To President Obama

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

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

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

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

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

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

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?