policies for eventual implementation;
Instituting alliances with Western “progressive” organizations that share similar goals;
Inflaming violence and keeping Muslims living in the West “in a jihad frame of mind”;
Supporting jihad movements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;
Collecting sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support jihad around the world.

This plan was drafted in 1982, and has been put into effect with more and more efficiency as time has passed. Since 1982, "the Muslim Brotherhood has spread its network across the Middle East, Europe, and even America. At home in Egypt, parliamentary elections in 2005 saw the Muslim Brotherhood winning 20 percent of the available legislative seats, comprising the largest opposition party block. Its Palestinian affiliate, known to the world as HAMAS, recently gained control of the Palestinian Authority after elections secured for them 74 of 132 seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council. Its Syrian branch has historically been the largest organized group opposing the Assad regime, and the organization also has affiliates in Jordan, Sudan, and Iraq. In the US, the Muslim Brotherhood is primarily represented by the Muslim American Society (MAS)."

Poole writes, "For those who have read The Project, what is most troubling is not that Islamists have developed a plan for global dominance; it has been assumed by experts that Islamist organizations and terrorist groups have been operating off an agreed-upon set of general principles, networks and methodology. What is startling is how effectively the Islamist plan for conquest outlined in The Project has been implemented by Muslims in the West for more than two decades. Equally troubling is the ideology that lies behind the plan: inciting hatred and violence against Jewish populations around the world; the deliberate co-opting and subversion of Western public and private institutions; its recommendation of a policy of deliberate escalating confrontation by Muslims living in the West against their neighbors and fellow-citizens; the acceptance of terrorism as a legitimate option for achieving their ends and the inevitable reality of jihad against non-Muslims; and its ultimate goal of forcibly instituting the Islamic rule of the caliphate by shari’a in the West, and eventually the whole world."

Read the whole article here: The Muslim Brotherhood "Project."

Something You Can Do About It Right Now: Sign This Petition

2008-11-23T00:37:00.000-08:00

This is what it says: I join in unity with all free people and nations in the world against Islamic religious hatred and intolerance being fomented against our human right of freedom of expression. We stand against the vicious threats of bodily harm and destruction being made in blatant protest of this basic right. We ask our leaders to stand up against these threats of intimidation. We ask them to send a strong message to the Islamic world and the perpetrators of hate and intolerance that threats to our freedoms or acts of violence and terror against us will not be tolerated. We demand that our governments of free and democratic nations and all of their legislators speak out in one voice denouncing this growing, fascist, religious assault against human rights and take immediate action to protect the freedoms therein from intimidation and fear of death or destruction.

Sign here>>>

A Question to Ponder

2008-11-23T00:36:00.000-08:00

"Today is 17th Ramadan - a day which marks the anniversary of the Battle of Badr," I just read on the Muslim Public Affairs Committee website. And this holds special meaning for Muslims. Muhammad was persecuted by his enemies. Poor ol' Mo. Of course it had nothing to do with his constant abuse of his enemies and his raiding their caravans and killing their people. He was unfairly persecuted and of course needed to "defend Islam" (and keep the booty).

The article asks, "What lessons can Muslims draw from this event?" Because, it says, poor ol' Muslims are persecuted and abused by their enemies today, so history is mysteriously repeating itself. Of course it has nothing to do with their constant bombing of non-Muslims everywhere, or their constant push to squeeze more concessions from the non-Muslims, or their overt purpose of subverting democratic governments. They are unfairly persecuted and must, of course, "defend Islam."

Such a meaningful and important lesson to ponder while you're fasting, eh?

Henry Kissinger Said...

2008-11-23T00:35:00.001-08:00

"The central problem that we now face is Islamic extremism, for which the only real solution is to arrest it and to demonstrate its incapacity to achieve its objectives. Otherwise, the momentum is going to become stronger and stronger."

(10/10/2008) Henry Kissinger to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy

What Would You Propose?

2008-11-23T00:33:00.000-08:00

I came across another list of possible solutions to the relentless Islamic political encroachment. This is an answer to the question, "So what do you think CAN be done about all this besides moral grandstanding and warning about 'our failure to act?'" This one seems very reasonable, and all of these proposals are attainable and would be effective. This list is from a longer article by Dr. Babu Suseelan, Pathways to Jihadi Terrorism. Here's his list:

1. Ban or reform all Islamic madrasas.

2. Deny permission to construct mosques.

3. Consider limiting immigrants from Islamic countries to free countries.

4. Closely monitor students studying in free countries from Islamic nations.

5. Stop the flow of funds from Saudi Arabia to American Islamic schools.

6. Deny visas to Muslim Imams from India, Pakistan and the Middle East.

7. Establish radio and television stations in and around Islamic nations.

8. Use mind manipulation techniques to denounce evil practices of Jihadis.

9. Stop immediately the conversion of correctional populations into Muslims. This is a serious consideration. The U.S. has 2.5 million offenders in federal correctional institutions, state prisons and local jails. 95% percent of them will return to our communities. Converted Muslims with criminal proclivities are a potential danger. They could work as sleeper-agents in our communities. Most of the prisons employ Imams and 95% percent of them are from Pakistan, India, Iran, and from the Middle East.

Number one would be difficult to do, but I think it is perhaps the most important. Number 8 refers to psychological warfare using mainstream media to produce shame and guilt.

All of these could help answer the question, "Okay, then, what do you think should be done about it?" What are you trying to accomplish? How do you propose accomplishing it?

I would add, of course, applying sedition laws and massive educational programs to non-Muslims about Islam.

Beliefs Do Not Have Rights

2008-11-23T00:23:00.000-08:00

The following is an excerpt from an article called How To Beat Jihad by Ali Sina, an Iranian ex-Muslim, who makes some interesting points, and because he grew up in a strict Islamic country, his insight adds a unique perspective. Reprinted with permission.

Our responsibility is to awaken the non-Muslims and warn them of the danger of Islam. The danger comes from Islam and not the Middle Eastern people. Unlike Muslims, who discriminate, violate and abuse the human rights of non-Muslims, the non-Muslims have difficulty with discrimination. However, they must understand that Islam is just a belief and beliefs do not have rights. Humans have rights, beliefs don’t.

Muslims can become feral dogs if their religion is criticized. Savagery should not be tolerated. Those Muslims who choose to defend their religion with savagery should be locked up or kicked out. Dialog should be welcomed, but there should be zero tolerance for violence.

Once dialogue begins, Islam will be discredited and Muslims will be set free. Once their source of pride becomes a source of shame, they will no longer cling to it but rather will be embarrassed of it and would want to dissociate themselves from it.

The Western culture is guilt-based. The Eastern culture is shame-based. For us Easterners, everything is about image and how others see us.

The opposite of guilt is innocence. If your ethos is guilt-based, you have an inner police that stops you from doing wrong because doing wrong makes you feel guilty.

If your ethos is shame-based, all you care is to preserve your image. The opposite of shame is honor. You can do wrong but as long as no one sees it, your image is not tarnished and you can still be seen as an honorable person. In a shame-based culture, wrong and right have no meaning. It is all about shame and honor. If the stain of shame is removed, even if it means the murder of your own daughter, honor is restored. These are two very different worldviews. Unless we understand them we will not be able to make sense of Muslims and their minds.

Shame-based cultures are primitive. All Eastern cultures are shame-based even when they are not Islamic. Japanese culture, for example, is, or it has been, a shame-based culture. Our Persian culture is also shame-based. Proverbs like “I keep my cheeks rosy with slaps,” are telltales of a shame-based culture, where image is more important than facts. This proverb says that I may be starving but my pride does not allow me to let anyone know it so I slap myself to keep my cheek rosy. Because poverty is the source of shame as long as I hide my poverty, I have preserved my honor.

Islam is a fear-based philosophy that has taken root in a shame-based milieu. This is a very dangerous combination. When you combine fear and shame moral codes, you give birth to the most insidious ethos imaginable. That is Islam. Islam is an illogical doctrine that is based on fear and is defended through honor. This makes Islam more dangerous than Nazism. Muslims are not concerned about the irrationality of Islam or about good or evil. They are mostly concerned about losing face and upholding the image of Islam.

read the rest>>

The Shari'a Awareness Project'

2008-11-23T00:22:00.001-08:00

You can help get the word out with these fine products:

Bare Naked Islam

Stop Islamofascism

Blessed Are The Infidels

Islam Is As Islam Does

My Grandparents Voted Democrat

Give War a Chance

Political Correctness Kills

A New Way Jihadists Can Muzzle American's Free Speech

2008-11-23T00:20:00.000-08:00

It’s known as “libel tourism” and here’s how it works: A book published in the United States names an individual abroad who supports terrorist groups. That individual – for the sake of discussion, let’s say he’s a Saudi petro-billionaire with a home in London – goes online and orders a few copies which arrive in the mail. He takes those books to a British attorney who files a lawsuit complaining that his client has been libeled.

The billionaire knows it will be much easier to prevail in the U.K. than it would be in an American court where the First Amendment and decades of case law provide free speech protections. (Under English law, by contrast, the burden in a libel case is on the defendant to prove his innocence – which can be impossible if he’s been using confidential sources or even just sources who don’t want to cross an ocean and take part in a courtroom battle.)

The legal costs are chump change for the billionaire, while few non-fiction writers command similar resources. If the writer chooses not to spend months living in a hotel and fighting it out in court, the case will be forfeit and he will be hit with a “default judgment.” If he doesn’t pay, he’ll never again be able to set foot in the U.K. and other countries that enforce British court judgments.

But more important is this: The message gets sent, loud and clear, to journalists, scholars and publishers, that researching and writing about terrorists and those who enable them is verboten – even in America.

>>>read the whole story

The Main Barrier to Stopping Islam's Encroachment

2008-11-23T00:19:00.001-08:00

I just read a good article on Geert Wilders. He said something I really liked:

"Right now, people are speaking without really saying what they mean. It’s not enough to talk about immigration. You have to get to the core of the issue, which is that Islam is incompatible with democracy.”

That basic thing — simply speaking directly about the issue — seems to be one of the main barriers to getting anything done to stop Islam's relentless encroachment. Political correctness and multiculturalism seem to have constrained and impeded free speech so much that in high political circles or in newspapers it is almost impossible to find anyone willing to speak normally about it. All you manage to get is a very carefully-crafted vagueness. No problem can be solved that way.

No More Ordinary Lives

2008-11-23T00:17:00.001-08:00

Below is a quote from an excellent article entitled, Your War On Jihad:

"Every one of us that values equality and liberty has a role and an obligation in this war against Islamic supremacism and Jihad. No matter who you are, no matter how busy you are, no matter how many other responsibilities you have, this is your war on Jihad.

"None of us have a choice in this fight. This war is not an option for us; it is not something we can do when we have nothing else to do. Good intentions are not enough. Our nation, our people are at total war in a battle for the very values on which America was founded. We can't expect 'ordinary lives' during this war."

Why Won't People Listen?

2008-11-23T00:16:00.001-08:00

If you have ever tried to tell friends and family about the dangers of Islam (and I certainly HOPE you have!) you've probably run into what seems to be a brick wall, at least occasionally. People seem to deliberately refuse to understand what you mean. Why?

In an article at Political Islam, Bill Warner has a great list of what's getting in the way of people really listening to you. He says, "Once you understand the doctrine of political Islam, there is a question that naturally arises. Why doesn't everyone know about this? ...It is not only that we don't know, we have also developed a systemic social theory of why we will not learn."

Those of us who want to reach the people who do not yet know what we know (and I should think that includes all of us) better clearly understand what this brick wall is made of, so we can fashion ways over or around it.

I think Warner's list is good. Probably a few more things could be added to it.

His list is (he explains each in more detail in the article):

1. Inertia
2. What will we have to do?
3. I know this Muslim and he is nice.
4. Afraid of being called a bigot.
5. Islam cannot be worse than Christianity, so why learn?
6. It's too hard; non-Muslims cannot learn Islam.
7. Fear.

I would add that you sometimes see a look in someone's eyes that says, "I think you're one of those nutballs who gets obsessed with some obscure paranoid threat, and I don't know if I should encourage this by listening."

Unreasonable Fear of Islamophobia

2008-11-23T00:14:00.001-08:00

By the time I finished reading the 24-page report put out by Smearcasting.com, (about the top 12 Islamophobes in America) I had made so many notes in the margins, I could have easily written a document twice its size in commentary on the ridiculous PR effort to convince readers that those who are trying to educate the public about Islam's relentless encroachment, Islam's political goals, and the methods of Jihadis are all "Islamophobes" who are doing nothing more than smearing the good name of Muslims everywhere and stirring up "racial hatred."

The whole 24-page document, entitled Smearcasting, criticizes, insinuates, implies, but doesn't really say anything substantial, but displays a virulently hateful and sarcastic tone about these "Islamophobes." Ironically enough, they seem Islamophobe-phobic and yet in the entire document, they never once refute any of the quoted claims of their hated dirty dozen.

On top of that, they do not acknowledge — and I think this is a significant omission — two significant facts. And the ommission of this acknowledgment makes the document lose all credibility. The two facts they omit are:

1. Muslims are committing large numbers of violent acts in the name of Islam.

2. There are intolerant and clearly violent portions in the Qur'an.

These are such glaring and pertinent facts, I don't think any amount of whitewash of Islam or vilification of these pundits could gain any credibility unless they are addressed, or at least acknowledged.

But the article, Smearcasting, actually cheered me up because first of all, they offered nothing that caused any doubt about the work we're doing. And more important for my morale, I discovered the impressive reach of these pundits. It was heartening to know so many people are hearing this message and apparently wanting to hear this message.

Micheal Savage has a radio show that reaches 8.25 million readers per week. According to the article, Savage "sees a monolithic Islamic scheme to take over the U.S." This, as well as many other statements are never refuted in the article, by the way. They must have assumed they were speaking to multicultural journalists who would accept the implication that these claims were preposterous, when almost all the pundits' comments they quoted in the article (in order to ridicule the statements) were accurate, reasonable assertions and statements of fact.

Bill O'Reilly's Radio Factor show reaches 3.5 million listeners. Michelle Malkin and Robert Spencer both have bestselling books. Glenn Beck has the third highest-rated national radio talk show among adults ages 24 to 54, and he has "repeatedly associated Islam with Nazism. He drew a parallel between Mein Kampf and 'jihad' because, he said, both mean 'my struggle.'" This is another statement the article left standing, as if it was self-evident this is ridiculous, when in fact it is an accurate statement.

Anyway, it was a relief to know these antijihad pundits were so popular. Our message doesn't have nearly the reach we need, but this is a good start, and the numbers were bigger than I expected. And it was pleasing to know that in this well-researched onslaught meant to defame and hopefully destroy these twelve kings and queens of Islamophobia, that the best they could come up with was completely toothless.

A Very Good Point

2008-11-23T00:13:00.000-08:00

"Perhaps the greatest of all ironies in the present-day Middle East, as David Horowitz has pointed out, is that Arab Israelis enjoy more social, legal and political freedom than do Arabs in any one of the fifty-three Muslim countries."

- From an article on TROP, Understanding the Arab-Israeli Conflict.

A List I Want To Be On

2008-11-23T00:11:00.002-08:00

In this report (it's a PDF file), SmearCasting.com has compiled a list of the top twelve Islamophobes in America. As Pastorius has so eloquently written:

Islam is certainly not a race. It is an ideology. In fact, it is a political ideology in that it intends to impose its own system of laws on all of us.

Therefore, it is necessary that we be able to criticize it. It is necessary that the laws of free speech apply to criticism of Islam.

There is no such thing as Islamophobia, as you are, no doubt, well aware. Muslims are calling religious criticism and political criticism "Islamophobia" for no other reason than it works as a tactic to shut people up. This is a free country and we are allowed to criticize religions and political ideologies. Here's the list:

The Dirty Dozen: Who’s Who Among America’s Leading Islamophobes

David Horowitz
Robert Spencer
Daniel Pipes
Michael Savage
Pat Robertson
Sean Hannity
Bill O’Reilly
Mark Steyn
Steve Emerson
Michelle Malkin
Glenn Beck
Debbie Schlussel

The PDF report is worth reading to discover some techniques used by some of the most successful counterjihadists in the field. I'd like to thank CAIR for informing me of this valuable resource.

The Roots of CAIR

2008-11-23T00:11:00.001-08:00

This is an excerpt from an excellent article entitled The Muslim Brotherhood's US Network:

Following a 1993 Philadelphia meeting of Hamas leaders and activists in which the need to engage in propaganda efforts was discussed, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) was founded in Washington DC. Its stated mission is to “enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

Although these objectives sound innocuous enough, the Muslim Brotherhood (of which many of CAIR’s founders were members) often uses terms like these as euphemisms for more insidious actions. A Brotherhood memo written in 1991 makes reference to a “dictionary” that the Ikhwanis (the core group of the Muslim Brotherhood) use to decipher the true meaning of their words, which are put in quotation marks in written documents.

The fact is that CAIR was created by Ikhwanis for influencing the U.S. government, Congress, NGOs, and academic and media groups. The Brotherhood identified the media as “stronger than politics,” highlighted the importance of training activists to present a “view of the IAP” that would be acceptable to Americans. One of CAIR’s founders, Omar Ahmad, explicitly suggested the need for “infiltrating the American media outlets, universities and research centers.”

...The Holy Land Foundation trial documents also proved that CAIR was part of the Muslim Brotherhood linked network created to help Hamas in the U.S. Even though it has portrayed itself to be a civil rights group, and is often described as such by the mainstream press, its top leadership is made up of the IAP and the UASR principals mentioned earlier. Despite public denials, CAIR leaders have been heard expressing their support for Hamas both in public and on FBI surveillance tapes. CAIR has received support from, and lent support to, Hamas financial conduits in the United States. Several CAIR officers and employees have been indicted on terrorism-related charges.

This line, in particular, struck me with a lot of impact: "The Brotherhood highlighted the importance of training activists to present a “view of the IAP” that would be acceptable to Americans."

That's what we need to do as well. We need to educate the public, but try to do it in a way that is acceptable. We need to tell them the truth, but tell it in a way it can get through to them, in a way that takes their already-existing point of view into account and doesn't ignore it, but gently alters the point of view.

Right now, CAIR is out-finessing the anti-jihadists. That's got to stop.

Read more: The Cultural Invasion Project.

How China Deals With Muslims

2008-11-23T00:10:00.001-08:00

From FrontPage:

This year, during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, the government implemented strict rules governing all aspects of Uighur religious life. Henceforth, according to a recent report out of Xinjiang province, “official versions” of the Koran will be the only legal ones; imams will be barred from teaching the Koran in private; the study of Arabic will be allowed only at special government schools; and Muslim students and government workers will be “compelled to eat” during the Ramadan fast. Those Uighurs wishing to make the hajj, the annual Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia, will be obligated to do so through government-run tours that are virtually unaffordable to the average Chinese Muslim.

The Chinese government is crippled by no moral qualms about how to respond to terrorism. The Chinese Muslims being held in Guantanamo Bay would have been tortured and killed long ago had they been captured by the Chinese instead of the Americans. In fact, this was the main argument against repatriating them to China.

Read the whole article>>

Islam Leads To Tyranny

2008-11-23T00:08:00.000-08:00

Serge Trifkovic said most of the conflicts in the world involve Muslims, and if you ended all conflicts that involved Muslims right now, the world would be a pretty peaceful place.

Muslims, both moderates and extremists, are always quick to point out that Islam is a religion of peace. But Trifkovic's statement made me curious, so I've been searching on Google for a map of world conflicts (and which ones involve Muslims). I haven't found what I was looking for yet, but I found two maps (on two different web sites that have nothing to do with each other) that are interesting when you see them together.

The first map is by Freedom House, an organization that tracks democracies around the world. It shows their map of world freedom. The purple countries are the least free:

A few clicks later, I found this map of populations of Muslims. It shows by color where the densest population of Muslims live in the world (the highest population of Muslims is darkest blue):

Pretty interesting, huh? One of the things I've advocated repeatedly is that we can reduce Islamic terrorism by pushing for women's rights.

In order for women to have rights, the Muslims cannot have Shari'a law. Or it would have to be so modified as to be unrecognizable. To weaken the hold of Shari'a would probably weaken the population's belief that the Qur'an is the perfect word of Allah, which would include the instructions to take over the world. This would make it more difficult for jihadis to recruit new soldiers. And hopefully those young men would find more productive things to do with their time than blowing themselves up.

And all this could be brought about by focusing solely on promoting women's rights.

Do you think every woman should have human rights? Yes? So does almost everybody else in the world. This is a place we can join together in a mutual and important purpose.

In the war against the Islamization of the world, this is the place where the strength of the free world can overcome the weak spot of Shari'a.

CAIR's Obsession With "Obsession"

2008-11-23T00:07:00.001-08:00

I was going to post this Monday, but since AOW has already discussing it, I'll post it now. Being the sneaky bastard that I am, I subscribed to the newsletters of all the pro-Muslim groups in America I could find. It has been an incredibly rich source of inspiration and insight. I've decided to become a Muslim. Just kidding.

It's fascinating to see how they spin the news, what they strongly dislike, and how they promote their cause.

CAIR has taken exception to the massive promotion of the movie, Obsession. Of course. In one of their op-ed columns, Ahmed Rehab (I'm not making this up) tries to make a good case against the movie, but fails miserably. He wrote, "First, it exploits Americans’ unfamiliarity with Islam and Muslims to suggest that deviant groups are somehow representative of most, if not all, Muslims."

And it went downhill from there. The movie doesn't, in fact, suggest that deviant groups are representative of most Muslims. It goes out of its way to suggest otherwise. In one of my few criticisms of the film, I think it goes TOO far out of its way to suggest otherwise. It does, however point out that "deviant" Muslims are following mainstream Islamic theology, which is an entirely different point leading to entirely different conclusions.

Also I thought it was interesting that Mr. Rehab would recognize Americans' unfamiliarity with Islam. It is this unfamiliarity that has made America so vulnerable to the relentless Islamic political encroachment CAIR strives to accelerate.

Rehab also wrote, "while the Muslim world has its share of fanatics, they comprise a tiny fraction of the population and are highly at odds with a mainstream society that aspires to peace and prosperity."

Now of course he might have meant the mainstream non-Muslim society. But even if he was referring to mainstream Muslims, he can say that in all sincerity. He and his audience know that the peace and prosperity they seek can best be achieved by a constant, unrelenting invasion and undermining of the U.S. government (and every other government). When all the world's governments are Islamic, they will have the true peace they aspire to. And when all those Christians and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists who do not want to give up their religion pay their jizya, they will have the prosperity they aspire to as well.

Some of Rehab's readers may know very little of this. If not, it is their own fault they live in ignorance of a faith they profess. They should either learn what they're professing or get the fuck out. But you can bet Rehab knows all about it. His bullshit is unadulterated taqiyya.