Freedom Ain’t Free & Take Our Country Back

VICTORY Is Not Defeat

CAIR vs. Pompaeo: Both are Wrong


Rep. Mike Pompeo (R. Kan.) spent nearly five minutes calling on Islamic
leaders to denounce terrorism.  I first learned of his speech from
Bare Naked Islam.  As predicted by BNI, CAIR
reacted with a demand for apology.

The video clip of the speech is embedded below,
followed  by my transcription of the remarks.  I have placed
superscripts in the text, linked to a list of comments.  To read a
comment, click its superscript. To return to the transcript, use your
backspace key.

Its been just under two months since
the attacks in Boston and in those intervening weeks, the silence of
Muslim leaders has been deafening.  And that is sad, but perhaps
most importantly it’s dangerous1.


There have now been at least a dozen attacks by
Muslim terrorists on U.S. soil since Ramzi Yousef‘s
parked rental van exploded  in the basement of the World Trade
Center on February 26 of 1993.  Some have caused death and injury
such as the 9-11 attacks in 2001 and Nidal Hasan’s mass shooting at
Fort Hood Texas.  Other attacks such as Faisal Shahzad’s fizzled Times
Square bombing or the unsuccessful underwear bombing of a flight were
thwarted or aborted.


Yet  failed or not, all of these attacks
successful in scaring Americans; successful in reducing our freedom, in
the most freedom loving nation on earth. Successful in slowing our
economy and successful in demonstrating that a free and open society
can potentially be vulnerable.  They were, in the former Attorney
General Mike Mukasey’s
words, crimes2
that are none the less meant to send a terrorist message.


When the most devastating terrorist attacks on
America in the last twenty years come overwhelmingly from people of a
single faith3
and are performed in the name of that faith4, a special
obligation falls on those who are the leaders of that faith.
Instead of responding, silence has made these Islamic leaders across
America potentially complicit5 in these acts and, more
still, those that may well follow.


If a religion claims6 to be one of peace, Mr.
Speaker, it’s leaders must reject violence that is perpetrated in its
name.  Some clerics today suggest that modern Jihad is non-violent
and is only about making oneself a better Muslim.  Perhaps that’s
for moderate Muslims, but  extremists seek to revive the era
when most Islamic scholars8 understood Jihad to be
holy war.


Mr. Speaker, for decades Middle Eastern  oil money have [sic]
this more extreme violent interpretation9 in mosques around the
world.  Less than two months after the 9-11 atrocities an
Egyptian Brotherhood preacher who is probably the most influential
Sunni cleric today, declared suicide bombing to be legitimate. He said
“these are historic heroic commando and martyrdom attacks and should
not be called suicide.”.


So, what is it that these Islamic leaders must
say?  First, that there is never any justification for
No political goal legitimizes terrorism11.
Terrorism is
never excusable as ‘resistance’12.  Imams must say
that terrorist actions- killing and maiming
[unintelligible- may be: solely is wrong].


They must also publicly and repeatedly
denounce radical14
clerics who seek to justify terrorism.


There is a battle of interpretation15
Islam, its not enough to deny responsibility saying one’s own
interpretation doesn’t support terrorism. Moderate16
Imams must strive to ensure that no Muslim finds solace for terrorism17
in the Qur’an.  They must cite the Qur’an as evidence that the
murder of innocents18 is not permitted
by good believing19
Muslims and must immediately refute all claims to the contrary.


Finally, Muslim leaders must say that there is no
room for militant Islamism in the religion of peace20.
These statements must be made frequently, publicly and in the
mosques.  Yes, in the mosques and in the madrassahs where many
learn their Islamic religion.


You know we have to call evil by its name in
to stamp it out21.
Downplaying  atrocities and rampages assures more of them.
Every Muslim leader must unequivocally proclaim  that terror
committed in the name of Islam violates the core tenets of the prophet
and they must  do so repeatedly, period.


My own faith has occasionally been hijacked in
name of violence and cruelty including in Kansas my home state by Fred
Phelps and his Westborough Baptist Church.    In
response, hundreds of protestant ministers preached that Mr. Phelps’
actions violate the most fundamental Christian traditions and denounced
he [sic] and his church’s evil acts. Pope John Paul II similarly
apologized for the Catholic Church’s failure to do more to speak out
against the evils of Nazism and  to protect Jews from the


Just as these religious leaders have called up
who have acted cruelly and brutally in the name of their faith, so too
must Muslim religious leaders refute terrorist theology23.


We are now two decades into Islamic radicals
attacking Americans on U.S. soil; I know that not every Muslim supports
these actions. Dr. Zuhdi Jasser of the American Islamic Forum for
Democracy  has spoken out in a clear and consistent way so has
Zainab Al-Suwai of the American Islamic Congress but the  silence
in the face of extremism coming from the best funded Islamic advocacy
organizations and many mosques across America is absolutely
deafening.  It casts doubt upon the commitment to peace by
adherents of the Muslim faith. This is utterly unacceptable, it
is  dangerous24;
it must end. I yield back, Mr. Speaker.

Islamic condemnation of terrorism:

Mustafa Mashhur, General Guide,
Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt; Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami
Pakistan, Pakistan; Muti Rahman Nizami, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami
Bangladesh, Bangladesh; Shaykh Ahmad Yassin, Founder, Islamic
Resistance Movement (Hamas), Palestine; Rashid Ghannoushi, President,
Nahda Renaissance Movement, Tunisia; Fazil Nour, President, PAS – Parti
Islam SeMalaysia, Malaysia; and 40 other Muslim scholars and

We condemn, in the strongest terms, the
incidents, which are against all human and Islamic norms. This is
grounded in the Noble Laws of Islam which forbid all forms of attacks
on innocents.


Islamic condemnations of terrorism are the worst sort of malignant
malarkey. Islam can  not condemn its own sacraments! I have dealt
with this crap before, in detail. Some links to the Qur’an, hadith
& tafsir may be broken, but the quotes are still accurate.


  • The OIC Remembers the Victims of 9/11 on its 10th
    09/17/11 The OIC Remembers the Victims of 9/11 on
    its 10th Anniversary
    .  The
    OIC did not condemn the
    Accursed Abomination, it celebrated it, smirking & snickering at
    your gullibility.  Read between the
      lines and between the words,
    scratch the surface and delve into Islam’s canon to discover the
    unpleasant objective factual reality.

    The  OIC’s malignant
    pretense is reproduced below with superscripts linked to my revelatory
    evidence and comments. Click any

    superscript to read the comment,
    then use your Backspace key to return to your place in the septic spew.

  • “Condemn in the
    Strongest Possible Terms”
    condemn the attack on innocent civilians in southern Israel in the
    strongest possible terms as well as ongoing rocket fire from
    Gaza,”  Do you have the fortitude to view a cleaned up version of
    the strongest possible terms, terms the Traitors won’t use? 
  • Terrorism Fatwa: Feces
    03/04/10  A  Sufi Sheikh living in Britain issued a 88
    page summary of a 600 page fatwa supposedly ruling terrorism &
    suicide bombing harram.  I exposed his malignant malarkey.


  1. Silence is less dangerous and
    threatening than false assurances of passivity.  False assertions
    that Islam is the “religion of peace”  lull some listeners into
    inattention and apathy.
  2. Islamic terrorist attacks are acts of war,
    not civil criminal offenses. The crime-investigation-trial-punishment
    model does not fit; the war-victory model is required. Because Muslims
    are motivated to terrorism by Allah’s imperatives,
    threat & promise, Muslims will never cease from attacking
    until they become extinct. Extinction is victory; anything less is
  3. Muslims engage in terrorism because
    is Allah’s battle tactic: to so
    brutalize victims

    that those “behind them” will “learn a lesson”; so that they will be
    terrorized and thereby rendered unable to mount an effective
    resistance.  The use of terms such as “fearsome example” &
    “strike terror” used in the parallel translations of Surah Al-Anfal 57
    will afford a clue to the intelligent reader.
  4. Islamic terrorism is performed in
    the name of Allah:  “Allah hu akbar”: the takbir which is
    exclaimed when the attack is commenced, attaches the brand.  They
    shouted the takbir when they slit the throats of the flight crews; just
    as they shout it when sacrificing the hadi at the eids.  They
    sacrificed their victims to Satan.
  5. Imams are not complicit in terrorism
    because they fail to condemn it, they are complicit because they teach,
    preach and encourage it; they are Muslims–believers. Look up the
    definition of believers in the Qur’an!  9:111
    , 49:15.
  6. Islam does not mean peace, it means
    submission.  ‘You will submit or we will make peace by waging war
    and exterminate you. ‘  Imams can not reject anything that is part
    of the Qur’an or part of Moe’s Sunnah. I disrespectfully direct
    doubters, dissenters & deniers, damn fools one and all, to The Reliance of the Traveller, Book O8.7.
    those Islamic leaders to denounce attacks against Jews & Israel and
    observe their reaction.  What is the difference between the many
    bus and restaurant bombings in Israel and the Boston bombing?

       Open the Qur’an to 2:85,
    and read it repeatedly until you understand it. Are Muslims
    allowed to
    pick what they like from that book and reject the rest?  Islam is
    an all or nothing, bundled package deal; take it or leave it. Study
    what does it command Muslims to do? Does it have geographic
    Does it have an expiration date? What the Hell does it mean?
    9&tAyahNo= 29&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0


  7. The Qur’an does not define
    Go to Corpus Qur’an and look up the Arabic terms used for it,
    the third word in 2:216..  Hilali & Khan defined Jihad in a
    footnote to 2:190.  The legal definition is given in The Reliance of the Traveller O9.0.  Is it
    Jihad an-Nafs?  Now, Smart Ass, explain to me exactly how a
    Mujihideen gets

    in Jihad an-Nafs!!!  And, being so God blessed smart, explain in
    another comment exactly what Moe meant when he said he would love nothing better than multiple martyrdom!!

    What did Jihad mean to Moe? What did he
    about it?  Why does each of the six canonical hadith collections
    have a “Book of Jihad”?

  8. Islam is static, defined in
    the immutable
    Qur’an and exemplified by Moe’s Sunnah.  It is and always will be
    what it was when Moe died.
  9. There is only one authentic
    interpretation of the Qur’an: Moe’s.  Read his Sunnah!  He
    said that he was ordered to fight with men. He fought. He dictated extortion letters and dispatched them to
    neighboring kings by private courier.
  10. Allah sanctified terrorism.
    He said that he would cast terror into the hearts of disbelievers. 3:151,
    He said that he did cast terror: 33:26, 59:2. He commanded Muslims to take actions
    designed to strike terror into the hearts of disbelievers:  8:57,
  11. Moe’s tactical objective was to keep
    the loot flowing
    . His strategic objective was global domination;
    read 8:39
    with particular attention to the compound terminal conditions stated
    therein.  What part of  “altogether and everywhere” or”in the
    entire world” do you not understand?
  12. Of course, resistance is their
    rationalization for terrorism in the reconquest of Israel.
    Demanding that their sophistry will accomplish nothing.
  13. Moe is considered by Muslims to be the perfect
    role model
    , to be emulated by all Muslims, in all places; at all
    times. Moe was a terrorist, by his own testimony:  Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331, 4.52.220. To see examples of Moe’s terrorism, read
    the oldest extant biography: The Life of Muhammad;
    page 368, page 523 and page 676.   Rep. Pompeo demanded that Imams
    renounce Moe’s terrorism, which would be, under Shari’ah, a death
    penalty offense.
  14. When applied to Islam and
    Muslims, terms such as “radical” & “extremist” are superfluous.
    Normative Islam, as Moe preached and exemplified it, is genocidal,
    terrorist & imperialist.  Believers are
    only those who “fight in Allah’s cause”: 9:111,
    The rest are hypocrites, whose Islam does not reach beyond their throats.
  15. Moe interpreted Allah’s word with
    every word he spoke and act he performed. Refer to Sahih Bukhari’s books of Jihad, Khumus &
    Expedition and to Guillaume’s  The Life of Muhammad.
  16. If they are moderate,
    they ain’t Muslims; they are hypocrites,
    to be killed
    and gathered
    together with us into Hell
  17. Yes, of course, so nobody can
    find these:  3:151, 8:12,39,57,60,65,67,
    9:5,29,38, 39,111,120,123,
    Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220.  What part of “None
    can change His Words
    .” does the Congressman not comprehend?
  18. Define innocent!
    Extract a definition of innocent from an Imam, Alim or Qadi.  Then
    plant your foot in his butt because he is
    a damned liar
    . Killing believers is expressly
    . 5:32
    does not mean what you think it does. Muslims will not cite 5:33
    because it revels the awful truth: only Muslims are
    !  Non-believers are not innocent, they are guilty
    of rebellion: “waging war against Allah and his Messenger”. Tafsir Ibn Kathir
    gives us the definition of “wage war” as an inclusive set, any member
    of which is sufficient to condemn us. That set includes “disbelief”

    The blood and property of kuffar are not sacred to Muslims and kuffar have no human
    rights until they become Muslims.  The Jizya is imposed in lieu of destruction and a species of punishment for infidelity.

  19. Believing Muslims wage war
    against us. Refer to the ayat linked in #14.  Imams can not refute
    objective factual reality.
  20. Only Allah has the right to be worshiped“. Only Allah and his Messenger have the right to
    legislate and rule
    . Non-Islamic governments are tyrannical and must be conquered. The original religion of Islam is Jihad!
  21. Its name is ISLAM!
    Islam is intrinsically evil, by design.  Its mission is mercenary and its method is
  22. Repetition does not convert a
    lie into truth, even if it is believed and accepted as truth, it
    remains a falsehood.
  23. Muslim leaders must
    refute Islam. Yeah, right.
  24. Painting over a skunk’s stripes or
    amputating a rattle snake’s rattles would be a dangerous act: removing
    warning signs.  Urging Muslims to misrepresent their war cult as
    something else is equally irrational and dangerous.

June 14, 2013 Posted by | CAIR, Islam, Political Correctness, Terrorists | , , , , | 2 Comments

Exposing Islam Through CAIR’s Lies about the Boston Marathon Bombing

Bare Naked Islam posted and commented on a CAIR OPED, from which I extracted
a crucial phrase and did a search. The text turned up on CAIR’s
Facebook page.  I have reproduced it below, highlighting some
important words, phrases & clauses which I will dissect below
the OPED.

Nihad Awad, like all lying Muslims, assumes that we
are stupid, illiterate and gullible. With a smug smirk he plays
semantic games, cherry picks scripture and misrepresents the damnable
doctrines & practices of Islam.

The bothers who bombed the Boston Marathon were
Muslims. The surviving bomber said that they were motivated by
religion.  What component of Islam would motivate anyone to maim
and mutilate as many people as possible?   After reading this
post, you will be able to answer that question.

[Qur’an & hadith links added. Superscripts are linked to my

#CAIR ISLAM-OPED: A Word of Truth on
Jihad and Islam

By Nihad Awad

There is a growing attempt by some commentators to label the recent
bombings in Boston as “jihad” and to blame the deadly blasts on a
concept they call “radical Islam.”

I call “radical Islam” non-existent because radicalism or extremism
not permissible in Islam
. Islam prohibits extremism2 and an
part of the faith is moderation. A more accurate term
might be
“Al-Qaeda ideology

The Quran, Islam’s foundational holy text, states clearly: “We made you
to be a community of
the middle way
, so that (with the example of your
lives) you might bear witness to the truth before all mankind.” (Quran,

The Quran also states: “O you who believe! Stand out firmly for
justice, as witnesses to God, even against yourselves, or your parents,
or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for God can best
protect both.” (Quran, 4:35)

There is no such thing as radical Islam4,
but there are radical

– just as there are extremists
of every other religion
6 or belief.

But there’s a huge difference between the existence of radical
individuals and a religion
that permits radical beliefs or actions
These radicals
certainly do not represent the teachings of Islam or the
behavior or beliefs of mainstream Muslims7.

In one Islamic tradition, called a “hadith,” the Prophet Muhammad said:
“Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion
will not be able to continue in that way. So you should not be
extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good
tidings that you will be rewarded; and gain strength by worshipping in
the mornings, the nights.” [Bukhari 1.2.38]

In recent years, we have seen the term “jihadist” come to be used as if
it means a person who kills people out of a religious motivation8,
this is terribly inaccurate.

does not mean “holy war.” 9
jihad means to “struggle,”
strive and exert effort. It is a central and broad Islamic concept that
includes struggle against evil inclinations within oneself, struggle to
improve the quality of life in society, struggle
in the battlefield for
10(e.g., – having a standing army
for national
11), or
against tyranny or oppression

For the sake of accuracy and to avoid spreading false information about
a major world religion, extremist
Muslims who commit crimes
should be
called criminals or, in cases where the definition fits, terrorists.
should not legitimize
their actions by calling them jihadists, even if
they attempt to call themselves by that label and seek a false
religious connection or justification. These criminals should not be
honored with a religious label.

Islam allows legitimate self defense, but prohibits
the killing of
innocent people
12, even in times of war or
conflict. Aggression
is never

“And fight in the cause of God those who

, and do
commit aggression
. Indeed God does not love those who are
(The Quran, 2:190).

So yes, there are some Muslims who have extreme views, or mental
illnesses, or political grievances, or a host of other reasons that
lead them to kill people, and this is not only a tragedy and a crime
but an egregious
violation of the principles of Islam

The difference between Muslim killers and killers from other
backgrounds is often the way they are described by the media and viewed
by the public: with Muslim killers, the
crime is almost always
attributed to their religion

Because the word “terrorism”15 is used almost exclusively to
crimes whose perpetrators are Muslims, you might think that a majority
of mass killings and acts of terrorism in the U.S. were committed by
Muslims. But when we look at the facts, that perception does not hold

* According to FBI statistics, of all terrorist attacks on U.S. soil
from 1980 to 2005, six percent were committed by Muslims. (Source:

* According to a study from the Combating Terrorism Center at the US
Military Academy, since 2011, politically-motivated attacks by Muslim
Americans have killed 33 people, while terrorist attacks by white
supremacists and other right-wing extremists killed more than 200
people. (Source:

* According to a report by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and
Homeland Security, “66 Americans were killed in mass shootings by
non-Muslims in 2012 alone, twice as many fatalities as from
Muslim-American terrorism in all 11 years since 9/11.” (Source:

In a well-known hadith, a man asked the Prophet Muhammad, “What is the
?” to which Prophet Muhammad replied, “Speaking a word of
truth to an oppressive ruler.”

The constant misuse of terms like “jihad” and “radical Islam” is
offensive to the truth and is counterproductive to our nation’s efforts
to achieve security.

It is time we all speak a word of truth by applying the proper labels
to criminals and their acts of violence, no matter their religious

[Nihad Awad is national executive director for the Washington-based
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest
Muslim civil liberties group. He may be contacted at: ]


ISLAM-OPED is a syndication service of the Council on American-Islamic
Relations (CAIR) designed to offer an American Muslim perspective on
current political, social and religious issues. ISLAM-OPED commentaries
are offered free-of-charge to one media outlet in each market area.
Permission for publication will be granted on a first-come-first-served

Please consider the following commentary for publication.

CONTACT: CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper,
202-744-7726, E-Mail:


radical Islam

To be effective, a professional liar will include
some truth in his spew of malignant malarkey.  It is true that
there is no such thing as radical Islam.  Islam is what it is; its
standard was set 1400 years ago by Moe’s recitation, which is recorded
in the Qur’an and exemplified by Moe’s sunnah
& SiraImperialism, terrorism, rape & pillage are
intrinsic sacraments of Islam
, not bida introduced by “extremists
or radicals”

I disrespectfully direct doubters, deniers &
dissenters to Craig Winn’s The Prophet of Doom,
which combines the most significant parts of the Qur’an, hadith, Sira
& Tahrik in 1000 pages supplying the context & chronology
lacking in the Qur’an.  If you lack the patience for 1000 pages,
read the In
His Own Words Appendix
for the highlights.


Normative Islam is extreme; it encompasses global imperialism, terrorism, genocide, rape and
.  Those intrinsic sacraments of Islam are not
prohibited. Transgressing the limits is prohibited.

The limits are set in Sahih Muslim 19.4294,
in which Moe commands his generals to make holy war. What would profane
it? Embezzling spoils, killing children, mutilating bodies and fleeing
from battle are the limits which must not be transgressed; which would
profane Islam’s holy war.

Al-Qaeda ideology

Al-Qaeda is a subset of the Muslim Brotherhood,
which is a subset of Islam; what is their ideology?  Islamic
is most clearly stated in the motto of the Brotherhood,
which is copied in the Charter of HAMAS.

is its target, the Prophet is its model, the Koran its constitution:
Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of
its wishes
  • Only Allah has the right to be worshiped.  3:2
  • Only Allah has the right to legislate & rule, which he
    delegated to Moe and his successors. 33:36
  • Jihad is ordained for Muslims. 2:216
  • War must be waged against pagans until only Allah is worshiped on
    a global scale. 8:39
  • War must be waged against Jews & Christians until they are
    subjugated & extorted. 9:29
  • The blood and property of infidels is not sacred to Muslims.
    Infidels only acquire human rights when they become Muslims. Bukhari 1.8.387
  • The basic penalty for “waging war against Allah and his
    Messenger” is execution. 5:33

radical Islam

This entry is redundant: see .Extremism.

radical Muslims

The correct expression is: Believers.
Believers are defined in 8:1-5.  The meaning will not be clear until
you look up the context of “spend” and “go out” at .  The
definition in 9:111 is more explicit: they sold their souls to
Allah for admission to his celestial bordello so they fight in his cause,
killing and being killed.  In 49:15, they are described as only those who fight
in Allah’s cause.

extremists of other

Tim McVeigh was a lapsed Catholic who acted out of
political, not religious motives.  Christians who shoot
abortionists or bomb abortion mills, like McVeigh, act in contravention
of Christ’s teaching and example.  Muslims engaged in terrorism
act in obedience to Allah and emulation of Moe.

mainstream Muslims

Was Moe, the founder of Islam, a mainstream
Muslim?  If not, then who is?  Moe revealed the Qur’an, which
enshrines the doctrines of Islam; are those doctrines not mainstream?
If Moe’s sunnah does not define mainstream Muslims, what does?

They said that when the apostle heard
about Abu Sufyan

coming from Syria, he summoned the Muslims and said, ‘This is the

Quraysh caravan containing their property. Go out to attack it, perhaps

God will give it as a prey.’


‘Abdullah b. Abu Bakr told me that one
of Aslam told him that B. Sahm

of Aslam came to the apostle and complained that they had fought and got

nothing and found nothing with the apostle which he could give them. He

said: ~O God, You know their
condition and that they have no strength,

and that I have nothing to give
them, so conquer for them the wealthiest

of the enemy’s forts with the
richest food.’ The following day God conquered

the fort of al-Sa’b b. Mu’adh
which contained the richest food in Khaybar.

Moe was a predator. Predation is part of mainstream
Islam.  In Tabari, Vol. VIII, page 122, we find the sad story of
the death of Kinanah, chieftan of Khaibar Oasis.

Then he asked him for the rest of it.
Kinanah refused to surrender

it; so the Messenger of God
gave orders concerning him to al-Zubayr

b. al-‘Awwam, saying, “Torture
him until you root out what he has.”

Al-Zubayr kept twirling his
fires tick in his breas
t 510 until

Kinanah almost expired; then the Messenger of God gave him to

Muhammad b. Maslamah, who beheaded him to avenge his brother

Mahmud b. Maslamah.


religious motivation

If your Lord issued divine imperatives commanding
you to wage war against pagans and ‘people of the book‘ and if he threatened you with eternal damnation if you refused to wage war and promised you admission to his celestial bordello
if you join the jihad, that would be religious motivation to engage in
offensive conquest.  What if your Lord promised you extra credit
towards an upgrade in your seat in his celestial bordello for any step you take to injure or enrage disbelievers;
would that be religious motivation?

Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and his co-conspirators filed
with the military tribunal a signed response to the

“nine accusations” against them. In their document, they spill the

Many thanks to God, for his kind gesture, and choosing us to
perform the act of

Jihad for his cause and to defend Islam and Muslims.

Therefore, killing you and
fighting you, destroying you and terrorizing you,

responding back to your
attacks, are all considered to be great legitimate duty in our religion

actions are our offerings to
. In addition, it is the imposed reality on Muslims in
Palestine, Lebanon,

Afghanistan, Iraq, in the land of the two holy sites [Mecca and Medina,
Saudi Arabia], and in the rest ofthe

world, where Muslims are suffering from your brutality, terrorism,
killing ofthe innocent, and

occupying their lands and their holy sites. Nevertheless, it would have been the greatest
religious duty

to fight you over your
. However, today, we fight you over defending Muslims,
their land, their

holy sites,and their religion as a whole.

That is neither radicalism nor extremism; that is normative Islam, as
Moe preached and practiced it.  That is motivated by Allah’s
imperatives, threat and promise. Those are religious motivations.


Jihad means extreme exertion and striving.  It
is not defined in the Qur’an, but it is defined in a footnote by Hilali
& Khan in their translation of 2:190.

[1] (V.2:190) Al-Jihâd (holy
fighting) in Allâh’s Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is
given the utmost importance in Islâm and is one of its pillar (on which
it stands). By 
Jihâd Islâm
is established, Allâh’s Word is made superior, (His Word being 

ilaha illallâh 
means none has the right to be worshipped but Allâh), and His Religion
(Islâm) is propagated. By abandoning 
Jihâd (may
Allâh protect us from that) Islâm is destroyed and the Muslims fall
into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are
stolen, their rule and authority vanish. 
Jihâd is
an obligatory duty in Islâm on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape
from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfil this
duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.

‘Abdullâh bin Mas‘ûd رضي الله عنه: I asked Allâh’s Messenger صلى الله
عليه وسلم “O Allâh’s Messenger! What is the best deed?” He replied, “To
offer the 
Salât (prayers)
at their early fixed stated times.” I asked, “What is next in
goodness?” He replied, “To be good and dutiful to your parents.” I
further asked, “What is next in goodness?” He replied, “To participate
in Jihâd in Allâh’s Cause.” I did not ask Allâh’s Messenger صلى الله
عليه وسلم anymore and if I had asked him more, he would have told me
more. (
Hadîth No.41).

holy fighting in Allah’s cause

What makes fighting holy?  Intentions:
intending to please Allah.  What profanes it? Embezzling spoils, killing
children, mutilating corpses and fleeing from battle.

What is Allah’s cause? To make Islam dominate the world.

legal definition

The Reliance of the Traveller, the Shafi’i school’s
handbook of Shari’ah, certified as accurate and authentic by the
Sheikhs of Al-Zzhar University, defines Jihad in Book O9.0.

(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

-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.)


“Jihad is ordained for you” in 2:216 Allah says
Jihad, not defense.  When Moe was weak, with no army, Allah
prescribed patience and forbearance. When he moved to Medina and built
a small force, Allah prescribed defensive and retaliatory fighting in 22:39.
When his army grew strong enough to raid camel caravans and small
settlements, Allah revealed the primary Jihad imperatives in Surahs
Al-anfal & At-Taubah.

The Reliance of the Traveller, in Book O9.1,
sets forth two types of jihad: offensive and defensive. The former is
required in every year, and if not performed when possible, all who
know of the obligation are in sin.  The obligation is communal,
binding on all eligible male Muslims until a su8fficient number has
reported to the front.

O9.1: The Obligatory Character of Jihad

is a communal obligation (def: c3.2).  When enough people perform
it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon
(O: the evidence for which is the Prophet’s saying
(Allah bless him and give him peace),

“He who provides the equipment for a soldier in
jihad has himself performed jihad,”

and Allah Most High having said:

“Those of the believers who are unhurt but sit
behind are not equal to those who fight in Allah’s path with their
property and lives. Allah has preferred those who fight with their
property and lives a whole degree above those who sit behind. And to
each, Allah has promised great good” (Koran 4:95).

If none
of those concerned perform jihad, and it does not happen at all, then
everyone who is aware that it is obligatory is guilty of sin, if there
was a possibility of having performed it.
In the time of the
Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) jihad was a communal
obligation after his emigration (hijra) to Medina. As for subsequent
times, there are two possible states in respect to non-Muslims.

first is when they are in their own countries, in which case jihad
(def: o9.8) is a communal obligation, and this is what our author is
speaking of when he says, “Jihad is a communal obligation,” meaning upon the Muslims each year

The second state is when non-Muslims invade a
Muslim country or near to one, in which case jihad is personally
obligatory (def: c3.2) upon the inhabitants of that country, who must
repel the non-Muslims with whatever they can).

Reliance O25.9
outlines the duties of subordinate rulers; one of them holds a clue for
you: to wage war against neighboring infidels and distribute the
spoils.  .

The Hanifi school adds some crucial clarity.

Al-Hedaya Volume II, Book IX, Chapter 1, Page 141

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.

standing army

The purpose of Islam’s army is offensive, not
defensive: to strike terror into the hearts of intended victims.
Note the expressions used in multiple translations of 8:60.

Islam prohibits
killing innocent

SnakeShit!!! 5:22
does no such thing!  Words have meanings, but Muslims have their
own. They play a vicious semantic game which must be exposed.

5:32. Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if
anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread
mischief in the land – it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if
anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all
mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear
proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them
continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly
and exceeding beyond the limits set by Allâh by committing the major
sins) in the land!.

Note the highlighted escape clause.  The prohibition is in 4:92.

4:92. It
is not for a believer to kill a believer

except (that it be) by mistake, and whosoever kills a believer by
mistake, (it is ordained that) he must set free a believing slave and a
compensation (blood money, i.e Diya) be given to the deceased’s family,
unless they remit it. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with
you and he was a believer; the freeing of a believing slave (is
prescribed), and if he belonged to a people with whom you have a treaty
of mutual alliance, compensation (blood money – Diya) must be paid to
his family, and a believing slave must be freed. And whoso finds this
(the penance of freeing a slave) beyond his means, he must fast for two
consecutive months in order to seek repentance from Allâh. And Allâh is
Ever All­Knowing, All­Wise.

4:93. And whoever kills a believer
intentionally, his recompense is Hell
to abide therein, and the
Wrath and the Curse of Allâh are upon him, and a great punishment is
prepared for him.

Who is innocent? Only Muslims!!!  If you ain’t
Muslim, you are a rebel against Allah and his Messenger, due to be
killed for waging war against them.

The truth is revealed in 5:33 and clarified by Tafsir Ibn Kathir.

5:33. The recompense of those who wage
war against Allâh and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only
that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be
cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is
their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the

`Wage war’ mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes
disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. Mischief
in the land refers to various types of evil.

aggression is never

It is difficult to find a more egregious lie. You
have already seen ample proof of the obvious objective factual reality
if you have read this far.  Whether you read Reliance of the Traveller, Risala or Hedaya, the aggressive and offensive nature of
Jihad is clear in Shari’ah.

Moe dictated and dispatched extortion letters by
private courier to his intended victims.  Two of those letters are
extremely clear, leaving nothing to the imagination; I will link to
them. You can find the others on those sites.

The quote to 2:190 is not accurate; the operative expression is
transgress the limits, not commit aggression.

religion & crime

Islam is a crime against humanity: a war
crime.  Its mission is mercenary and its method is martial.


What did the terrorists say when they slit the
throats of the flight crews?  What did Nidal Malik Hassan shout
when he shot the soldiers at Fort Hood?  What did they say when
they cut off Nick Berg’s head?  What did they shout when they blew
up children at Beslan?

Mohammad Atta, in his final message to the Magnificent 19, directed them
to shout the Takbir

while slaughtering because
it terrifies disbelievers

“When the confrontation begins, strike
like champions who do not want to go back to this

world. Shout, ‘Allahu Akbar,’ because this strikes fear in the hearts
of the non-believers.”

What did Allah say he would and did cast?  How
did Moe say he was made victorious?

May 11, 2013 Posted by | CAIR, Islam, Political Correctness, Terrorists | , , , , , | 3 Comments

Islam is a Lie, Muslims are Liars and the Press Promulgates the Lies

The Irish Times uttered and published a spew of deception which must not go unanswered.  News media should inform, not deceive.  I will let most of the lies slide to concentrate on one target rich paragraph.

During the life of the Prophet Muhammad, the wars fought were all defensive wars. And he forbade the killing of woman, children, elders and religious leaders during war. Inciting terror in the hearts of civilians is forbidden in Islam. In fact, in the holy Koran, the primary source of Islamic law, a verse states: “Whoever kills an innocent it is as if he has killed the whole of humanity.”

defensive wars

The assertion that Moe only fought defensive battles is an egregious lie, easily disproved.  Turn first to the Noble Qur’an, Surah Al-Anfal.

. And (remember) when Allâh promised you (Muslims) one of the two parties (of the enemy i.e. either the army or the caravan) that it should be yours, you wished that the one not armed (the caravan) should be yours, but Allâh willed to justify the truth by His Words and to cut off the roots of the disbelievers (i.e. in the battle of Badr). [8:7]

Allah promised them a victory, and they were lusting after the rich spoils of a caravan on the trade route.  The Meccan army went out to defend the caravan, not to attack Moe. Moe went out to attack the caravan, and was met by the army.

Until 2001, I was unaware of the extortion letters which Moe dictated and dispatched to neighboring kingdoms and empires.   Because I learned about them in a Paltalk chatroom, you will learn about them through this blog post.  I present to you two brief excerpts from Moe’s letter to the Chiefs of Aqaba. This letter stands out from the mill run because it is extremely explicit. The others leave a little to the imagination.

[…] I do not intend to wage war against you till you receive my written reason for it. It is better for you, either to accept Islam or agree to pay Jiziya and consent to remain obedient to Allah, His prophet and his messengers.[…]  […] If you do not accept these terms and set them aside, I do not need your presents and gifts. In that case, I shall have to wage war (to establish peace and security). Its result would be that the big ones shall be killed in war and the commoners shall be taken prisoners.[…]

Moe expressed his intention to wage war unless tribute was paid.  That is offensive, not defensive warfare.  The two main jihad imperatives begin with commands to fight: 8:39 & 9:29; where is the defensive element in those verses?

  • And fight them until[…]
  • Fight against those who[…]

Surah Al-Baqarah supposedly preaches defensive jihad; 2:190 tells Muslims to fight those who fight them. It does not say those who attack them.  Click the link, read the ayat and scroll down to read the footnote which defines jihad.  Where is the defensive element in that definition?

  • And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you[…]

Sahih Muslim 19.4294 contains some clarifying elements.

  • Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah.
  • If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them.

It becomes obvious that “those who fight you” means those who resist.  Islamic law confirms the obvious. The Shafi’ite school sets a minimum of one ghazwat per year.

The Hanifi school says that jihad must be continuous and is undertaken on Islamic initiative.

women & children

Isn’t that nice, Moe prohibited his army from killing women and children.  Muslims want us to assume that the proscription is based on morality. It is not; far from it.  The proscription is economic.

  • Some [jurists] are of the opinion that all of them may be killed, on the mere ground that they are unbelievers, but they make an exception for women and children since they constitute property for Muslims. [Imam Ibn Taymiyyah]
  • […](so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives [33:26]
    • […]and the prisoners were their children and women.[…] [Tafsir Ibn Kathir]
    • When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled. [Reliance O9.13]
  • Make a holy war, do not embezzle the spoils; do not break your pledge; and do not mutilate (the dead) bodies; do not kill the children. [Sahih] Muslim 19.4294

What do embezzlement and killing children have in common? Children are part of the spoils!

Inciting terror

Forbidden in Islam?  Yeah, right.

  • We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve,[…] [3:151]
  • […] I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.” [8:12]
  • […]Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts[…][33:26]
  • […]I have been made victorious with terror […][Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220]


They love to cite Surah Al-Ma’idah 32 but never cite the ayat which follows it; why is that?

  • The recompense of those who wage war against Allâh and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter. [5:33]
    • `Wage war’ mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. [Tafsir Ibn Kathir]

Ibn Kathir defined wage war against Allah to include disbelief;  If you do not believe in Allah, you are waging war against him, and may be killed by Muslims.  Only Muslims can be innocent.

May 7, 2011 Posted by | Islam, Political Correctness | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Obamination: Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!

Bare Naked Islam posted a still shot taken from the video of the execution of the Qur’an at the Dove World Outreach Center. I saved that image, cropped, adjusted and enlarged it for maximum clarity.

This is the original image, as posted at BNI.
Full image of burning Qur'an.

Examine it closely. Note that the cover is to the right of the back binding. Arabic Qur’ans are printed from right to left, their bindings are on the right side, not the left.  Note that the title is in English, barely legible.

In this cropped image, the Qur’an is brought up close. Note the title.
Close up of burning Qur'an.

This cropped image has been enlarged as much as possible and adjusted for maximum clarity.
Burning Qur'an adjusted for legibility.

The English title is legible. Because of the binding and title, we know that the executed Qur’an was an English translation, not an Arabic Qur’an.

Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies By Mona Baker  will give you some important background information on the controversy over translating the Qur’an into other languages.

When the PLO seized the Church of the Nativity, they performed istijmar with pages torn from the Bible. There was an on line fatwa permitting the practice, but it has been scrubbed.  They don’t consider the Bible to be holy, because the Qur’an supersedes it, and claims it to be corrupted.

It is required that Qur’an recitation be performed in Arabic.  They assert that no other language can convey the full meaning of the Arabic words.  They consider translations to be interpretations of the meaning of the Qur’an, not the Qur’an itself, so burning it should be no skin off their noses.

Pastors Jones & Sapp spent four hours trying the Qur’an before convicting and executing it. I was unable to view the streaming video, so I do not know what evidence was presented by the prosecutor, but I know that he is an apostate fluent in Arabic.  The prosecution witnesses were also apostates.

I have no knowledge of the evidence presented or witnesses called, if any, by the defense. I would like to see both sides post their briefs and evidence in pdf format.

In any case, rioting, murder & malicious destruction of property in reaction to the trial & execution of a Qur’an translation do not defend it, instead they pile on evidence of its evil effect on believers.

Obamination had remarks on the subject Saturday, since they are not yet posted on the White House blog, I rely on quotes found in a report on Yahoo News.

“The desecration of any holy text, including the Koran, is an act of extreme intolerance and bigotry,”



How anyone, especially the President of the United States, can impute sanctity to the Koran, or consider it to be sacred, is beyond imagining. What is sacred about a text which attributes divine sanction to imperatives for offensive conquest on a global scale, terrorism & genocide?  Muslims & liars will aver that the Qur’an does not do so. I challenge them to disprove the obvious!

  • 8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.
  • 9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
  • 8:12. (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”
  • 8:57. So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson.
  • 9:120. It was not becoming of the people of Al-Madinah and the bedouins of the neighbourhood to remain behind Allah’s Messenger (Muhammad SAW when fighting in Allah’s Cause) and (it was not becoming of them) to prefer their own lives to his life. That is because they suffer neither thirst nor fatigue, nor hunger in the Cause of Allah, nor they take any step to raise the anger of disbelievers nor inflict any injury upon an enemy but is written to their credit as a deed of righteousness. Surely, Allah wastes not the reward of the Muhsinun*
  • 8:67. It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allâh desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.

What can be more profane than attributing to deity a desire for genocide?


What is more  intolerant than declaring war upon people because they do not share your superstition?  Is there any rational excuse for tolerating that?  The President of the United States implied that we should tolerate the damnable doctrines which motivated the Magnificent Nineteen  to hijack four airliners and slit the throats of the flight crews with the intention of flying them into occupied office buildings.

Demanding that we tolerate and hold sacred that which instigated Abomination 9/11 is treason, for which Obama should be impeached.


Bigotry implies prejudice. Jones judged the Qur’an, based on evidence.  That is judgment, not bigotry.  Obama is “a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices” concerning Islam, in denial of the evidence.

No religion tolerates the slaughter and beheading of innocent people, and there is no justification for such a dishonorable and deplorable act.



When one Jewish tribe surrendered following a two week siege, Moe slaughtered all the adult men and adolescent boys. Everything he did is sunnah: exemplary conduct to be emulated.  If no religion tolerates slaughter, then Islam is no religion.

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


Only Muslims are innocent, all others are kuffar and rebels against Allah.

  • 5:33. The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.
    • ‘Wage war’ mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. Tafsir Ibn Kathir

April 3, 2011 Posted by | Islam, Political Correctness | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Obamination: Treason in Mumbai

Thanks and a tip of the hat to Logan’s Warning for alerting me to Barack Hussein Obama’s al-Taqiyya. Indian Express carries the story of Obamination at Xavier’s College, where a Muslim student asked for his views on jihad.

“I think all of us recognise that this great religion (Islam) in the hands of a few extremists has been distorted to justify violence towards innocent people that is never justified,”

Lets break it down point by point.

great religion


  • Muhammad bin Abdullah, founder of Islam
    • 8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.
    • 9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
    • Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
      Narrated Anas bin Malik:
      Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.” Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, “O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?” He replied, “Whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have.”
    • Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:
      Narrated Abu Huraira:

      Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).

Moe defined Islam with his recitation and set the standard with his Sunnah. Normative Islam is extreme; there is no extremism over and above it.


The standard of Islam is open on the face of the Qur’an & hadith. What is distorted about it?  “Ordered to fight” & “made victorious with terror” are the standard, not distortions.

justify violence

What did Allah say about “fighting” ?  What did Moe say about it?  “Fight them until”, “ordered to fight”.  How do you justify offensive wars of conquest?  In Mecca, outnumbered, in a position of weakness, Moe preached tolerance & forbearance. In Medina, as he accrued an army, he preached defensive & retaliatory warfare.

  • 22:39. Permission to fight is given to those (i.e. believers against disbelievers), who are fighting them, (and) because they (believers) have been wronged, and surely, Allâh is Able to give them (believers) victory
  • 2:190. And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors. [This Verse is the first one that was revealed in connection with Jihâd, but it was supplemented by another (V.9:36)].

Click the link to 2:190, read the translator’s footnote and the surrounding context. While the verse relates directly to defensive warfare, the definition of jihad in the footnote is anything but defensive.

Al-Anfal 39 & At-Taubah 29, quoted above, command offensive, not defensive warfare. When they were revealed, Moe’s army had grown in numbers and skill, he was ready for the conquest of Mecca and neighboring kingdoms & empires.  Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir describes these as orders “to fight”.

  • The Order to fight to eradicate Shirk and Kufr
  • The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah
    • This honorable Ayah was revealed with the order to fight the People of the Book, after the pagans were defeated, the people entered Allah’s religion in large numbers, and the Arabian Peninsula was secured under the Muslims’ control. Allah commanded His Messenger to fight the People of the Scriptures, Jews and Christians, on the ninth year of Hijrah, and he prepared his army to fight the Romans and called the people to Jihad announcing his intent and destination. The Messenger sent his intent to various Arab areas around Al-Madinah to gather forces, and he collected an army of thirty thousand.

Those abominable imperatives are codified in Shari’ah: Reliance of the Traveller, Book o, Chapter 9, Sections 8 & 9.

  • o9.8: The Objectives of Jihad

    The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,

    “Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled” (Koran 9.29),

    the time and place for which is before the final descent of Jesus (upon whom be peace).  After his final coming, nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus’ descent (upon him and our Prophet be peace), which is the divinely revealed law of Muhammad. The coming of Jesus does not entail a separate divinely revealed law, for he will rule by the law of Muhammad. As for the Prophet’s saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

    “I am the last, there will be no prophet after me,”

    this does not contradict the final coming of Jesus (upon whom be peace), since he will not rule according to the Evangel, but as a follower of our Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) ).


    The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim (O: because they are not a people with a Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax (jizya) ) (n: though according to the Hanafi school, peoples of all other religions, even idol worshippers, are permitted to live under the protection of the Islamic state if they either become Muslim or agree to pay the poll tax, the sole exceptions to which are apostates from Islam and idol worshippers who are Arabs, neither of whom has any choice but becoming Muslim (al-Hidaya sharh Bidaya al-mubtadi’ (y21), 6.48-49) ).

Reliance of the Traveller o9.1 defines the religious obligation of offensive conquest.  The closing paragraphs of the section convey vital information.

  • In the time of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) jihad was a communal obligation after his emigration (hijra) to Medina. As for subsequent times, there are two possible states in respect to non-Muslims.

    The first is when they are in their own countries, in which case jihad (def: o9.8) is a communal obligation, and this is what our author is speaking of when he says, “Jihad is a communal obligation,” meaning upon the Muslims each year.

    The second state is when non-Muslims invade a Muslim country or near to one, in which case jihad is personally obligatory (def: c3.2) upon the inhabitants of that country, who must repel the non-Muslims with whatever they can).

What does this mean: “meaning upon the Muslims each year”?   Muslims are required to mount at least one military expedition against kuffar in every year. The question is answered with extreme clarity by this quote from Al-Shafi’i.

“The least that the imam must do is that he allow no year to pass without having organised a military expedition by himself, or by his raiding parties, according to the Muslims’ interest, so that the jihad will only be stopped in a year for a (reasonable) excuse.”

innocent people

In Islam’s view, only Muslims are innocent. All others are rebels against Allah who must be warred against.  Scroll up to the quote of Bukhari 1.8.387 and read it again. Our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims until we become Muslims. We only obtain rights by becoming Muslims.  That should be a clue for you.

Muslims love to quote Surah Al-Ma’idah 5:32, which says that killing one innocent person is equivalent to killing the entire population of the world, but never quote the succeeding verse. That is because 5:33 prescribes hudud for those who “wage war” against Allah. It says that they can be crucified, killed, mutilated or expelled.  But it does not define “wage war”. Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir fills in that gap for us. If you do not believe in Allah; if you are not a Muslim, then you are waging war against him, subject to the punishments listed in 5:33.

The Punishment of those Who Cause Mischief in the Land
`Wage war’ mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways.

President Barack Hussein Obama is an accursed liar, a traitor to the human race as well as the nation over which he has been elected to preside.  He lies about the nature and identity of our sworn existential enemy and demands that we tolerate its existence & perpetual aggression.

It is not possible for a sane and sentient person, a lover of life & liberty, apprised of the damnable doctrines & practices of Islam, to tolerate the perpetuation & propagation of a belief in divine mandate to conquer, subjugate, enslave, dispossess and kill everyone who does not immediately submit to Islam.

Islam must be confronted and resisted, both ideologically & militarily. President Barack Hussein Obama won’t do it. He must be removed from office  and replaced by someone who will. 

November 7, 2010 Posted by | Islam, Islam Distorted?, Islam Hijacked?, Islam Perverted?, Islam Twisted?, Islamic Terrorism, Political Correctness | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Spurring Facebook Censorship

My Facebook friend Frank Einstein alerted me to the existence of a Facebook page dedicated to demanding the removal of Facebook groups critical of Islam.  In perusing their  page, I discovered that they are also attacking another of my old friends, Az Zaqqum.  I find their information page to be full of hypocrisy, which I expose here by giving selected  excerpts H2 status and interspersing my comments between them.

The document is long and rambling,  I took excerpts out of context in order to conserve space.  I have added bold face and font color emphasis to some quotes from Islam’s canon in order to make the significant points stand out with more clarity.   The heading immediately below is a link to the page.

Remove All Groups and Pages that Attack Islam

Brothers and sisters, not just in religion, but in creation

until when will we watch transgressors step into our lives as if they own us?

We would live and let live, but you will not.  Islam demands that the entire world submit to it. We object to Islam precisely because it attempts to impose itself upon us by force.  For the details, see: What’s Wrong With Islam/Muslims?

Until when will we specifically ignore our own rights to the freedom of religion

Until Islam is no more.

3:85. And whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.

As the son or daughter of a male Muslim, you have no choice.  If you apostatize, you are subject to execution.

My right to question, criticize and mock Islam does not in any way impair your freedom of religion.

practice it peacefully anywhere civilized?

Islam can not be practiced peacefully. Jihad is ordained for you. Allah commands you to wage war upon us. [J.M. Rodwell] hadith confirm & Shari’ah codifies the jihad imperatives.

Until when will we watch transgressors attack our religion

Until you go blind or wise up and emancipate yourself from slavery to Allah.  Between 1787 and 1815 you attacked our shipping.  On September 11, ’01, you attacked our World Trade Towers for the second time.  We have every right to name and shame the enemy who is attacking us, and by God, we will.

be satisfied with having their own rights

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
We have the right to choose our own religion or none; to worship  or not as we choose.  You have a demonic mandate to impose Islam upon us.   We have a right to freedom of speech & press.  You assert a right to be shielded from criticism.   We have rights, and by God, we will blessed well maintain them!

not even dare to force other’s in their decision making

Our Facebook groups do not have any force.  We can do nothing more than expose Islam to ridicule by reference to its own canon of scripture, tradition, exegeses & jurisprudence, just as I do in these blog posts.  It is Muslims, demanding that Facebook delete us, threatening boycotts and demanding international legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam  who are attempting to use force.

do not know the true essence of peace and justice

“Peace” is what happens after Islam completes its global conquest. “Justice” is just us Muslims.

purpose of individual rights is to recognize and protect the

individual’s freedom of choice for “constructive” purposes

The only right is the right to obey Allah’s dictates in every facet of life. That is how Islam defines the term.

When people think they can mentally or physically attack anyone

Yes I agree killing innocent people is wrong

Only Muslims are innocent, all others are rebels against Allah, subject to the hudud prescribed in 5:33. Ibn Kathir, in his tafsir, defines waging war against Allah to include disbelief.
`Wage war’ mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. [ The Punishment of those Who Cause Mischief in the Land]

publicly humiliating any religion

  • 98:6. Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islâm, the Qur’ân and Prophet Muhammad ()) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikûn will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.
  • 5:60. Say (O Muhammad  to the people of the Scripture): “Shall I inform you of something worse than that, regarding the recompense from Allâh: those (Jews) who incurred the Curse of Allâh and His Wrath, those of whom (some) He transformed into monkeys and swines, those who worshipped Tâghût (false deities); such are worse in rank (on the Day of Resurrection in the Hell­fire), and far more astray from the Right Path (in the life of this world).”

creating any laws that contradict individual rights is wrong


Such non-Muslim subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. In addition, they:

-1- are penalized for committing adultery or theft, thought not for drunkenness;

-2- are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar);

-3- are not greeted with “as-Salamu ‘alaykum”;

-4- must keep to the side of the street;

-5- may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims’ buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;

-6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;

-7- and are forbidden to build new churches. Restrictions on dhimmis.

June 22, 2010 Posted by | Political Correctness | , , , , | Leave a comment


%d bloggers like this: