The apologists of terror are constantly telling me that violent muslims and their supporters are a "small minority" of that gentle creed.
Here's an AP story about an Israeli Arab Muslim who truly does belong to a tiny minority—the minority who are trying to promote understanding between Muslims and Jews: Muslim in Nazareth takes on Holocaust.
NAZARETH, Israel — No one talked to him at a recent family wedding, Khaled Mahameed says. Neighbors curse him at the supermarket. A relative accuses him of unwittingly playing into Israel’s hands.
The reason: this Israeli Muslim has embarked on a lonely mission to teach his fellow Arabs about the Holocaust, in which Nazi Germany put to death an estimated 6 million Jews.
Mr. Mahameed’s newly opened Holocaust institute in the biblical town of Nazareth is a modest operation, with occasional lectures. About 60 photos documenting the genocide mounted on the walls. But the effort is highly unusual if not unique in the Arab world, where the Holocaust often is played down or even denied.
One photo shows a Nazi officer pointing a gun to the head of a Jew who squats at the edge of a mass grave. “Men like this man settled our land,” Mr. Mahameed told five Arab visitors recently. “We have to understand the very deep trauma of this man.”
Mr. Mahameed, 43, thinks that learning about the Holocaust could help Arabs understand Israel better and ultimately resolve the Middle East conflict.
A few of his neighbors have expressed support for his museum, but it has provoked strong opposition among Palestinians who say Israel used Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler’s genocide as an excuse to take Arab land.
Underlying this dispute is competition over victimhood, said Tom Segev, an Israeli author on the Holocaust. “Arabs often feel that if they acknowledge the Holocaust, they give up their claim of being the real victim of this conflict,” Mr. Segev said.
Tiny minority indeed...
islam - the scourge of civilization
Equal rights before the law does not exist under Islam. One citizen, one vote does not exist under Islam. Freedom of worship does not exist under Islamic law. Minorities -- that is, non-Muslims -- enjoy rights and protections at the pleasure of the Muslim community that are ever-subject to the capriciousness of a rights-canceling fatwa. Indeed, Islamic law is not the basis of a religion, as the Judeo-Christian world understands religion, but is rather a controlling ideology that is nothing short of totalitarian.
"I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their
heads, maim them in every limb." Q. 8:12
Another reason why I have remained anonymous...
Our little friend Steve wonders why I believe that islam is evil. Here's reason 4,326 from the popular islamic site called Islamic Q@A.
http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=14305&dgn=4&ln=eng
Question :
There is no one among us who is unaware of what the Christians say defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and we are not unaware either of the gheerah (protective jealousy) of the young men of the Muslim ummah towards their religion and their Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Is it permissible to respond to those who defame the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by insulting the speaker, knowing that I insulted one of them and some of my relatives advised me not to do that again, because it will make them defame and mock him even more, so their sin will be on me?.
Answer :
Praise be to Allaah.
Defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is a kind of kufr. If that is done by a Muslim then it is apostasy on his part, and the authorities have to defend the cause of Allaah and His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by executing the one who defamed him. If the one who defamed him repents openly and is sincere, that will benefit him before Allaah, although his repentance does not waive the punishment for defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), which is execution.
If the person who defames him is a non-Muslim living under a treaty with the Muslim state, then this is a violation of the treaty and he must be executed, but that should be left to the authorities. If a Muslim hears a Christian or anyone else defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) he has to denounce him in strong terms. It is permissible to insult that person because he is the one who started it. How can we not stand up the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)? It is also obligatory to report him to the authorities who can carry out the punishment on him.
If there is no one who can carry out the hadd punishment of Allaah and stand up for the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) then the Muslim has to do whatever he can, so long as that will not lead to further mischief and harm against other people. But if a Muslim hears a kaafir defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and he keeps quiet and does not respond for fear that this person may then defame him even more, this is mistaken thinking. With regard to the verse (interpretation of the meaning):
“And insult not those whom they (disbelievers) worship besides Allaah, lest they insult Allaah wrongfully without knowledge”
[al-An’aam 6:108],
What do muslims want? World domination of course..
Even moderates muslims long for the Khalifah(islamic government) to be imposed around the world and the black flag of islam to fly over western buildings.
Read the entire stinking document here:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/politics/khalifa.html
The Khalifa of the Muslim ummah must strive to:
Safeguard Islam in its original form, and to protect against the introduction of new things (bid'a) into Islam.
Establish justice (including punishments for crimes) among the people.
Ensure the protection of the ummah. People within the boundaries of the Muslim state (regardless of whether they are Muslims or not) should feel secure enough to be productive.
Protect the physical boundaries of the state through the use of arms and other methods.
Defend the rights of Muslims abroad, and to see to it that Islam can spread freely in non-Muslim lands (including the use of force).
Organize jihad against any non-Muslim government which prevents Muslim da'wah from entering its land.
"Tiny" minority?
If there weren't a market for these things, they wouldn't be manufactured. From Richard S. Ehrlich in AsiaTimes,
BANGKOK - The Osama bin Laden cigarette lighter is adorned with his raised, chrome portrait, an embossed "9-11", sketches of the New York World Trade Center, an approaching airplane, and a big red splotch. When you flick the sleek, metal lighter open, a light-emitting diode illuminates the splotch so it glows bright red on one of the buildings, emphasizing the site of the first crash. Loud, computerized music beeps out a loop of Mozart.
Made in China - as are many of the latest gimmicky Osama bin Laden souvenirs - the butane lighter recently showed up in Cambodia.
"I paid US$2 for it, in the old Soviet market in Phnom Penh," a Canadian traveler, who asked not to be identified, said in an interview after visiting the Cambodian capital. "One man's catastrophe is another man's cheesy souvenir," he said. "I bought three, for the novelty. I'll give them to people who would appreciate the irony that they even exist. When you open it, it plays a classical tune. It's quite freaky, eh?"
The lighter came boxed with a gold-and-black cigarette holder, and was manufactured by Boerda Smoking Set Co Ltd. An Internet search indicated the Chinese company makes various lighters for domestic use and export.
In a crammed, middle-class shopping mall in Bangkok, other bin Laden souvenirs are also currently on sale. A Thai shop selling lava lamps, magic tricks and embarrassing gifts to surprise recipients, offers a small, inexpensive hand puppet of bin Laden wearing boxing gloves. Stick your fingers inside and wiggle them, and little Osama punches the air.
On Bangkok's popular Khao San Road, where thousands of backpackers flock to cheap hotels, restaurants, discos and an avant garde street market, stalls sell droopy, rubbery bin Laden masks alongside other scary faces.
The souvenirs appear to be made not by bin Laden supporters, but by profit-seeking factories that have slapped bin Laden's visage, and symbols of his international Islamist war, onto existing generic toys and other items in a crass effort to reach a fresh demographic of buyers.
Bin Laden is so popular amongst muslims this is an obvious marketing ploy...
Do muslims learn to hate Jews in the womb?
Whenever you come across muslims in their natural habitat (even here in North America) you can be guaranteed of one thing; sooner or later their Jew-hatred comes to the surface. On a Blog run by a so-called moderate muslim called Jamal (http://www.jamalsadik.com/home/) he posted an article about some pakistani takeoff on Star Wars. Here's what he said:
"The link is on my friend Asim’s site, since the movie was his brainchild, and also cuz I am a Jew about my bandwidth usage on my website’s server."
I pointed out that this sort of comment was outright bigotry. Another "moderate" muslim called Haseeb had some advice for me:
"It’s funny how jews run the entire world and they still complain about it. They go on and on about how people are anti-semitic and whatnot, while they’re the ones who call all the political and economical shots. So flanstein, the next time you want to bitch about someone saying “I’m a jew about my bandwith,” shut up and think about what jews have instead of getting all butt-hurt about it. Now go watch schindler’s list and all those other jewish sympathy movies while sucking a lemon through a douche bag, you douche bag."
Brought to you by the folks from Islam, the religion of peace...
What happens when muslims are shown to be liars?
If you're on their blog, they ban you. I had a recent discussion with one such duplicitous muslim on his blog called http://avari.blogs.com/
Our discussion went like this:
Flanstein said:
Who wants their religion to rule the earth? Not me. That would be you folks...
AA Pakistani Mulah said on "60 Minutes", "One day, God willing, we will live to see the flag of the Islamic Nation flying on top of America's buildings."
An American muslim student said at a Muslim student forum at the College of Staten Island (NYC) a week after the attacks of Sept. 11: "It is the duty of every Muslim to struggle for Islam to DOMINATE the world."
Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." - Omar Ahmad.
Omar Ahmad Co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations
Posted by: Flanstein May 30, 2005 07:52 AM
So because some guy on TV said it, I believe it. You're stupider than you look, Flanstein, and I don't even know what you look like.
Posted by: haroon May 30, 2005 08:17 AM
Haroon,
Stop clenching your little fists, you'll give yourself a stroke. These were just a few small examples of the duplicitous nature of muslims and their expansionist ideals for this nation.
Let me ask you a simple question; do you agree of disagree with Omar Ahmad that "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant?"
At this point, our intrepid little jihadi had to answer my question or ban me. Guess which option he chose?
Mohammed's Believe It or Else!
Thanks to the Infidel Army for pointing me to this site. This hilarity can be found at: http://islamcomicbook.com/
A conversation with muhammad
From Ali Sina at Faith Freedom
Muhammad:-Hey people I am a prophet!
People: - Where are your credentials?
Muhammad: - Here is a letter that I have written that says I am a prophet.
People: - But this is your own words.
Muhammad: -No this is what Allah dictated and I wrote it.
People: - How can we know you are not lying?
Muhammad: - You are deaf, dumb and blind and you’ll burn in hellfire. 2.171, 6.39, 8.22, 17.97
Stupid people aka Muslims: - Whoa! What a convincing argument! We believe.
Muhammad: - Now let us go and raid merchant caravans.
Muslims: - But isn’t stealing unethical?
Muhammad: - No! Because you became poor after following me and are no more working, Allah has given you the right to lay hand on other people’s property. Also they oppressed you. You can kill them. Oppression is worse than killing 2:217 Now let us attack villages without warning and take the population by surprise while they are heedless and their cattle is being watered at places of water. We will kill their fighting men and take their women and children as captives. Remember that the prettiest of the captives is my share. [Bukhari 3.46.717 ]
Muslims: - But isn’t raping married women sin?
Muhammad: -No! Incidentally Allah sent me a verse this morning saying it is okay to have sex with your right hand possessions. 4:24 So rape them with clear conscience. But always remember that the prettiest captive belongs to Allah and his messenger. [Bukhari1.8.367]
Also from now on you don’t have to practice coitus interruptus. Go ahead and ejaculate inside your victims "for if any soul is predestined to exist, it will exist". [Bukhari 3.46.718, 5.59.459 Abu Dawood 29.29.32.95, 29.29.32.96]
Islam has always been about attacking and conquering others, enslaving or killing them, and then living off their slave labor, as disguised in pseudo-religious babble to both embolden the believers and fool the non-believer.
Apply the Golden Rule to Islam and treat it and Muslims as it and they would treat you in Saudi Arabia (the epicenter of the disease.)
Creepy American muslims - what they really think...
This was found on a blog written by an average american muslim - who takes the benefits of civilized society - and dumps them in the toilet...
Yeah, so they recently had the elections in Britain, and Muslims were having these debates all over the Internet and elsewhere about whether voting is permissible or not. They're still having the debates on a bunch of message boards. So I feel as though I need to throw in my two cents, even though I'm pretty late.
Anybody that knows me, knows that I side with the opinion that voting is shirk (wrong). But what's different about me is that I prove my argument from a different angle than other people who also hold the same opinion. In other words, we come to the same conclusion (that voting is shirk), but with a slightly different angle. But what I find strange is that I don't think I've ever seen anybody else present this angle for this opinion. Usually, the argument that they use goes something like this:
"Democracy is a system based on shirk because it gives the absolute right of legislation to someone other than Allah (that is, to the parliamentarians). Agreed? So when you vote, you are voting in another legislator instead of Allah, and since legislation is exclusively a right of Allah, it's almost as though you are voting in another god (or object of worship) instead of Allah. And since you took part in voting him into the parliament, you are therefore partly responsible in the crime."
I may not be wording it the best, but it goes something like that. If somebody could correct me or word it better, I'd be more than happy. It's a strong argument I think, but I think that my angle of argument is somewhat better. My argument goes something like this:
"Democracy is a system based on shirk because it gives the absolute right of obedience to someone other than Allah (that is, to The People). According to this system, ultimately, anything the people want should be implemented, in the absolute sense. We believe that such a right only belongs to Allah. And we believe that the vehicle through which we determine what our object of worship (ilaaha/deity/god), Allah, wants from us is through revelation. On the other hand, the vehicle through which they (the parliamentarians) determine what their object of worship (ilaaha/deity/god), The People, want from them is through voting. So, in a way, when you vote, you are willingly accepting their worship of you, The People. Even though that thing which you may be telling them to do is in line with Islam, they won't be doing it because Islam said so or because Allah said so, but rather, they'll be doing it because you said so. In other words, they won't be doing it out of worship of Allah, but rather, they'll be doing it out of worship of you."
Does that make sense to you? Allow me to give the following analogy:
Suppose there are five of you in a group. And suppose that one person comes to you and says that he will obey you in the absolute sense, no matter what you tell him to do. He says he will implement the majority vote. Meaning, if you tell him to pray five times a day, he'll do that. If you tell him not to drink, he'll do that. If you tell him not to commit adultery, he'll listen to you. On the other hand, if you tell him to do the opposite of any of these things or to do anything in disobedience to Allah at all in general, then he'll listen to you on those things also. God is not an issue here. In other words, like I said before, he agrees to obey you absolutely. So then he comes up to you one day and asks you all to "vote" on a certain issue. Let's say the issue is something that has a bearing in Islam, like drinking. So would you vote "No, you should not drink" (knowing that he would only be doing so out of complete submission and worship of you)? Or would you say to him "Why are you asking me as though I am some moral criteria for you to determine what's right and what's wrong?! Why are you taking me as an object of worship?! You shouldn't care about what I say or don't say, but rather, you should look to what Allah has already revealed in the Qur'aan, and you'll find that he has forbidden drinking and that is what you should really consider!".
Do you see what I'm trying to say and the point that I'm trying to make? There's a difference between absolute obedience (At-Taa'a), which is supposed to be only for Allah, and between regular obedience (Taa'a), which can't be considered worship.
At the same time, I want to clear a common misconception that some people have when they hear somebody say that something is shirk. Just because I consider voting to be shirk does not mean that I do takfeer (declare as a disbeliever) of every single Muslim who votes. In fact, I find that this is the point many people give to disagree with this opinion that voting is shirk, from the beginning of your discussion with them til the end. They'll say, "Yeah, but I just can't see how it would make sense to accuse a huge Muslim population of shirk, so I just can't agree with that view". In this regard, Shaykh Abu Muhammad a-Maqdisi writes the following in his book, This is Our Aqeedah! (Haadhihi Aqeeduna!):
Having said that, we do not declare as Kuffār, the generality of people who participate in the elections, for not all of them seek legislating lords in their participation in it. Rather, from them are those that seek to choose representatives for worldly services for living. In this matter the tribulation has spread far and wide. And the motives of the candidates for election differ - among those that do not directly take part in or practice legislation, such as the representatives. For that reason, we do not proceed to pronounce Takfīr of the individuals among them as we do with those that directly perform clear Kufr such as legislation and its likes.
And we say: taking part in legislative elections is an action of Kufr and we do not make general Takfīr. Rather, we differentiate between a persons performance of an action of Kufr, and placing the ruling of Kufr upon him, of what that implies of establishing the evidence if the affairs become confused and the matters become mixed up, as well as the consideration [given to] the motives in the likes of these issues.
Are we at war with Islam?
Jihad Watch's Hugh Fitzgerald considers the common claim by Muslim leaders that the West is at war with Islam:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/006100.php#more
The more accurate formulation would be: the adherents of Islam, following correctly its tenets, as expressed in the Qur'an and Hadith, and in the example of Muhammad set out in the Sira, have been making war, whenever and wherever possible, and employing whatever instruments at the time are available (combat, wealth, "pen, tongue," and now demography) to spread Islam, to prevent non-Muslims from setting up any obstacles to the further spread and ultimate dominance of Islam, and to ensure that any non-Muslims permitted to remain alive without being forcibly converted will, nonetheless, have to live lives of deliberate humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity. During some long periods when Islam was weak, and the awareness of the outside world also feeble, the only kind of Jihad that was practiced against the outside world were expeditions by slavers and looters to Western Europe (a million whites seized, and many villages destroyed, over several centuries, Eastern Europe and Russia -- several million victims, including Circassian and Georgian and other Christian women seized for their noted beauty), and to Africa (tens of millions of black Africans, mostly young males castrated at the point of seizure, and then marched overland, and then taken often by sea for part of the journey, to the slave markets of Islam: Jeddah, Constantinople, Damascus, Cairo, Baghdad, Algiers, Constantinople, even as far as Ottoman-ruled Smyrna). The mortality rate was 90%.
That has been the history of Islam's relations to all non-Muslims. Conquest, destruction, slavery, demands from within the lands conquered for jizyah. It is little different today, though disguise is of the essence. The Bumiputra system used against Hindus and Chinese in Malaysia is simply a disguised jizya tax by the Malaysian Muslims. Yet Muslims now demand foreign aid from Infidel states, and act as if it is theirs by right and must not either be stopped or have any strings attached to it: see the fury of the P.A. over the American Congress's attempt to funnel aid through American aid agencies; see the Egyptian government's complacent belief that no matter what it did to help Iraqi weapons projects, no matter what nuclear projects it is up to itself, no matter how completely it ignores its solemn commitments under the Camp David Accords and has become a world center of antisemitism, no matter how much anti-Americanism its people display in that most hostile of countries, it will still continue to receive, for no conceivably sensible reason, some $2 billion a year from American taxpayers, apparently helpless to prevent their government from paying what has now become a jizyah tax, just like all the others we pay to every Muslim country that does not have oil revenues.
Islam is at war with Buddhists in Thailand and in Burma, and at war with Confucians and atheists in China. It is at war with Hindus in Bangladesh, and Pakistan, and Kashmir, and India itself. It is at war with Christians in the Philippines, and in Indonesia, and in Malaysia, and in Bangladesh, and in Pakistan, and in Iran, and in Saudi Arabia, and in Iraq, and in Lebanon, and in Egypt, and in Algeria. Islam is at war with whatever Jews can be found, in and out of Israel, since so very few remain, after years of persecution and murder, within the lands ruled by Muslim Arabs. Islam is at war with everyone, for Islam divides the world between Believer and Infidel. Anyone who reads and re-reads the Qur’an, and then reads the commentators, and the jurisconsults, and the muhaddithin, and then looks at the history of Islamic conquest -- reading, for example, "The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam" which is perhaps Bat Ye'or's greatest work of history -- and then looks at Muslim attitudes and behavior today, can come to only one conclusion: Muslims are at war with, and remain a permanent danger to, all non-Muslim societies. If some are not fervent in their Islam, we still do not know what might set off such fervency. Those who place such abstract principles as "tolerance" and "pluralism" above the reasonable need to preserve civilizations, such as our own, which first created and promoted such principles, against those who do not in truth believe in those principles and in the long run would destroy them and the civilization that developed them, are wrong. Lincoln was not the first, nor the last, to understand that in war-time, the same measures do not necessarily apply as during peace-time.
Those who see things aright, and who have taken the trouble to study Islam, know that this war can be contained, and that it need not involved large-scale military conflict. But that conflict can be avoided, across national borders, and within the borders of European nations, only if Muslim countries and groups are kept from acquiring major weaponry, or forced to disgorge what they have, and are kept from migrating in greater numbers to the West (they have little desire to go elsewhere), and those here limited in their sinister campaigns of Da'wa (in which Islam is not fully spelled out until, for the convert, he or she has already signed up for the Army of Islam), which are aimed first at the most marginal and therefore most vulnerable populations -- marginality defined as both economic and psychic.
Far from making war on Islam, the United States has repeatedly rescued Muslims in Kosovo and Bosnia, extended aid for decades to Turkey and Iran, always been prompt to offer other kinds of aid (the aid post-tsunami rushed to Aceh, the most Muslim part of Indonesia), protected Muslim Kuwait and even-more Muslim Saudi Arabia from Saddam Hussein (a choice that looks, in retrospect, not quite as obviously right as it once did), and continues to give aid, against its own best interests, to Pakistan (a recipient for decades of American military and political support), to Egypt, and to the "Palestinian" Authority. And of course tens of billions, even hundreds of billions, have been spent to rescue the Iraqis from their own latest Lord of Misrule, and to build up the country -- all the while taking casualties because of the inability of Iraqis to do the job themselves. They are unable to fight for their own country though there are 25 million of them. So very few of them capable of feeling, among the rumors and lies and crazed through-the-prism-of-Islam perceptions of the universe, any real or lasting gratitude.
Muslims make war, with or without military means, because Islam itself is suffused with a war-like and aggressive doctrine. Refusal to see this does not make the doctrine go away. Imaginary "Muslim moderates" who are then imagined to be a "majority" do not make the texts of Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira change. They do not make the massacre of the Banu Qurayzah prisoners disappear. Or the assassination of Asma bint Marwan. Or the attack on the Khaybar Oasis. Or little Aisha. Or a hundred other events in Muhammad's life, Muhammad who is uswa hasana, in the Qur'anic phrase, the very model for all Muslims, for all time.
Islam makes war and calls it "peace" and "justice." From a Muslim perspective, of course, this is perfectly true. Islam brings with it a pax islamica, and the "justice" of Islam. Quite right. No Muslim should really disagree.
But those of us who have made the choice not to accept Islam, and who find that the more we discover about it, the more horrified we become (and let's face it: a few years ago, we knew almost nothing about it, and were prepared, for example, to assume that the last word on the subject might be, for the more naive, John Esposito, and at a slightly lesser level of naivete, Bernard Lewis). Now we have studied, and are trying as best we can to get others to study. It would even be nice if a few journalists, before offering their platitudes and plongitudes, at least admitted they knew little about Islam. It would be nice if the cheerleaders of the "Light-Unto-the-Muslim-Nations" Project in Iraq would stop to consider and even study the nature of Islam, and begin to ask themselves if Iraq is not in fact the obvious place, almost a god-given place, to exploit -- merely by leaving, for nothing more is called for -- the fissures between Arab and non-Arab Muslim, between Sunni and Shi'a. And then to concentrate on preventing the islamization of Europe -- not by throwing Israel to the wolves, which is the hollow and self-defeating strategy of the Alastair-Crooke-and-Patrick-Seale variety, urged on by the deplorable men now in charge of the E.U. bureaucracy and foreign policy, but by waking Europeans up to their betrayal, by their own elites in the government and the press, to the long-term interests of the indigenous Infidels.
Again, this sentence is either true or false:
"The large-scale presence of Muslims within Western Europe has already made the lives of the indigneous Infidels, and non-Muslim immigrants as well, far more unpleasant, expensive, and physically dangerous than they would have been without such a large-scale Muslim presence."
No one, not even those who utter such silly phrases as "but what can we do? what can we do know?" can deny the truth of that easily verifiable remark.
Verify it yourself. Talk to Europeans. Walk around the streets of European cities. Find out the cost of monitoring Muslims, at train stations and bus stations, at metro stations and at airports, at chemical plants and at nuclear plants. At churches, and at synagogues, and at Hindu and Buddhist and Sikh temples. And parliaments. And city halls. And police stations. And fire stations. And schools, beginning with, but hardly limited to, the Jewish schools. And of course those spies in the mosques, those wire-taps, those agents who must be paid, and the police, and the security guards, and the lawyers, and the judges, and the whole apparatus that grows and grows, only to monitor a problem that need not ever have been allowed to be created, much less be permitted to continue to grow because leadership is lacking, the articulation of the problem is seldom to be heard.
And of course, the United States must watch Western Europe carefully, and its own Infidels learn from the unhappy experience of France, and Belgium, and Germany, and England, and Spain, and...well, fill in the names yourself.
And draw the right conclusions yourself.
The horror of islamic law
This is what is in store for those nations that allow sharia law to creep into their judicial systems... WaPo calls this: "A Killing Commanded by Tradition."
Within an hour, the entire village would learn that the 25-year-old married woman had been discovered in a darkened nearby hut with her lover.Within two days, Amina was dead -- killed by her fellow villagers April 20 after the men of the community ruled that she had violated Islamic law by having an affair with a neighbor....
Soon Amina's father, the elders and a crowd of villagers had gathered outside. Mohammad unlocked the chain and flung open his front door. At the back of the room sat his son, Karim, on a floor cushion.
Next to him sat Amina. Her expression was once again blank, Aslam said.
It threw Aslam into a rage.
"I shouted, 'What is she doing here? Give her to me! I will kill her!' " he recounted last week. "I was so shocked, and my Islamic dignity was so offended."
But the other villagers restrained him, Aslam and other witnesses said.
"We told him, 'No, no! This should be handled by sharia now,' " his brother Hashem recalled, referring to the Islamic legal code.
"Fine, I will give her over to sharia then," Aslam said he responded. "Whatever sharia says, I will do it."...
Under sharia, the punishment for adultery is death by stoning. But the code requires that there be undeniable proof of the crime -- for instance, multiple witnesses to the sex act, a confession, or other signs such as an inexplicable pregnancy....
But no one involved disputes that the villagers were unanimous in their view that according to the dictates of Islam, the proper resolution of the case would be for Karim, as an unmarried man, to be lashed and Amina, as a married woman, to be stoned to death.
Early that afternoon, one of the mullahs went to fetch a stick with which to whip Karim as Yousaf took his leave of the villagers.
Then they watched Yousaf's turban slowly vanish over a mountain path and, along with it, Amina's last hope.
Punishment
There are two, conflicting accounts of Amina's death.
According to her great-uncle Assan, after the shura reached its verdict, a group of villagers came to the dark storage room and took her away to be stoned.
"She knew what was going to happen to her," Assan said softly. "She was screaming and sobbing."
Amina's paternal uncle, Mohammad Azim, said he watched as the villagers forced Amina down a muddy path toward a patch of soft earth along a riverbank surrounded by stones, a few yards from the edge of the village.
It was a beautiful spot, shaded by an enormous tree and offering a charming view of the village clinging to the mountainside.
It was also an ideal place for a stoning.
"They dug a hole in the ground right here," Azim said, pointing to a spot in the clearing six days later. "Then they buried Amina up to her waist, with her arms pinned by her side."
Azim said Amina's hair was covered in a head scarf, and that she was crying in terror as nearly a hundred men gathered in a circle around her and began throwing small rocks at her head.
"I couldn't watch for more than a few minutes," Azim said. Instead, he said, he walked up to Amina's parents' house and waited with them in silence during the two hours it took to kill her.
Several villagers and Amina's mother said that they, too, believe she was stoned. And a few said they had seen the bloody hole after she was removed from it.
But no one else would admit to witnessing the actual stoning, much less participating in it. And the ground where Amina was allegedly buried to her waist showed little sign of disturbance six days after her death -- possibly because, as Azim and other villagers contend, they had refilled the hole and then the river had flooded over it, or possibly because the stoning never happened.
Several other villagers, including Amina's uncle, Hashem, tell a very different story.
Hashem said the villagers handed Amina over to her uncles, including himself and Azim. Their original intention was to hang her, Hashem said. But as they were leading her away, they became increasingly angry and started to beat her with their fists.
"It was dark," he said. "All of us were striking her, and then she fainted and we saw that she was on the ground and not breathing. Maybe she had a heart attack."
Whatever the means of her death, Amina's parents said her bruised corpse was returned to them sometime between afternoon and evening prayers that day.
Amina's mother, Nessa, said she did not grieve.
"My daughter was a criminal and a sinner who brought dishonor on my name," Nessa said hotly several days later. "And I should be blamed for her death, not anyone else, because I told my tribe they could kill her. I forgave them for spilling her blood."...
If Amina had been allowed to live, Nessa added, the shame of it would have forced Nessa to leave the only home she had ever known and a valley in which her family had lived for generations.
"But now I can walk everywhere in the village with my head high. . . . I'm happy. Extremely, extremely happy," she shouted. The tone in her voice betrayed no joy.
Then Nessa covered her face with her hands....
Amina's father Aslam, however, was released from police custody in Faizabad after a night of questioning, on grounds that he was not directly responsible.
Just before embarking on the long walk back to Gazon, he sat on a metal chair in a room in the police station, reflecting on all that had happened in the last several days.
Unlike the feelings of his wife Nessa, Aslam's anger at Amina had by now given way to sorrow.
"I feel so sad for her. She was so young," he said, as his eyes grew glassy with tears. "I really miss her now. . . . I will miss her voice, and our conversations in the evenings."
There was much he wished he could go back and change. "If only she had told me that she did not want to go back to her husband," he said. "I would have done something about it. I would have counseled her."
But he said he harbored no doubt that she deserved to die after she admitted to committing adultery.
"There was no option. This is what Islam commands us."
"hey flanstein you jew fuck go back to your oven"
This is the response that I got from a "moderate" muslim on a discussion on another board called "http://angryiranian.blogspot.com
You scratch the surface on many muslims and this is what you get - vicious Jew-hatred.
Religion of peace?
What western muslims want...
The fascinating thing about talking with muslims, is that at some point - usually when they can no longer defend their views - they ban you from their blog. I had one such conversation with a young, naive Canadian muslim called Saffiyyah. She runs a little blog called http://safspace.blogspot.com/
Now Saffiyyah is not a radical head-chopper or Jew-hater like so many we find on-line. She is polite and I’m sure she views herself at the pinnacle of muslim modernity. However she HAS been indoctrinated into the death-cult of mohammad, and when one scratches the surface, she is not unlike the monsters who flew their planes into the WTC.
When I asked her if she would rather live in Canada under our democratic institutions or under sharia, this is what she said;
”I think people misunderstand the Shariah. Shariah law is a system of justice. If interpreted in the current context in Canada, it would not be very far from Canadian law. The goal of justice would be the same. The definition of right and wrong would be similar. The main difference would be in terms of purpose: Shariah law is justice for the sake of God, while Canadian law is justice for its own sake.”
While she did not have the courage to answer my direct question on preference, it doesn’t take much reading between the lines to ascertain her wishes.
The vicious cycle of Sharia, with its abdication of women’s rights and imposition of an antiquated judiciary poses a serious challenge to any western nation. Sharia, whenever it has been imposed means suffering, oppression, hand-chopping beatings and the absence of alcohol. Would I still get to eat bacon I wonder?
I wonder if saffiyyah has ever heard of Amina Lawal, a Nigerian woman sentenced to death by stoning in a Nigerian Islamic court. Her crime - to have given birth to a child out of wedlock.
A French businesswoman in Dubai was gang-raped by three men last year who offered her a ride home from a nightclub. When she reported the crime immediately to the police, they confiscated her French passport and arrested her—for adultery under shari'a law.
What kind of Canadian would WANT to live under this sort of barbarity you may ask? Muslims it seems...
Look what happens under islamic rule...
On April 23, 2005, Saudi newspapers reported that 40 Pakistanis were arrested by the Saudi religious police in a Riyadh apartment for conducting Christian religious activity. The following are excerpts from the reports:
The Saudi daily Al-Jazirah reported that 40 men, women, and children with Pakistani citizenship were arrested on April 21, 2005 after performing Christian religious rites in an apartment in the Thaharat Al-Badi’a neighborhood in western Riyadh. The arrest was part of a sweeping police operation by the Riyadh District Police, at the order of Riyadh Governor Prince Salman bin Abd Al-’Aziz.
The paper reported that the operation came after Saudi religious police – known as the Authority for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice – followed and collected information on the activity of the 40, who listened to a proselytizing lecture by a Pakistani minister.
The paper also noted that during the police operation, which lasted nearly 10 hours, a cross and a large number of proselytizing books and cassettes were found [in the apartment]. The detainees themselves stated that they had come to listen to lectures by the minister. One of the detainees was a Muslim Pakistani, who acknowledged that he had been influenced by the Christian ideology.
The Saudi daily Al-Riyadh said that the detainees had set up a church in the apartment, equipped with crosses, pictures, and statues. Likewise, it was said that during their religious activity, one of them was found praying, as the others present repeated their words, and one of the women arrested was listing the people’s confessions and distributing writs of absolution. The Al-Riyadh report included a photo of the detainees and of a large cross and the group which was arrested.
A Saudi religious police source explained the reason for the arrest: “These people tried to spread the poison and their beliefs to others, by means of distributing pamphlets and [missionary] publications.” He said that all the detainees “had been transferred to the relevant bodies for investigation.”
Why I believe islam is THE enemy of civilization...
Recently, a young muslim woman asked me on her blog "why have you singled out Islam for critique? After all, Judaism and Christianity have their share of extremists. Are you not worried about the threat they pose? "
I answered her this way...
Why have I singled out islam? What an odd question...
Here's a clue, who dances around dead infidels holding their victims burnt entrails shouting "allah akbar"?
Airplanes full of humans are hijacked and crashed into skyscrapers full of humans, hotels are bombed, 12 year old children’s birthday parties are blown up, bus loads of children are massacred. Who were the culprits? Mormons? Animists? Jews? Hindus?
Somebody executed thousands during the miss world riot while asking some of the victims to recite passages out of the koran. If they could not comply, they were butchered on the spot. Were the villains Quakers? Buddhists? Bahai? Pagans? Atheists?
The targeting, torture and massacre of schoolchildren in Russia was perhaps the most barbarous act in 2004. Who I ask were the culprits? Unitarians? Scientologists? Catholics?
There is, of course, the massacre in N.Y. the hundreds of Australians BBQ'd in Bali and hundreds more blown apart in Madrid. Who did that I wonder? Falun-gong?
Let’s not forget all the innocent people beheaded on video (shouting alla akbar) while they danced around in joy.
The common thread between all of these horrific crimes is a religion I believe is a grave threat to civilization - islam.
Equal rights before the law do not exist under Islamic law. One citizen, one vote does not exist under Islamic law. Freedom of worship does not exist under Islamic law. Minorities -- that is, non-Muslims -- enjoy rights and protections at the pleasure of the Muslim community that are ever-subject to the capriciousness of a rights-canceling fatwa.
Indeed, Islamic law is not the basis of a religion, as the Judeo-Christian world understands religion, but is rather the basis of a controlling ideology that is nothing short of totalitarian.
Abdel Rahman al-Rashed, a Saudi journalist in London said: “It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists,” he writes, “but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims. We cannot clear our names unless we own up to the shameful fact that terrorism has become an Islamic enterprise; an almost exclusive monopoly, implemented by Muslim men and women."
Do Muslims have self-esteem Issues?
From the Cairo-based Sandmonkey blogspot
Did you hear that the Pope converted to Islam before he died?
No, you didn’t? But that’s all over Egypt. It’s the latest rumor of the week. People who support it point to the fact that the Pope had dirt put on his corps ( an Islamic burial tradition) and that he wanted his memoirs burned to hide his secret conversion of course ( why else would he have them burned they would argue), which he showed in his establishing of good relations with the Muslim community and opposition to the Iraq war. The Pope, they would say without a shred of doubt in their voice, died a muslim. And some people actually believed that! Ain't that some shit?
Ohh and in case you haven’t heard, Bill Gates also declared his conversion to Islam. I got that piece of news in an e-mail. Apparently he announced it at a house-party ( where they didn’t serve alcohol I am certain) and told his “shocked” guests that he amassed all the wealth in the world and bought everything he ever wanted, but only found peace of mind in converting to Islam. The E-mail had a snapshot of a newspaper article, which I am sure isn’t made up or anything. And again, apparently some people believed it.
Ok, what is with muslims? I am begining to think that they may have serious self-esteem issues. Why the making up of stories of celebrities and important people converting to Islam? Does it make them feel better to make up lies? Isn’t it freakin enough that there are more then one billion muslims in the world? Do they also have to have celebrities? What is it?
I mean, I am sorry, but you never see the jews bragging about the jewish stars or artists who convert ( Madonna a.k.a. Ester, anyone?). You don’t see them celebrating it! And you don’t see the Christians caring that much when someone who wasn’t suddenly becomes Christian or declares himself born again. I know a lot of Christians and I personally didn’t see anyone excited about the fact that Mase became a reverend or that the guitarist from Korn found Jesus and quit the band.
But there isn’t a muslim that I know that doesn’t brag about Mohamed Ali, or mention with great pride that Cat Stevens (sorry, Yousef Islam) converting to Islam ; Never mind that Mohamed Ali joined the nation of Islam, which is to Islam what the Mormons are to christianity, and that Cat stevens didn't have a hit out in 20 years .
What is it about muslims? Why do they care so much about celebrity endorsements of Islam?My own theory is that Muslims do have self-esteem issues, and that’s because the majority of Muslim celebrities are, well, let’s just say, not the kind of people you want representing your religious group( Louis Farakhan, Osama Bin Laden, the Taliban, etc..). This is why they love it when a western celebrity converts and will make up stories about it to make themselves feel better. That’s the only explanation that I have for it. Anyone else have a theory?
islam - religion of (body) pieces...
ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - A Pakistani man accused of desecrating the Koran was shot dead Wednesday after being chased by an angry crowd.
Ashiq Nabi, in his thirties, was accused of being disrespectful to Islam’s holy book and had been in hiding since Monday, a senior police official said.
“Today, a mob spotted him and shot him dead,” said Mazahar ul Haq, police chief of Nowshera town, about 100 km (62 miles) west of the capital, Islamabad.
Blasphemy, including desecrating the Koran, is a capital offence in deeply Islamic Pakistan and carries the death sentence, but convictions have always been turned down by high courts because of a lack of evidence.
Witnesses said the man was chased through fields and climbed a tree to get away from an angry crowd of up to 500 men. When he refused to come down, someone shot him dead, they said.
Taken last week in Indonesia, another example of the massive support Jew-hatred has in muslim countries.
The religion of peace believes it is a womans own fault if she is raped
Sheikh Feiz Muhammad an Australian cleric doesn't think much about women, or the womens movement.
“Every minute in the world a woman is raped, and she has no one to blame but herself, for she has displayed her beauty to the whole world,” Sheikh Feiz Muhammad told a packed public meeting in the Bankstown Town Hall last month. “Strapless, backless, sleeveless - they are nothing but satanical. Mini-skirts, tight jeans - all this to tease men and to appeal to (their) carnal nature.”
There was pressure on Muslim women to unveil, the sheikh said, and this was because “they want you to be available for their gross, disgusting, filthy abomination! They want you to be a sex symbol!” The woman who wore the hijab was hiding her beauty from the eyes of “lustful, hungry wolves”, he said.
Sheikh Feiz Muhammad teaches at the Global Islamic Youth Centre in Liverpool, NSW. His long, ranting speech, damning and ridiculing Western culture (if you allow your wife to watch the “devil” of daytime television, he advised men, you will come home from work and find she is being “negative” towards you) was greeted with frequent applause.
5:33 The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; [Anyone who disbeliefs in Islam and speaks against it is considered to be waging war against Allah and his messenger]
Who said muslims lack a sense of humour?
Taken from an islamist blog called the angry iranian
http://angryiranian.blogspot.com/
Islamic Republic Day
Tehran, April 1 - The Father of the Islamic Revolution, Imam Khomeini, was a God-sent man. He changed the destiny of Iran by giving Iranian real representative rule and throwing into the dustbin of history monarchial tyranny. The late Imam attached importance to people's aspirations and demands within the brilliant framework of the time-honoured and time-tested laws of Islam. He used to say: People are the real for me.
Imam Khomeini (may his soul rest in peace), did in fact set in motion the Islamic revolution and without him it was impossible for Iran or the Iranians to throw off the yoke of the American supported Pahlavi regime. In other words, his immense popularity, both as revolutionary leader for whom millions used to turn out in Tehran and other cities and as the supreme mujtahed whose words were binding for his followers, he did not require any referendum to determine the system of government for Iran. Yet, he decided to hold a free and fair referendum by inviting all sections of the Iranian society to make their views on the type of rule they favoured.
Such a great confidence the late Imam had in the nation that less than two months after the victory of the Islamic revolution he called for a referendum to determine a new system of government in Iran. On April 1, 1979, millions of Iranian voters took to the booths and 98.2 percent of the participants voted yes for setting up the dynamic Islamic Republic system in Iran. This was something unprecedented in history and none of the great revolutions of the past centuries ever ventured to carry out such a bold measure, as did the Great Islamic Revolution of Iran.
It is this unique characteristic that sets the Islamic revolution apart and at the pinnacle of the pyramid of all contemporary revolutions. The Islamic Revolution burst on the world scene like an explosion of light. It was moulded by the pristine ideology of Islam and the rich cultural background of the religion, that God chose for all humanity. Here, under the auspices of the Islamic Revolution, it was the will of the Muslims that mattered, unlike the deceptive slogans of the West's liberal democracy. In fact, a study of revolutions of the recent past, including the French and Russian revolutions shows that the leadership paid only lip service to the people.
For the French and the Bolshevik revolutionaries the masses were only means of overcoming the former dictatorial regimes and once the old system had been gotten rid of, both the French and the Russian revolutions suppressed the popular will of the people and imposed their absurd ideas upon them. This was not the case with the Islamic Revolution in Iran, which has never lost its popular appeal.
It continues to thrive on the will of the Muslim masses of Iran as the popular religious system. As a matter of fact, the April 1979 referendum that led to the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran actually heralded the start of other elections. Today, 25 years later, Islamic Iran is proud to say that it has held as many elections with the full participation of the Muslim people. Needless to say, nationwide elections have become a regular feature of the Islamic Republic for the past quarter century with the public exercising its right of vote to chose the country's parliament, the president, the Experts Council that determines the leadership and oversees its performance and various other bodies such as the rural and city councils.
Every time the Islamic Republic goes to the polls, the US and the Zionists cry hoarsely and leave no stone unturned to spew poisonous political propaganda in order to mislead people. But every time they are frustrated as Iranian Muslims consider it their religious duty to come out in large numbers to elect candidates of their choice and thereby defeat the plots of the enemies of Islamic Iran. The Islamic Republic system enjoys popular grassroots support, a factor that has kept Iran steady on its feet and made the country the cynosure of all eyes on the international arena.
The Iranian people through their wide scale support for the system they helped established have withstood against the military, political, economic and cultural plots of the West, and shown to world bodies how a popular religious system can counter the might of super bullies by relying firmly on God and the Islamic and humanitarian values. Could there be a greater proof of the popular base of the Islamic Republic system? No certainly not, thanks to the farsightedness of the Father of the Islamic Revolution who had the clarity of vision to determine the best possible system for Iran and the Iranian Muslims.
What Are Islamic Schools Teaching?
by Daniel Pipes
New York
Sun March 29, 2005
"Shocked" is how Aisha Sherazi, principal of the Abraar Islamic school in Ottawa, described the reaction of the school's administration and board on learning last week that two of its teachers had incited hatred of Jews.
And "shocked" was how Mumtaz Akhtar, president of the Muslim-Community Council of Ottawa-Gatineau, described his own reaction to the front-page news about the Abraar school.
But they may have been the only two persons on the planet to be "shocked" to learn that teachers at an Islamic school are promoting anti-Semitism or other aspects of the Islamist agenda. The fact is, inquiries into Islamic schools repeatedly discover just such a radical Islamic outlook. Some examples:
New York City: An investigation by the New York Daily News in 2003 found that books used in the city's Muslim schools "are rife with inaccuracies, sweeping condemnations of Jews and Christians, and triumphalist declarations of Islam's supremacy."
Los Angeles: The Omar Ibn Khattab Foundation donated 300 Korans (titled The Meaning of the Holy Quran) to the city school district in 2001 that within months had to be pulled from school libraries because of its anti-Semitic commentaries. One footnote reads: "The Jews in their arrogance claimed that all wisdom and all knowledge of Allah was enclosed in their hearts. … Their claim was not only arrogance but blasphemy."
Ajax, Ontario, 50 kilometers east of Toronto: The Institute of Islamic Learning is a Canadian emulation of the extremist Deobandi madrassahs of Pakistan. It focuses exclusively on religious topics, has students memorize the Koran, demands total segregation from the Canadian milieu, and requires complete gender separation. Former students complained about the school's cult-like devotion to its head, Abdul Majid Khan, and complained that it is a "twisted religion."
Then there are four leading Islamic schools in the Washington, D.C. area:
The Muslim Community School in Potomac, Md., imbues in its students a sense of alienation from their own country. Seventh-grader Miriam told a Washington Post reporter in 2001, "Being American is just being born in this country." Eighth-grader Ibrahim announced that "Being an American means nothing to me."
A textbook used at the Islamic Saudi Academy of Alexandria, Va., in 2004, authored and published by the Saudi Ministry of Education, teaches first graders that "all religions, other than Islam, are false, including that of the Jews [and] Christians." An ISA class valedictorian, Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, was recently indicted for plotting to assassinate President Bush.
The U.S. government revoked the visas in 2004 of sixteen people affiliated with the Institute for Islamic and Arabic Sciences in America, of Fairfax, Va.
In the words of the Washington Post, "That decision followed accusations that the institute, a satellite campus of al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University in Riyadh, was promoting a brand of Islam that critics say is intolerant of other strains of the religion as well as Christianity and Judaism."
In addition, the IIASA is under investigation for ties to terrorism.
The Graduate School of Islamic Social Sciences of Ashburn, Va., referred to as a "purported" educational institution in an affidavit justifying a raid on the school, had its financial records seized in 2002 on suspicions of links to terrorism.
Nor are schools the exception among Islamic institutions in North America. A recent study by Freedom House found a parallel problem of venomous anti-Jewish and anti-Christian materials in U.S. mosques. The most prominent American Muslim organizations, especially the Council on American-Islamic Relations, spew antisemitism and host a neo-Nazi.
The same applies in Canada, where the head of the Canadian Islamic Congress, Mohamed Elmasry, publicly endorsed the murder of all Israelis over the age of eighteen.
So long as Muslim leaders simply declare themselves, in the spirit of Capt. Renault in the movie Casablanca "shocked, shocked" whenever news of Islamist supremacism leaks out, this cancer will continue unabated.
The Islamic schools, the mosques, and other Muslim organizations like CAIR and CIC will continue their cat-and-mouse game so long as it works.
It won't work only when outside pressure is brought to bear on them by politicians, journalists, researchers, moderate Muslims, and others. They must state clearly and frequently the unacceptability of Islamist venom. Only then will today's fraudulent "shocked" reaction finally become sincere.
Let us never forget who was responsible, why they did this, and how much they - and their co-religionists - hate us...
The cover page of an enterprising young Canadian jihadi’s violent fantasy. islam, religion of peace....
More proof that muslims everywhere hate Jews...
'God bless you, your efforts are good,' instructor wrote on Ottawa boy's story celebrating violence, hatred against Jews
Juliet O'Neill
The Ottawa Citizen
Thursday, March 24, 2005
The cover page of the boy’s story is illustrated with a burning Star of David beside a machine-gun and a Palestinian flag atop the Dome of the Rock, an ancient Muslim shrine in Jerusalem. The text next to the shrine reads: 'With the call of God is the Greatest, the flag of Zionism will fall and will be destroyed.'
Two teachers at the Abraar Islamic school in Ottawa were suspended yesterday pending an investigation into the encouragement or incitement of hatred against Jews expressed in a young student's violence-laden writing project.
Principal Aisha Sherazi said the seven-member school board and administration were "shocked" (what a laugh - these folks ferment hatred of infidels and then claim they are "shocked)by teacher involvement in the project that was brought to her attention by the Citizen yesterday morning, and decided at an emergency meeting to suspend the instructors.
One teacher was apparently involved in the artistic production of the eight-page story of killing and martyrdom. Handwritten in Arabic and titled The Long Road, the cover page was illustrated by a drawing of a burning Star of David beside a machine-gun and Palestinian flag atop the Dome of the Rock, an ancient Muslim shrine in Jerusalem.
The other teacher had written comments on the student's paper, praising the boy's story of revenge for the assassination by Israeli forces a year ago of Sheik Ahmed Yassin, a co-founder of Hamas, in retaliation for suicide bombings against Israeli civilians.
"God bless you, your efforts are good," the teacher wrote on the title page. "The story of the hero Ahmed and the hero Salah is still alive. The end will be soon when God unites us all in Jerusalem to pray there."
On the margins inside the story, the teacher had written a note endorsing the boy's fantasy of a young Ahmed Yassin and his friend, Salah El-Dine, ambushing Israeli soldiers.
"Without thinking, Ahmed took his M16 machine-gun and threw the bombs, and he showered the Jews; this resulted in the killing of the soldiers," the boy's text reads. "Salah said: 'You killed them all.' Ahmed answered: 'Praise be to God.'"
If muslims live in your city or town, it's only a matter of time for their hatred of infidels to make itself apparent.
Apparently, I'm "unclean"...
Taken directly from Robert Spencer's Dhimmi Watch http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/
Jihad Watch Advisory Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald takes on this outstanding display of dhimmitude from the eminently cloudy-minded Thomas Friedman at the New Duranty Times:
Everyone will have his own startling encounter with Islam -- the real thing, not what these Muslim apologists, hoping to give everyone a carefully-circumscribed "peek into the Koran" (and let's make sure that none of these unwary Infidels manages to read anything beyond the Michael Sells "Approaching the Qur'an" and by all means, keep them from looking into the Hadith or the Sira). But not more.One keeps being surprised. Yesterday, amused by the latest display of vacuity by Tom Friedman, nominating -- modestly -- Ali al-Sistani for the Nobel Prize -- I went to www.sistani.org to look around. There, between Sistani's complete banning of chess, and his discussions of all the usual subjects that inquiring Muslims wish to know about, from whether it is okay to marry the sister of a man you have sodomized, or who has sodomized you (I forget which) to whether your canonical prayers count if you haven't performed the wudu (ablutions) correctly -- you know, all the stuff that you want to know -- was the little matter of "Najis" or the "unclean."
If you click on "Muslim Laws" on the left, and then, once a list comes up, click on "najis things" you will get a list -- #84 -- and if you then go a little further, and click on the menu where, among those unclean things, the "kafir" (which is to say, the Unbeliever, or You and I, Dear Reader) you will get a further discussion of how, in nice, wonderful, "moderate" Islam of the al-Sistani variety, the Unbeliever, the Infidel, the Kafir (guilty of "kufr" or "ingratitude" for failing to receive the Revelation of the Last of the Prophets in the right, accepting, submissive way) is viewed.
So here, for everyone out in Ames, Iowa, is just a little sample of what you are missing, and what one suspects that Mohammed Fahmy et al. would prefer that you not inquire into too deeply. And please, whatever you do, do NOT read the websites www.dhimmitude.org and www.faithfreedom.org and www.co-jet.org and www.jihadwatch.org, and do NOT read anything by Bat Ye'or, but especially do not read Islam and Dhimmitude or The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam. And do not read Ibn Warraq's Why I Am Not a Muslim. And let's not even talk about Robert Spencer. These books will only confuse you. And never pay attention to a man named Ali Sina. Never google the name "Habib Malik" to read what he has to say about the historic relationship of Islam to Christianity, and never read a similar article by James V. Schall, a professor at Georgetown.
Well, here is what you can find at www.sistani.org:
"84. The following ten things are essentially najis:
1. Urine
2. Faeces
3. Semen
4. Dead body
5. Blood
6. Dog
7. Pig
8. Kafir
9. Alcoholic liquors
10. The sweat of an animal who persistently eats najasat [i.e., unclean things].108. The entire body of a Kafir, including his hair and nails, and all liquid substances of his body, are najis.
109. If the parents, paternal grandmother and paternal grandfather of a minor child are all kafir, that child is najis, except when he is intelligent enough, and professes Islam. When, even one person from his parents or grandparents is a Muslim, the child is Pak (The details will be explained in rule 217).
110. A person about whom it is not known whether he is a Muslim or not, and if no signs exist to establish him as a Muslim, he will be considered Pak. But he will not have the privileges of a Muslim, like, he cannot marry a Muslim woman, nor can he be buried in a Muslim cemetery."So who wants to second the nomination of Al-Sistani for the Nobel Prize? Anyone out there in Ames, Iowa?
Wherever Muslims live in Canada - Jew-hatred is sure to follow...
Reports of anti-Semitic incidents up dramatically in 2004, says Jewish group
OTTAWA (CP) - A "chilling" new audit by a Jewish group says a record number of anti-Semitic incidents were reported in Canada last year.
B'nai Brith Canada's League for Human Rights released a report Tuesday citing 857 incidents across the country. That's the highest number since the organization began tracking such incidents 22 years ago. And it's up 47 per cent from 2003.
The biggest numbers were in Ontario and Quebec - the most populous provinces - with one incident recorded for the first time in Nunavut.
Especially troubling was a 59 per cent increase in incidents aimed at Jewish homes, said league director Ruth Klein.
"We find this number especially chilling because it implies a measure of premeditation," Klein told an Ottawa news conference.
"People are actually taking the trouble to find out where Jews live, and targeting them in their own homes."
Incidents range from graffiti, to bomb threats and violence.
Among the incidents cited by the league in 2004:
-A Jewish home in Calgary spray-painted with the words Hitler Rules.
-Graffiti on a city street in Cambridge, Ont., proclaiming: Help Save The World. Kill The Jews.
-A website created by a teenager in St. John's, Nfld., filled with anti-Jewish comments.
Almost 45 per cent of the incidents were investigated by police. Of those, 13 resulted in charges, with one leading to a prison sentence. Several cases are still before the courts.
Jewish students were targeted in 47 incidents, often linked to anti-Israel or antiwar events.
Almost one-third of all incidents occurred in March and April, when Israel launched countermeasures against terrorist groups in the Palestinian territory. Klein said that seemed to fall in line with a historical pattern surrounding Israeli military activity.
"We've often found in the past that whenever there's increased tension in the Middle East, Jews in this country are targeted by people who are acting out on their anti-Israel anger," said Klein.
Figures are compiled from incidents reported directly to the league's anti-hate hotline, or its regional offices in Toronto, Halton-Peel in Ontario, Montreal, Ottawa, Winnipeg and Edmonton.
An RCMP spokesman said he didn't immediately have hate-crimes statistics available.
The league makes a number of recommendations in its report, including having dedicated hate crime units established by all major police forces. The report also calls on Ottawa to amend the Criminal Code to include Holocaust denial as a hate crime.
Keep Islamic law out of Canada, Quebec politicians urge
Minister suggests province reject; Muslim immigrants who favour system
MIKE DE SOUZA
The Gazette
Friday, March 11, 2005
Islamic law has no place in Quebec or the rest of Canada, a provincial cabinet minister and several MNAs said yesterday.
With the Ontario government expected to decide shortly on whether to allow the Islamic legal code, known as sharia, to be applied to settle family disputes among Muslims, Liberal and Parti Quebecois MNAs warned yesterday that using sharia would lead to blatant violations of women's rights.
"I think all political parties in Quebec must say loud and clear that not only do we not want it in Quebec, we don't want it in Ontario and we don't want it in Canada," International Relations Minister Monique Gagnon-Tremblay said at a conference.
The former immigration minister said Quebec should refuse immigrants who believe the Islamic system should be applied.
"We must rework the social contract (for immigrants) so that the people - Muslims who want to come to Quebec and who do not respect women's rights or who do not respect whatever rights may be in our Civil Code - stay in their country and not come to Quebec, because that's unacceptable."
"On the other hand, if people want to come to Quebec and accept our way of doing things and our rights, in that instance they will be welcome and we will help them integrate."
Sharia is canonical law based on the teachings of the Koran.
Ontario's attorney-general is studying a report, made public in December, that recommends sharia be allowed to settle family disputes.
But in an hour-long presentation, Liberal MNA Fatima Houda-Pepin argued Islamic law would infringe on women's rights and open the door to polygamy.
"We've seen sharia at work in Iran. We've seen it at work in Afghanistan, with the odious Taliban regime. We've seen it in Sudan, where the hands of hundreds of innocent people were cut off. We've seen it in Nigeria with attempts at stoning," she said.
Salam Elmenyawi, chairperson of the Muslim Council of Montreal, was outraged when told about the comments made at the conference.
"When you talk like that, you are attacking me and my faith," he said in a phone interview. "This is total ignorance. Bigotry and ignorance have no limits."
But Houda-Pepin, who was raised a Muslim, also warned that the public should make an effort to get to know those in the community who are lobbying for application of sharia.
"One of the strengths of Islamists is that they know you very well. They know our history, they know our culture, they know our justice system, the Charter of Rights," she said.
She said those lobbyists are trying to impose a political agenda, not necessarily a religious one.
"Their objective is not to integrate into Canada, it is to integrate Canada to their values," she said, acknowledging sharia is interpreted in a more liberal fashion in such countries as Morocco as opposed to Saudi Arabia, for example.
The stink of islam is finally being acknowledged for what it is - a death cult of hatred, fear and oppression..
The enemy is amongst us
Mar. 8, 2005. 06:12 AM
Toronto Star
CSIS chief links immigrant to Al Qaeda Mosques being monitored by agency
Two top officials speak to senators
TONDA MACCHARLESOTTAWA BUREAUOTTAWA—A Canadian landed immigrant is a key commander affiliated with Al Qaeda in Iraq, a top CSIS official says.
CSIS director Jim Judd told a Senate committee yesterday "the ranks of trained terrorist fighters in Iraq are bolstered by individuals from around the world, including from Europe and Canada."
Judd told the committee: "For example, a Canadian citizen is believed to be a member of a group affiliated with Al Qaeda and Abdul Jabbar, a landed immigrant, is believed to be a key commander and ideologue with that same organization in Iraq."
Judd gave no further details.
CSIS operations director Dale Neufeld, the former interim director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and now second-in-charge, did say the agency is monitoring mosques in Canada that it suspects are raising funds for terrorist activities and recruiting terrorist sympathizers.
The Hypocricy of islam
Across the civilized world, muslims whine and moan if concessions aren't made to them and their "religion". Sadly, the concessions are a one-way street.
Washington DC - The Saudi Government said today it won’t allow non Muslims to seek its citizenship, Al-Watan newspaper reported today.
Naser Al-Hanaya, Ministry of Interior Assistant for Civil Affairs, told Al-Watan that the citizenship law amended October 18 of last year won’t allow any non Muslims living in the country to seek Saudi nationality.
Al-Hanaya said “Islam is the religion and non Muslims won’t be allowed citizenship.”
Reason 5,876 why islam stinks...
Canada's Muslim refusenik
National Post
Sat 05 Feb 2005
By Robert Fulford
The threat to Western democracy posed by unassimilated Muslim immigrants in Europe has been discussed for years. Given that background, it's remarkable that Irshad Manji, the author of The Trouble with Islam, can imagine powerful and positive influence running in precisely the other direction, from the democracies to Islam. She argues that the West's traditions, embraced by young Muslims, can save Islam from intellectual atrophy and moral failure. And she's enlisted as an agent of that change.
It's now only about a year since Manji and her book, having made a good start in Canada, set off to tell the world that Islam desperately needs free inquiry, self-criticism, an honest examination of the Koran and women's rights.
By any standards, the results have been spectacular. Seen in a Canadian context, The Trouble with Islam has notably expanded the international sweep of Canadian writing; no other Canadian polemic has ever reached so far so fast. But her book would be a phenomenon wherever it came from.
There are 15 editions in print, from Brazil to Pakistan, and this year brings at least three more, in Israel, Bulgaria and Poland. Lately there have been nibbles from India, Bangladesh, even an underground publisher in Iran. Meanwhile, Arabic and Urdu readers can download the book free from the author's Web site, muslim-refusenik.com.
On the Web she delivers the same autobiographical message that brought her book to life. Muslims may believe the West will corrupt their faith, but that's not been her experience. A refugee from Uganda who grew up near Vancouver, she insists that freedom saved her belief. With her Canadian education and Canadian free speech, she learned how to live as a dissenting Muslim, a "Muslim refusenik" who refuses to join "an army of automatons in the name of God."
Because she can practise her religion freely, she's never abandoned it. "Had I grown up in a Muslim country, I might well be an atheist in my heart. The West has saved my faith in my faith." She headed one chapter in her book, "Thank God for the West." Defying the views of almost every articulate Muslim alive, she says: "The Islamic reformation begins in the West."
At a different moment in history, that might be optimistic nonsense. But the 21st century has given her message the electronic means to reach distant places where governments and imams condemn her ideas but citizens may be willing to consider them.
Reading muslim-refusenik.com leads us to a renewed respect for the freedoms created in cyberspace.
Managing all the material that comes her way, Manji sets an example of tolerance by quoting or linking every kind of criticism of her work, from the Palestine Solidarity Review's claim that she's a lying imperialist through a correspondent's regret that Idi Amin didn't kill her and her family to The Economist's friendly but condescending notice ("struggling to get out of this hodgepodge of a book, there are some sensible ideas").
She also deals in a calm and tolerant way with remarks many would consider outrageous, like a message from Pakistan: "You are a courageous lady. Keep telling the truth and please try to change your sexual orientation." When people say she shouldn't mention she's a lesbian because it's unrelated to her argument, she replies that she includes pluralism among her goals; Muslims must acknowledge the existence of gays and lesbians.
Those writing to her reveal that remarkable kinds of pluralism already exist among some Muslims. From London a Hindu writes that he and his Sunni Muslim wife are loving her book: "We live in the same funny, infuriating, insane world as you." A Muslim woman (self-described as Anglo-Polish, pale and freckled) sends from France a defence of her right to wear hijab and adds that her live-in boyfriend, a Roman Catholic, supports her.
Anyone trying to understand the movement of ideas and feelings in this era could do worse than study Manji's career. No one can know whether she will have the effect on history that her admirers hope for; religions rarely change that fast. But it's already clear that she embodies and illustrates the special nature of the historic period in which we live. Archimedes, explaining the function of the lever, famously said that if he were given a place to stand and the right kind of lever, he could shift the position of the planet. On the World Wide Web, Irshad Manji has found both a place to stand and a lever capable of tilting the world.
Unclothing Democracy (muslims understand that Islam and democracy are not compatible)
Khilafah . com ^ 23 February 2005
And do not clothe (cover) truth with falsehood, while you know what it is.” (Al-Baqarah:42)
One would be forgiven into believing that the amount of times that George Bush referred to democracy in his inaugural speech for his second term as US President that he actually believed in it.
It is not that democracy has any real substance, it never really did. In history, nations and their philosophers who sought to bring life to it only ended up discarding it or spending the rest of their philosophical lives trying to re-engineer it within more philosophical constraints.
Meanwhile, the modern day western politicians and capitalists have been thriving upon it, seducing the world’s states to adopt democracy as the only way to become progressive and civilized. Such is the dominance and influence of western political philosophy over the mind-set of academics, politicians, nations and people – it is as if one would be considered a heretic to even suggest an alternative or to even challenge the validity and application of democracy….and at least be popularly labelled as a fundamentalist, extremist and averse to world peace.
This stranglehold, not surprisingly, today stills deals an unfortunate blow for many leading Islamic thinkers, academics and scholars – who – in their sincere attempts to preserve Islam have made the grave error of wanting to present Islam as not simply ‘democractic’, but the actual source of democracy.
Recently, whilst, Sheikh al-Qardawi on his regular slot on Al-Jazeera was trying hard to defend ‘Islamic democracy’ against a tirade of Muslim callers at pains to point out their fundamental incompatibility – an article printed on-line by ArabNews entitled ‘Muslims and Democracy’ (21/02/05) referred to New York University professor, Noah Feldman, a theorist of Islamic democracy, who observed in his book, ‘After Jihad’, “that the caliphs never had absolute authority...the historical roots (for democracy) are there for modern Muslims who want to draw on the historical narrative”.
Without doubt, the rise of political Islam has been a key cause for the exponential rise in the discussions, conferences, papers, policies to equate Islam with democracy. The guardians of the bastion of ‘western capitalism’ have not only begun to see their own people increasingly beginning to reject the western values, and at least see the open hypocrisies of their western governments, but they have witnessed their worst fear, a global rise in political Islam that challenges the very existence of capitalism, its values and exposes the continuation of imperialist policies around the world, particularly in the Muslim world with the aid of puppet regimes.
To this end, Muslims must be like a cog in this Islamic political wheel. Indeed Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam) said, “The wheels of Islam are turning, so turn with it.”
The Muslims must present the truth as truth and the falsehood as falsehood. The Muslims must not cower in intellectual defeat from the current dominant western political climate of words, values and indeed actions…seeking reconciliation, where there is none and attempt to mould Islam by words and meanings to make it more palatable for western political consumption, though such words and their meanings are alien to Islamic political philosophy and fundamentally contradict the Islamic creed. Indeed Allah (Subhanahu wa ta’ala) says (in the translation of the meaning),
æóáÇó ÊóáúÈöÓõæÇú ÇáúÍóÞøó ÈöÇáúÈóÇØöáö æóÊóßúÊõãõæÇú ÇáúÍóÞøó æóÃóäÊõãú ÊóÚúáóãõæäó
“And do not clothe (cover) truth with falsehood, while you know what it is.” (Al-Baqarah:42)
íóÇ ÃóíøõåóÇ ÇáøóÐöíäó ÂãóäõæÇú áÇó ÊóÞõæáõæÇú ÑóÇÚöäóÇ æóÞõæáõæÇú ÇäÙõÑúäóÇ æóÇÓúãóÚõæÇ úæóáöáßóÇÝöÑöíäó ÚóÐóÇÈñ Ãóáöíãñ
“O you who believe, do not say ‘Ra’ina, but rather say, ‘Unthurna…” (Al-Baqarah:104).
This ayat was revealed in connection to the incident of where Jews used a word which had a meaning and changed its meaning to insult Muhammad (saw), thereby the Muslims were prohibited from using it.
So where does that leave democracy? The well-known definition of democracy is of a government that is established, ‘of the people, by the people, for the people’. By simply scratching at its surface, it is clear that it democracy no relationship with Islam in its generality or in its detail. The following points should be observed:
Origins Democracy has originated from the mind of man, whereas Islam has originated from Allah (swt).
Basis Democracy has its basis in secularism i.e. the detachment of religion from life, whereas Islam is based upon a comprehensive socio-economic and political structure where 'religion' i.e. the shariyah, is the source of all legislation.
Thoughts Democracy produces thoughts such as the four general freedoms (belief, individual, speech and ownership), people are the source of legislation, and the rule of the majority. Islam by contrast does not allow these absolute freedoms, nor are the people the source of legislation and neither is the Islamic ruling based on majority rule.
Systems Democracy produces systems that incorporate a legislative body (parliament or equivalent), political parties that function to oppose and compete against the government and a time limit for leadership (normally 4-5 years office). The Islamic political structure has no such structures or systems. In Islam there is no legislative body and the Khaleefah is the judicial and executive power. Political parties in Islam exist for one duty that is to account the government and raise the political and intellectual level of the ummah. Political parties are not permitted to compete for power and become an 'opposition party'. Also, the ruler in Islam is the ruler for as long as he implements Islam and as long as he does not contradict the conditions of ruling and neither resigns or dies.
Though in Islam there are elections for the appointment of the leader (Ameer) over the Muslims, one cannot say that elections are what makes Islam and democracy similar, for this is like comparing a dog to a chair and saying that since both have four legs, they are similar. In the west, elections represent the concept that people are sovereign over their affairs and the source of legislation, whereas in Islam elections represent the shariyah rule that the people have the authority and obligation to appoint a ruler to govern them with Islam.
It should be evident therefore that democracy has no relationship with Islam. Indeed the very misery that is being caused in the Muslim world i.e. oppression, suppression of any attempt to account the rulers, denial of rights, nepotism, people political enfranchisement – has been caused and supported by the ‘west’. It is evident that the drive for democracy is only to secure their control over the Muslim world and suppress the rise of political Islam – since their puppets have lost the ability to do this for them and the world has started to talk about the injustices that have the hidden support of western governments.
The intellectual political climate today is ripe for the Muslims to present the Islamic political framework and thoughts and not succumb to the western political philosophy.
NO sharia in Ontario!
From the International Herald Tribune,:
Jurisprudence in Canada, a country that prides itself for its progressive human rights positions, took a hit in December when former Attorney General Marion Boyd released her long-awaited report on the permissibility of Sharia law under the Arbitration Act of the Province of Ontario. To the astonishment of almost everyone involved in the debate, Boyd ruled in favor of the patriarchal religious code that governs the lives of Muslims.
It's hard to fathom what Boyd was thinking when she opened this Pandora's box. In spite of evidence that Sharia law isn't working as it is supposed to in a single country around the world today, she makes 45 recommendations that further complicate the already flawed Arbitration Act she was asked to examine.
The report drew opposition from women's groups and many others across the country. The Canadian Council of Muslim Women said, "Sanctioning the use of religious laws under the Arbitration Act will provide legitimacy to practices that are abhorred by fair-minded Canadians, including Muslim women."....
Boyd's report is now in the hands of the premier of the province, Dalton McGuinty. Throw it out, Mr. Premier, throw it out.
From the Chicago Sun-Times: Saudi government foments religious hatred in U.S.
What is happening in some American mosques, including a few in the Chicago area, is deeply disturbing. In certain Islamic schools, textbooks spit vitriol against Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims: "Be disassociated from the infidels, hate them for their religion." In mosque publications, America is the "Abode of the Infidel." The idea of human and civil rights is heresy. Working women are immoral.
These views are extreme, they promote violence and they are being espoused right under our noses. We knew this was happening in France, Germany and England but we didn't know the extent of the problem here. It is not happening in all mosques or Islamic schools, by any means, but in those select ones funded by the Saudi government to disseminate the fanatic Wahhabi-style Islam that has its demagogic roots in Saudi Arabia.
The Center for Religious Freedom
"The Saudi textbooks and documents spread throughout American mosques preach a Nazi-like hatred for Jews, treat the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion as historical fact, and avow that the Muslim's duty is to eliminate the state of Israel," writes Nina Shea, the Center's director. In addition, they "instill contempt for America because the United States is ruled by legislated civil law rather than by totalitarian Wahhabi-style Islamic law." Woe to Christians who should be actively hated because they stir up images of crusaders and colonists and because they are "enemies to Allah, his Prophet and believers." Woe to Muslims who advance tolerance and human rights -- they, too, are infidels. Woe to homosexuals or heterosexuals who have sex outside marriage -- it is considered "lawful" to kill them.