Freedom Ain’t Free & Take Our Country Back

VICTORY Is Not Defeat

Bullshit: Ghouse vs Geller–Jihad


Pamela Geller and Michael Ghouse argued about Islam & Jihad on Sean Hannity’s radio show. You can listen to the audio here. The title of this post reflects a phrase used by twice by  Ghouse in this debate.  This debate is in the context of revelation of the fact that John Brennan, nominated to head the CIA, is one of the enemy, a slave of Allah.

Thick accents and rapid speech make this argument hard to follow, but its context and content are extremely important.  Mike is a liar: he asserted that “there is no offensive warfare in Islam”, that Islam only fights defensively.    Pamela exhibits cognitive dissonance: at once demanding that violent imperatives be expunged from the Koran and acknowledging the impossibility of expunging them.

Muslim supremacists are super arrogant, condescendingly assuming us to be so stupid & gullible that their lies will never be fact checked.  With the exception of Risala, which is only available on the web, the books you should be reading are available at Amazon and other book stores.  The internet  makes some of these texts available to those of us who are not sufficiently affluent to accrue large libraries.

The Muslim appointed to head the CIA claims that Jihad is a “legitimate concept”  of self-purification & control in Islam.  Each of the six canonical hadith collections, considered the most authentic by Islamic scholars, has a book of Jihad or expedition.  I invite you to search each of those books and extract from them the ahadith relating to Jihad an-Nafs.  What proportion of those books relate to offensive warfare against infidels and what proportion relate to wrestling with one’s ego?  [Riyad us-salihin, Tirmidhi, al Nisa’i & Ibn Majah are large pdf files that may take some time to load. If you read Riyad & Tirmidhi, you will have most of the bases covered; there is much redundancy..]

Ghouse asserts that Jihad asghar is strictly defensive: he is a liar; I submit proof!   Reliance of the Traveller, cited by Geller in the debate, defines Jihad as war against non-Muslims.  Here is the full quote, with links added for reference.

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. As for the greater jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self (nafs), which is why the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said as he was returning from jihad.

“We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad.”

The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus (def: b7) is such Koranic verses as:

-1- “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);

-2- “Slay them wherever you find them” (Koran 4:89);

-3- “Fight the idolators utterly” (Koran 9:36);

and such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

“I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah”;

and the hadith reported by Muslim,

“To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”Details concerning jihad are found in the accounts of the military expeditions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), including his own martial forays and those on which he dispatched others. The former consist of the ones he personally attended, some twenty-seven (others say twenty-nine) of them. He fought in eight of them, and killed only one person with his noble hand, Ubayy ibn Khalaf, at the battle of Uhud. On the latter expeditions he sent others to fight, himself remaining at Medina, and these were forty-seven in number.)

Islamic law describes the obligation to wage war against passive infidels as communal: fard al kifaya, which lapses with respect to individuals once a sufficient number have responded.  Other obligations, such as Saum & Zakat, are fard Ayn: individually binding.  Jihad only becomes fard Ayn when Dar ul-Islam is invaded or threatened.  I refer doubters, dissenters & deniers to Reliance O9.1.  The obligation to attack passive infidels is described as binding upon Muslims in every year.

Subsequent sections of Chapter 9 inform us that “The caliph makes war on Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians” and “fights all other peoples until they become Muslims. ” I disrespectfully direct doubters, dissenters & deniers: damned fools one and all, to O9.8 & 9.9 for a critical lesson in objective factual reality.

The handbook of Hanifi Fiqh makes it plain with slightly archaic language: war must be carried out continuously, and it is undertaken on Islamic initiative, not in reaction to provocation.  I disrespectfully direct doubters, dissenters & deniers, damned fools one and all, to Hedaya, Volume II, Book IX, Chapter 1, pg. 140 & 141 to obtain a clue.

http://www.archive.org/stream/hedaysorguide00hamigoog#page/n154/mode/1up

  • Text
    •     The destruction of the sword  is incurred by infidels, although they be not the first aggressors, as appears from various passages in the  sacred writings which are generally received this effect.
  • Marginal Note
    • Infidels may be attacked without provocation.

The Sealed Nectar is described As the official biography of the Profit.  I now present to you a portion of its Table of Contents.  Note the frequent occurrence of terms such as battle and invasion.  Islam is so peaceful!  The violence started while the Profit was alive, in his last decade though Ghouse would have you believe that it is bida, inserted long after his death.  Note the extortion letters dictated and dispatched to neighboring Kingdoms prior to several invasions.

[Emphasis added.] [Source: http://www.sunnipath.com/library/Books/B0033P0000.aspx ]

The violence flows from Allah’s Jihad imperatives enshrined in the Koran.  Obtain a clue from Tafsir Ibn Kathir, which explains them.

Have you seen those signs which declare triumphantly that Islam will dominate the world?  Where do Muslims get that idea?  Once again, Ibn Kathir has the answer for us.

We have foolishly allowed an enemy fifth column to invade our territory and infiltrate our government.  It is essentially necessary to expel and exclude Muslims from America and Western Civilization.  We must first strip off the false mantle of religion, exposing Islam as a mercenary & martial predator preying on the human race.  Once exposed and defrocked, Islam can be removed from the penumbra of protection offered by the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, its institutions closed and Allah’s slaves expelled & excluded.

Please do your part by sharing this blog post with as many people as you can hope to influence. Take the second step by signing the International Qur’an Petition, emailing it to your Representative & Senators.

February 10, 2013 Posted by | Islam, Islam Distorted?, Islam Hijacked?, Islam Perverted?, Islam Twisted?, Islamic Reform, Political Correctness | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Awl Pierces Breivik, Skewering Geller, Spencer and Others


Abe Sauer , posted at the Awl, what he obviously thinks is a sharp attack upon  authors, speakers & bloggers who expose the core doctrines of Islam to public scrutiny.  Lets take a closer look.

After years of ratcheted-up rhetoric, it was only a matter of time before some right-winger deduced to take what he saw as the natural next step.

In 1995, President Clinton tried to blame McVeigh’s OKC bombing on Rush Limbaugh.  But Rush never suggested that anyone should blow up a federal office building or otherwise engage in militant rebellion.  The accusation was  a completely unwarranted by facts and logic.   Six years later, LibTards employ the same tired tactic against Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, and others who expose Islam.

“Only a matter of time”: a cause–effect relationship is postulated where none exists.  The rational critics of Islam are neither ordering nor inciting bombings & shooting sprees.  They are publishing relevant facts and logical observations on those facts. If Geller or Spencer had suggested or demanded vigilantism, Sauer would be dancing around the may pole chortling with glee about it. He ain’t because they didn’t.

“Some right winger”: In 1964 it was all about cries of “right wing” & “extremism”.  No logical or factual argument was levied against Goldwater because none was possible.  No logical or factual argument is possible against Geller & Spencer; instead, the LibTards resort to argumentum ad hominem.  Loaded words don’t cut the mustard.

There is often a difference between the apparent target and the real objective. The present case is exemplary. Eventually, Sauer gets down to his real target.

Bachmann has long cozied to anti-Muslim activists, understanding that the passion behind their single-issue support makes noise for candidates. As a presidential candidate, she signed the anti-Sharia pledge, which won her praise with the likes of bloggers like Robert Spencer, author of Jihad Watch, a blog cited numerous times by Breivik as inspirational.

Presidential politics is not incidental to the matter, it is central; this is a direct smear aimed at one of the leading contenders for the ’12 Republican nomination.  How does one grapple with loaded phrases such as  “cozied to” ?  “Anti-Muslim activists” are assumed to be the focus of evil in the modern world, without factual or logical basis for the assumption.  First Sauer smears Geller & spencer, next he associates a presidential aspirent with them to smear her.

“Cited numerous times by Breivik as inspirational”: Breivik obtained information from Spencer’s writings, not inspiration. Inspiration comes from exemplars, not teachers.  It is obvious that Breivik’s inspiration comes from McVeigh’s bomb technology and Muslim terrorists’ numerous shooting attacks.

In his manifesto, Breivik recommended both Geller and Spencer for guidance.

If he was guided by Geller & Spencer, Breivik would have confined his activities to education & lobbying, avoiding violence.  He obtained factual information from them, but not guidance.

Observe the flow of loaded words in this excerpt.

Even more mainstream writers are tied to the populist vilification of Islam. The National Review now regularly partners with the topic, as its reader base longs for more information on the impending threat of America’s Islamification. National Review writer Andrew McCarthy put his name on a book called “Shariah: The Threat to America.”

“Populist vilification”:  the pot calls the kettle black.  As more people become informed of Islam’s core doctrines & practices, the movement grows. It is popular, not populist.  This is not about a contest between the elite and uninformed mobs, it is a contest between the self-anointed   elite deceivers and an increasingly informed segment of the electorate, a segment of which the elite are becoming increasingly afraid.

“Mainstream” is not a term LibTards use to describe The National Review, instead, they would label it “right wing  extremist”.  Andrew McCarthy was a federal prosecutor who built the case against the Sheikh behind the first WTC attack. He found it necessary to study the Qur’an & hadith in building his case.  Because he learned what Shari’ah really is, from the original sources, he is smeared as a populist engaged in vilification of Islam.

Observe how the language is perverted in the next excerpt.

In Tennessee, the law even defines Sharia as “a legal-political-military doctrinal system.” Lawmakers said the bill was necessary to prevent “homegrown terror,” which would be funny today if it were not tragic.

Terrorism is a doctrine and practice of Islam, enshrined in the Qur’an and exemplified by Moe’s sunnah.  Home grown or imported, terrorism is terrorism. As used by the proponents of anti-Shari’ah legislation, terrorism refers to Islamic terrorism.  Breivik is home grown, and a terrorist inspired by his enemy’s example.

Terrorism is a battle tactic: a means of weakening their victims; rendering them incapable of mounting an effective defense.  “Casting terror into the hearts” of disbelievers is sanctified in the Qur’an, particularly in 3:151 & 8:12. Moe and Allah said that they would cast terror. Then, in 33:26 & 59:2, they said that they cast terror and described the results: death, enslavement and dispossession of disbelievers.  Moe said that he was made victorious with terror, in Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220.

Shari’ah is an all encompassing set of rules for the guidance of all Muslims at all times, in all places. It codifies Allah’s imperatives and Moe’s exemplary conduct.

Shari’ah tells Muslims how to purify themselves and pray. it tells them how to bury their dead. Big deal; that harms nobody except the deluded Muslims. It also governs marriage and divorce. it gives the father of a pre-pubescent virgin the right to marry her off without her consent.  Doubters & dissenters should dig into Book M of Reliance of the Traveller and read M3.13.

Shari’ah is supposed to be about family matters, totally innocuous. Is marriage a family matter? Is divorce a family matter?  Reliance of the Traveller, Book N. treats of divorce. In the previous paragraph, I linked to a provision of Shari’ah which permits a father to compel his minor virgin daughter to marry the man of his choice at the time of his choice.  Should pre-pubescent girls be married and divorced?  Knowing that I will not be believed, I present objective evidence.

N9.2

A waiting period is obligatory for a woman divorced after intercourse, whether the husband and wife are prepubescent, have reached puberty, or one has and the other has not.

Intercourse means copulation (def: n7.7).  If the husband was alone with her but did not copulate with her, and then divorced her, there is no waiting period.

Shari’ah provides for the marriage and divorce of girls who have not yet reached puberty.  By the way, divorce is effected by repeating “I divorce you” three times.  LibTards oppose laws barring Shari’ah from our courts and mock us for proposing them.

Shari’ah is all about innocuous matters; prayer, charity, funerals, marriage & divorce.  Yeah, right.  Reliance of the Traveller, Book O treats of “justice”. Its ninth chapter begins with the legal definition of jihad: to wage war against disbelievers.  It also prescribes the “religious obligation” to perform jihad, against disbelievers peacefully minding their own business in their own countries: “meaning upon the Muslims each year”

What does the caliph do about that obligation? “The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians “. “The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim ”  Of course, Shari’ah is innocuous & anodyne, lets enshrine it in our courts.  Yeah, right.

Is there any end to loaded language?

The anti-Muslim sentiment that in its extreme bred Norway’s shooter has only manifested so far in the U.S. in individual assaults and community “incidents”—such as the one in February in Yorba Linda, California, where a Muslim relief organization with perceived ties to terrorism was protested by attendees waving American flags and yelling “terrorist go home” to women and children.

“Anti-Muslim sentiment”  “bred Norway’s shooter”.  None but his progenitors bred  Breivik; actions are not dictated by sentiments. Knowing that Islam is a predatory institution which poses a clear, proximate and persistent existential threat is not a license to kill.  “Perceived ties to terrorism”; ” 1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month’s journey. ”  “I have been made victorious with terror “. Who tied Islam to terrorism?

Yes, it gets worse, much worse. Observe the egregious hypocrisy exemplified in the final excerpt.

Lost on nobody, in condemning the acts, right wing radicals in the U.S. and Norway sounded exactly like the Muslim community they so suspect—”We never advocate violence” is parroted by many, who then blame violent acts on lone, misled members of their ideology. (Familiar story.)

Violence: genocidal global conquest using terror as a battle tactic is an intrinsic part of the core of Islam, exemplified by its founder.  LibTards and other ignorant fools have not read the Noble Qur’an, specifically Surahs Al-Anfal & At-Taubah, which contain the jihad imperatives.  The exemplification is contained in the Jihad & Expedition books of Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu Dawud  & Malik’s Muwatta.

According to Allah, believers sell their lives & wealth to him, fight in his cause, killing others and being killed; in return for which he admits them to Paradise.   Allah threatens those who refuse to join the jihad with painful torment. Allah promises victory to those who fight, along with admission to Paradise. Allah promises a reward for any step taken to injure or enrage disbelievers.

Kindly find the New Testament functional equivalents of 3:151, 8:12, 57, 60, 65, 67, 9:5, 29, 30, 111, 120, 123, 33:26, 27, 47:4, 49:15 59:2, 15 & Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220. I mean explicit commands, threats, promises & boasts, not parables.  Show me or quit trying to deflect criticism of Islam with argumentum Tu-Quoque.

July 27, 2011 Posted by | Islam, Jerks, Jihad, Political Correctness | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: