Freedom Ain’t Free & Take Our Country Back

VICTORY Is Not Defeat

Qur’an Burning; Idiot’s Attitude: Respect for Islam


The video has disappeared from the AP article at Yahoo News. It is still available at the N.Y. Times.  48 seconds into the video,
general John Allen , Cmdr of Nato forces:

“I assure you, I promise you, this
was not intentional in any way and I
offer my sincere apology for any offense this may have caused.”

The article quotes the White House spokesman thusly.

Press
secretary 
Jay
Carney
 says it was a “deeply unfortunate
incident

that does not
reflect the respect the U.S. military has for the religious practices
of the Afghans.

I highlighted one clause that appears in other articles, but not within
quotes. I do not know whether Carney uttered or implied the sentiment
expressed in the highlighted clause.

From Reliefweb,
we learn of a U.N. statement expressing the same “respect”, describing
remarks by SRSG
Kubiš
.

He
stressed that the
United Nations deeply respects the Islamic faith, traditions and
culture of the Islamic
Republic of Afghanistan.

From CBSNEWS we learn that a military source said that
the Qur’ans were removed from the prison library because they “contained
extremist messages or inscriptions”.  The implication is that
prisoners had made marginal notes. Exactly what was in those notes?
Were they operational or motivational messages?

How would operational notes get out of the prison to
those who would implement them?  What is the difference between
motivational messages and the Qur’an, which exhorts Muslims to conquer
the world?  If we don’t want them to have access to incitement to
violence, then they should not have been given access to Qur’ans,
hadith, tafsir  & jurisprudence or the writings of Maududi,
Qutb, Al-Banna or Azam.   Is there any limit to the stupidity
& hypocrisy of our traitors?

Yeah, General, Taliban are sure to believe that
Qur’ans were collected, removed and sent to the garbage pile purely by
accident, without intent to destroy them.  We did not want the
prisoners to use them, the books are not in our language, and we did
not want the marginal notes to get out, so we disposed of the,
permanently.  You placed yourself in a bad position: you are
either incompetent or a liar.  Which is it, or  are you
both?

Removing the Qur’ans is not your error. Burning them
is not your mistake. Doing it in public, within  sight of the
enemy is a fatal mistake which has led to a dozen deaths and will
probably cause more death and suffering.  Next time, incinerate
the crap privately, in a proper facility and don’t advertise it.

Do any of those involved, including the White House,
Department of Defense, Department of State and United Nations
comprehend the plain meaning of words?  They said that they “respect Islam“.
Three classes of people “respect Islam”: ignoramuses, damned fools and
Muslims. Unfortunately, those classes are not mutually exclusive.

If you can respect a mercenary
war cult
whose doctrines sanctify genocidal
conquest,
terrorism
& slavery, then you have a terrible mental or moral
defect sufficient to warrant your removal from the gene pool of the
human race and from high office.

Islam is not incidental to the Accursed Abomination
and its aftermath; it is the central issue.  Allah’s damnable imperatives,
promises and threats which motivated the Magnificent Nineteen
to slaughter 3000 innocent people, are at the core of the
problem.  It is not possible to remove and permanently
exclude  Afghanistan from membership in the set of terror
sponsoring states without first removing Islam; Allah’s yoke of slavery
from the souls and necks of the people of Afghanistan and their
regime.  So long as they remain Muslim, all the blood and treasure
we have expended there are wasted, sacrificed to the demon of political
correctness.

Brigadier General S.K. Malik gave us the key to
victory in page sixty of “The
Quran’ic Concept of War
but our leaders are traitors,
unwilling to seize the key, insert it in the lock and turn it.
Pay particular attention to the sentences I have emphasized in this
crucial quote.

Terror cannot be struck into the
hearts of an army by merely


 cutting its lines of
communication or depriving it of its routes


of withdrawal. It is
basically related to the strength or weakness


of the human soul. It
can be instilled only if the opponent’s


Faith
is destroyed.

Psychological dislocation is temporary;


spiritual
dislocation is permanent
.
Psychological dislocation can be


produced by a physical act
but this does not hold good of the


spiritual dislocation. To
instill terror into the hearts of the enemy, 


it
is essential. in the ultimate analysis, to dislocate his Faith
. An

invincible Faith is immune to
terror. A weak Faith offers inroads


to terror. The
Faith conferred upon us by the Holy Qur’an has


the
inherent strength to ward off terror from us and to enable


us
to strike terror into the enemy.
Whatever the form or type of

strategy directed against the
enemy, it must, in order to be effective,


be capable of striking terror
into the hearts of the enemy. A strategy


that fails to attain this
condition suffers from inherent drawbacks


and weaknesses; and should be
reviewed and modified. This rule


is fully applicable to
nuclear as well as conventional wars. It is


equally true of the strategy
of nuclear deterrence in fashion


today. To be credible and
effective, the strategy of deterrence


must be capable of striking
terror into the hearts of the enemy.

If
we do not destroy Islam, nuking Afghanistan & Pakistan is our only
hope of victory: there will be no alternative to complete
extermination. The people of those enslaved nations must be made to
comprehend the fact that Allah is an impotent idol whose threat and
promise are vain.  They must throw off Islam’s yoke of slavery or
they must be exterminated.  Emancipation is morally superior to
extermination.  We needed to get started eleven years ago.

February 23, 2012 Posted by | Afghanistan, GWOT, Islam, Political Correctness, United Nations | , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Fiqh Council Declares No Conflict Between Islam and Constitution


The Fiqh Council of North America issued a resolution declaring that Shari’ah and the Constitution are not in conflict. Are they practicing al-Taqiyya or telling the truth?  Examine the details to find out.

http://www.fiqhcouncil.org/node/67
Resolution On Being Faithful Muslims and Loyal Americans

Resolution of the Fiqh Council of North America
Adopted in its General Body Meeting held in Virginia on September 24-25, 2011
On Being Faithful Muslims and Loyal Americans

Like other faith communities in the US and elsewhere, we see no inherent conflict between the normative values of Islam and the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Contrary to erroneous perceptions and Islamophobic propaganda of political extremists from various backgrounds, the true and authentic teachings of Islam promote the sanctity of human life, dignity of all humans, and respect of human, civil and political rights. Islamic teachings uphold religious freedom and adherence to the same universal moral values which are accepted by the majority of people of all backgrounds and upon which the US Constitution was established and according to which the Bill of Rights was enunciated.

The Qur’an speaks explicitly about the imperative of just and peaceful co-existence, and the rights of legitimate self-defense against aggression and oppression that pose threats to freedom and security, provided that, a strict code of behavior is adhered to, including the protection of innocent non-combatants.

The foregoing values and teachings can be amply documented from the two primary sources of Islamic jurisprudence – the Qur’an and authentic Hadith. These values are rooted, not in political correctness or pretense, but on the universally accepted supreme objectives of Islamic Shari’ah, which is to protect religious liberty, life, reason, family and property of all. The Shari’ah, contrary to misrepresentations, is a comprehensive and broad guidance for all aspects of a Muslim’s life – spiritual, moral, social and legal. Secular legal systems in Western democracies generally share the same supreme objectives, and are generally compatible with Islamic Shari’ah.

Likewise, the core modern democratic systems are compatible with the Islamic principles of Shura – mutual consultation and co-determination of all social affairs at all levels and in all spheres, family, community, society, state and globally.
As a body of Islamic scholars, we the members of FCNA believe that it is false and misleading to suggest that there is a contradiction between being faithful Muslims committed to God (Allah) and being loyal American citizens. Islamic teachings require respect of the laws of the land where Muslims live as minorities, including the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, so long as there is no conflict with Muslims’ obligation for obedience to God. We do not see any such conflict with the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. The primacy of obedience to God is a commonly held position of many practicing Jews and Christians as well.

We believe further that as citizens of a free and democratic society, we have the same obligations and rights of all US citizens. We believe that right of dissent can only be exercised in a peaceful and lawful manner to advance the short and long term interests of our country.

The Fiqh Council of North America calls on all Muslim Americans and American citizens at large to engage in objective, peaceful and respectful dialogue at all levels and spheres of common social concerns. We call upon all Muslim Americans to be involved in solving pressing social problems, such as the challenge of poverty, discrimination, violence, health care and environmental protection. It is fully compatible with Islam for Muslims to integrate positively in the society of which they are equal citizens, without losing their identity as Muslims (just as Jews and Christians do not lose their religious identity in doing the same).

We believe that emphasis on dialogue and positive collaborative action is a far better approach than following the paths of those who thrive on hate mongering and fear propaganda. Anti-Islam, anti-Semitism and other similar forms of religious and/or political-based discrimination are all forms of racism unfit for civilized people and are betrayal of the true American as well as Islamic values.

May the pursuit of peace, justice, love, compassion, human equality and fellowship prevail in the pluralistic mosaic that is the hallmark of our nation.

no inherent conflict

So the Qur’an is compatible with the Constitution?  Compare Surah An-Nisa’ 4:89 to the Bill of Rights.

4:89. They wish that you reject Faith, as they have rejected (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So take not Auliyâ’ (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the Way of Allâh (to Muhammad ). But if they turn back (from Islâm), take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them, and take neither Auliyâ’ (protectors or friends) nor helpers from them.

Amendment 1 – Freedom of Religion, Press, ExpressionRatified 12/15/1791. Note
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.

Allah issued a command to kill apostates. The Constitution forbids laws abridging freedom of religion.  How do they hope to square that circle?  Here is one more example just to pile on.

5:38. Cut off (from the wrist joint) the (right) hand of the thief, male or female, as a recompense for that which they committed, a punishment by way of example from Allâh. And Allâh is All­Powerful, All­Wise.

Amendment 8 – Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

 

sanctity & dignity of human life

The Fiqh Council asserts that Islam promotes those values, so we shall delve into the two most authentic Islamic sources: the Qur’an and Sahih Bukhari to discover the truth of the matter.  The council did not cite the Qur’an in this resolution but others have, quoting Surah Al-Ma’idah 5:32.

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!

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 Hereafter.

Muslims love to quote 5:32, but never quote the next verse. Why is that?  One phrase from that ayeh says it all: “wage war against Allâh”; what does it mean?  Tafsir Ibn Kathir has the answer for us. “`Wage war’ mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. “.

The Qur’an justifies killing disbelievers because of their disbelief, equating it with waging war against Allah.  One hadith in Bukhari’s collection, widely accepted as the most authentic of the six canonical collections, exposes the sanctity and dignity of human life assertion as an egregious lie.

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.”

While the first sentence of that hadith is sufficient to demolish the “religion of peace” meme, it informs us that our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims until we recite Shehada and do things their way.  Only Muslim lives are sacred.

The last sentence of that hadith makes another point crystal clear: only Muslims have human rights.  The assertion that Islam promotes the sanctity & dignity of human life and human rights is fully exposed as a lie.

uphold religious freedom

Allah said something else entirely, the polar opposite of religious freedom. Surah Al-Imran holds an important clue in ayat 85-151. [Click the link and scroll down to read the context.]

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.

If Allah won’t accept choosing Christianity, will his slaves?  The answer is in the context.

3:110. You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad  and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma’rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh – and rebellious against Allâh’s Command).

3:111. They will do you no harm, barring a trifling annoyance; and if they fight against you, they will show you their backs, and they will not be helped.

#111 tels us the intended outcome: war against Christians & Jews.  Consider the highlighted clause in #110; what is the meaning of “best of peoples”?  The answer is in a hadith and it does not reflect freedom of religion.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 80:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Verse:–“You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind.” means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.

Examine the highlighted clause.  Bringing us to Islam in change is violent & coercive, the polar opposite of religious freedom.  The ultimate contravention of freedom of religion is found in Surah Al-Anfal 8:39 & At-Taubah 9:29.  Those contain the jihad imperatives; fight until loops. Note the terminal conditions, which I have highlighted to make them stand out.

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.

Muslims are commanded to wage war until only Allah is worshiped; until Jews & Christians are subjugated & extorted. Tell me again how the teachings of Islam uphold freedom of religion.

universal moral values

Universal moral values such as the sanctity of marriage?  We turn next to Surah An-Nisa’ 4:24 to examine the morality of Islam.

4:24. Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allâh ordained for you. …

Muslims are prohibited from copulating with married women except those they own. Of course the prohibition of rape is another universal moral value upheld by the teachings of Islam; or is it? There is a hadith which speaks to this issue with stunning clarity.  Moe did not say “don’t rape them’ he ruled against al-Azl.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459:

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:

I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, “We went out with Allah’s Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, ‘How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah’s Apostle who is present among us?” We asked (him) about it and he said, ‘It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist.”

just and peaceful co-existence

In Surah Al-Baqarah 2:143 we discover the meaning of just: Muslim. If it ain’t Muslim, it ain’t just. Examine the highlights carefully.

2:143. Thus We have made you [true Muslims – real believers of Islâmic Monotheism, true followers of Prophet Muhammad  and his Sunnah (legal ways)], a Wasat (just) (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger (Muhammad ) be a witness over you. And We made the Qiblah (prayer direction towards Jerusalem) which you used to face, only to test those who followed the Messenger (Muhammad ) from those who would turn on their heels (i.e. disobey the Messenger). Indeed it was great (heavy) except for those whom Allâh guided. And Allâh would never make your faith (prayers) to be lost (i.e. your prayers offered towards Jerusalem). Truly, Allâh is full of kindness, the Most Merciful towards mankind.

Surah Al-Imran neatly wraps up the issue of co-existence. Examine the highlights carefully and click through for the full context; to the end of the Surah.

3:64. Say (O Muhammad ): “O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians): Come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but Allâh, and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allâh. Then, if they turn away, say: “Bear witness that we are Muslims.”

The above cited verse and its context give a strong hint, but fall short of complete clarity; they require external confirmation which is contained in Moe’s extortion letter to the Byzantine Emperor.  The extortion letter preceded the  ghazwat on Tabuk, which is the main focus of Surah At-Taubah.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 1, Number 6:
…The contents of the letter were as follows: “In the name of Allah the Beneficent, the Merciful (This letter is) from Muhammad the slave of Allah and His Apostle to Heraclius the ruler of Byzantine. Peace be upon him, who follows the right path. Furthermore I invite you to Islam, and if you become a Muslim you will be safe, and Allah will double your reward, and if you reject this invitation of Islam you will be committing a sin by misguiding your Arisiyin (peasants). (And I recite to you Allah’s Statement:)

‘O people of the scripture! Come to a word common to you and us that we worship none but Allah and that we associate nothing in worship with Him, and that none of us shall take others as Lords beside Allah. Then, if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are Muslims (those who have surrendered to Allah).’ …

word that is just

The “word that is just” is Islam. The call is to ‘come to Islam’. That is the dawah which precedes invasion if it does not result in surrender. .

Peace be upon him…

But war will be upon him who rejects the call to Islam.

become a Muslim;  be safe

If you do not become a Muslim, you will not be safe; Muslims will wage war against you.

Bear witness that we are Muslims

Why say that except as a veiled threat? The basis of that threat is revealed in Surah Al-Hashr  59:13.

59:13. Verily, you (believers in the Oneness of Allâh – Islâmic Monotheism) are more awful as a fear in their (Jews of Banî An-Nadîr) breasts than Allâh. That is because they are a people who comprehend not (the Majesty and Power of Allâh).

Allah told Moe that he and his army scared the Jews more than Allah did. Moe had built a well deserved reputation for rapacious rapine; which is what Allah talks about when he says that he will “cast terror”.   The context is confirmed by another extortion letter dictated & dispatched by Moe to Ethiopia.

LETTER TO THE SUCCESSOR OF AS’HAMA THE NEGUS

In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful.

From Muhammad, Prophet of Allah –

To Negus, King of Ethiopia.

His Prophet (Sal Allaho Alehe Wasallam).

I bear witness that there is none to be worshipped except Allah. No one is His associate or partner. He does not stand in need of a wife or children. And I affirm that I am his servant and his Prophet.

I invite you to believe in Allah who is One. If you want security, accept Islam.

O people of the Book! Ignore all matters of difference and dispute, and agree to a thing to which you and we are equally committed, and it is that we should not worship anyone except Allah. And neither should we associate anyone else with Him nor should we regard anyone else as our Sustainer. If they object to it, tell them, “you will bear witness that we believe in Allah.”‘

If you will not accept these, the responsibility of the transgression of your Christian people shall be yours.

Seal: Allah’s Prophet Muhammad

self-defense …

Muslims want us to believe the fabulism that Islam only fights defensively. I already showed you the ayat containing the primary imperatives of offensive jihad. In the early Meccan period, when Moe was weak, with no army, he preached tolerance and forbearance.  At Medina, as his army grew, he preached defensive & retaliatory combat. When his army was ready to take on Mecca, he issued 8:39 & 9:29.

Shari’ah puts proof to the egregious lie: Reliance of the Traveller, Book O and Al Hedaya Volume II, Book IX fall short of perfect clarity individually, but together they are mutually clarifying.

O9.1…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 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.

War must be carried on against the Infidels, at all times, by some party of the Muslims.

protection of innocent non-combatants

Islam is so moral, isn’t it?  Offensive wars of conquest are ok so long as women and children are protected, right?  Yeah, right!  Lets examine the reality of this egregious al-Taqiyya.  In Sahih Muslim 19.4294, the second most authentic of the canonical hadith collections, Moe’s orders to his field commanders are listed. They are ordered to avoid certain acts that would profane a holy war.  See also Sunan Abu Dawud 14.2608.

…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….

What do embezzling spoils and killing children have in common?  Mull it over for a moment, we’ll get back to it.  Next we turn to Malik’s Muwatta, #4 in authenticity, for a real eye opener.

Malik’s Muwatta Book 21, Number 21.3.8:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that a son of Kab ibn Malik (Malik believed that ibn Shihab said it was Abd ar-Rahman ibn Kab) said, “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade those who fought ibn Abi Huqayq (a treacherous jew from Madina) to kill women and children. He said that one of the men fighting had said, ‘The wife of ibn Abi Huqayq began screaming and I repeatedly raised my sword against her. Then I would remember the prohibition of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, so I would stop. Had it not been for that, we would have been rid of her.’ “

A fighter about to kill a woman remembered Moe’s prohibition and spared her; what a gentleman!  But why did Moe proscribe killing women and children? Obtain a clue from Surah Al-Ahzab.

33:26. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.

Who was made captives? Tafsir Ibn Kathir has the answer.

…(a group you killed, and a group you made captives.) Those who were killed were their warriors, and the prisoners were their children and women. Imam Ahmad recorded that `Atiyah Al-Qurazi said, “I was shown to the Prophet on the day of Qurayzah, because they were not sure about me. The Prophet told them to look at me to see whether I had grown any body hair yet. They looked and saw that I had not grown any body hair, so they let me go and I was put with the other prisoners.”…

What would they have done with Atiyah if he had reached puberty?  Such fine, peaceful gentlemen who do not kill children.  Why don’t they kill children?  The next clue comes from Shari’ah, codified in Reliance of the Traveller.

O9.13 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.

For the kill shot, we turn to the Religious and Moral Doctrine on Jihad by Ibn Taymiyyah.

…. 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 the constitute property for Muslims….

What do captive women and children have in common with the spoils?  They are part of the spoils!! Killing them is prohibited because they represent a source of wealth, to be sold on the slave market.

Shari’ah protects religious liberty

Examine the code from Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9 to see how Shari’ah protects religious liberty.

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…

 

O9.9

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…

Of course, waging war upon people until they convert to your religion is a great way to protect religious liberty.

Shari’ah & secular law

The Fiqh Council says they are compatible; are they?  Our Constitution prohibits “cruel and unusual” punishments. Shari’ah requires lashing and amputation.

O16.3

The penalty for drinking is to be scourged forty stripes, with hands, sandals, and ends of clothes. It may be administered with a whip, but if the offender dies, an indemnity (def: o4.4) is due (A: from the scourger) for his death. If the caliph (def: o25) increases the penalty to eighty stripes, it is legally valid, but if the offender dies from the increase, the caliph must pay an adjusted indemnity, such that if he is given forty-one stripes and dies, the caliph must pay 1/41 of a full indemnity.

P21.1 Allah Most High says: “Thieves, male or female–::eut off their hands in retribution for what they have earned, as an exemplary punishment from Allah. Allah is Almighty and Wise” (Koran 5:38).

Islam is compatible with democracy

Democracy involves man made law and a process of consensus. Islam requires Allah’s demonic law.  The two are incompatible because they are polar opposites.  Our laws are made by our bicameral legislature within limits set by our Constitution. Islamic law is the Qur’an & sunnah.

Moe was an autocrat; how can his successors be anything else?  Surah Al-Ahzab  has a clue for you.

33:36. It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.

Anti-Islam = racism

What race is Islam? It was invented by an Arab, but it has conquered Asians, Caucasians and Negroes. So, what race is it?  Islam is a deen: way of life. That deen is intra-species predation.  One hadith in Sunan Abu Dawud makes this fact abundantly clear. It offsets jihad against commerce and agriculture as inferior economic systems.  It declares jihad to be the original religion of Islam.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 23, Number 3455:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar:

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

Islam plays the race card and the hate card to silence its critics because it can not refute the fatal facts displayed above.  Islam is the polar opposite of American values: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Can there be any greater arrogance than that which at once seeks to destroy our way of life; to kill or enslave us and demands that we tolerate it in silence?

November 10, 2011 Posted by | Islam, Political Correctness | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Islam: No Right to Practice!


For more than a decade, the OIC and their allies have been demanding national & international legislation to enforce Islam’s blasphemy laws on us; to squelch, silence, censor & censure their critics. In the face of a growing backlash, they changed their words this spring, but not their strategic objective.

The OIC, Ban Ki-Moon, the HRC, EU, Secretary of State & President demand that we “respect” that which is unworthy of respect, “tolerate” the intolerable and “dialog” with it instead of exposing absolute evil.

In the wake of the horrific & despicable bombing and shooting attack in Oslo, Islam’s exposers & critics are being unjustly accused of “hate speech”., “inciting violence” & “inspiring” the lunatic who perpetrated the massacre.

There is only one rational way to respond to the bitter bitching & caterwauling: by throwing it back in their face with redoubled efforts to expose the rotten core of Islam.  That is the reason for  the series of blog posts culminating in this post which flatly declares that there is and can be no right to practice or propagate Islam.

This series began with Right: Peaceful Practice of Islam, with more than three thousand words from and about Islam’s canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence, it established the fact that the practice of Islam is not and can never be peaceful.  Islam is permanent war.  That fact should be fatal to Islam, instead, Islam is fatal to those deluded fools who ignore it. Over the last 14 centuries,  270*106  people have lost their lives to Islam.

  • Islam is inseverable: all or nothing.
  • Jihad is warfare against disbelievers.
  • Jihad continues until the last day.
  • Jihad is a “religious obligation”: fard al kifaya.
  • Allah said “fight them until…:”.
  • Allah said “fight those who… until…”.
  • Moe said “I am commanded to fight…”.
  • Allah must be obeyed.
  • Moe must be emulated.
  • Moe waged war.
  • The caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians.
  • The caliph fights all other peoples until… .

The series continued with Islamic Right to Rape,  establishing with reference to  the Qur’an, hadith & Shari’ah, the fact that Allah sanctified and Moe exemplified enslaving & raping female captives.

  • Captive women and children are enslaved, marriages are dissolved.
  • A group of them you killed, and a group of them you took captives.
  • Moe permitted the practice of azl on captive women.
  • Moe took sex slaves from the captives for his own harem.

The series continued with Islam: the Right to Terrorize, establishing with reference to the Qur’an & hadith, the status of terrorism as an intrinsic sacrament of Islam and its practice by Allah & Moe.

  • “I will cast terror…”.
  • “Allah cast terror…”.
  • “I have been made victorious with terror…”.
  • “To strike terror…”

The series continued with Islam: the Right to Plunder, establishing, with reference to the Qur;an & hadith,  the fact that the mission of Islam is mercenary and its method is martial.

  • “The spoils belong to Allah and his Messenger…”.
  • “You desire the good of this world…”.
  • “the keys to the treasures of the world were given to me”
  • Allah made spoils lawful for us.

The supposed right to practice Islam is not compatible with the rights given by God, ratified by the Declaration of Independence and protected by the Bill of Rights. If there is a right to practice Islam, there can be no right to life because the duty to kill & conquer is established by Moe’s recitation & sunnah. Jihad is not only a “religious obligation” it is their “original religion”, the abandonment of which subjects them to Allah’s curse of disgrace.

The supposed right to practice Islam is not compatible with the right to personal security because Muslims are entitled to enslave and sexually exploit the widows & orphans of conquered people.

The supposed right to practice Islam is not compatible with the right to be secure in our property because Muslims are entitled to plunder our real and personal property and subject us to extortion.

Did I just write that there is no right to practice Islam?  God blessed right I did!  No right to practice Islam peacefully?  Islam can not be practiced peacefully.  Islam entails jihad, which is aggressive warfare against disbelievers. Muslims are threatened with Hellfire for shirking jihad and promised admission to Paradise if they participate.  Believers are defined as those who “fight in Allah’s cause, killing others and being killed”.  That is not peaceful and can not be pacified.

Dialog?  Yeah, right; lets dialog about the points outlined above. Lets sit down with some Muslims and get into the gritty details of the Noble Qur’an, Sahih Bukhari, Reliance of the Traveller, Hedaya & Tafsir Ibn Kathir.  Fat chance.

July 31, 2011 Posted by | Islam, Political Correctness | , , , , | 1 Comment

Ahmadinejad: UN Racism Conference Part 2


The statement in block quote format is from [Statement by the Islamic Republic of Iran as delivered (unofficial transcript)] as published by Eye on the UN. Since the prepared speech is ten pages long and presents a target rich environment, I am dividing my analysis of the Iranian President’s address to the U.N. Racism Conference into several posts.

In the Middle Ages scholars and scientists were sentenced to death. And later on slavery and the hunting down of innocent people, separating them from their families and taking them in millions to Europe and America in the worst conditions, was popular. These were dark ages where lands were occupied and their sources were looted, and innocent people were killed and made homeless.

Iran’s President took a passing swipe at the excesses of the Inquisition, then he raised the issue of slavery. Unfortunately, he lies by concealment, practicing kitman. His implication is that the European powers and America enslaved Africans.  In fact, the victims were enslaved and sold by Arab Muslims and their African victims who converted to Islam. Rape, pillage & plunder took place wherever the Arab Muslims and their indigenous converts invaded from Arabia to Asia.

Islamic law includes a provision for captive women and children, it is found in Book O of Reliance of the Traveller.

O9.13

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.

O9.14

When an adult male is taken captive, the caliph (def: o25) considers the interests (O: of Islam and the Muslims) and decides between the prisoner’s death, slavery, release without paying anything, or ransoming himself in exchange for money or for a Muslim captive held by the enemy.

President Ahmadinejad exploited white guilt while glossing over the identity of the actual slavers.

May 7, 2009 Posted by | Political Correctness, United Nations | | Leave a comment

Defamation Resolutions: Enough Already!


I learned about the existence of this CNS News article through a link at Eye On the UN.

UN Passes Islamic ‘Defamation’ Measure, But Critics Hail ‘Backlash’
Thursday, December 18, 2008
By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor

In that article, I found a link to a statement by four human rights experts, named in the last page of the document.

International Mechanisms for Promoting Freedom of Expression
JOINT DECLARATION ON DEFAMATION OF RELIGIONS, AND ANTI-TERRORISM AND
ANTI-EXTREMISM LEGISLATION

Having read that statement, I now endorse it, reserving the exception of the following quoted points, to each of which I dissent. [Emphasis added.]

Recognising the importance to democracy, as well as to holding social institutions accountable, of open debate about all ideas and social phenomena in society and the right of all to be able to manifest their culture, religion and beliefs in practice;

Since Islam sanctifies & mandates genocidal1 conquest2 using terrorism3 as a battle tactic, manifesting its practice is a wrong, not a right.

The definition of terrorism, at least as it applies in the context of restrictions on freedom of
expression, should be restricted to violent crimes that are designed to advance an ideological, religious, political or organised criminal cause and to influence public authorities by inflicting terror on the public.

Advocacy of casting terror, incitement to cast terror and glorification of the act & those who perform it are essential to the perpetuation of terrorism and must be condemned as part and parcel of it.

The criminalisation of speech relating to terrorism should be restricted to instances of intentional incitement to terrorism, understood as a direct call to engage in terrorism which is directly responsible for increasing the likelihood of a terrorist act occurring, or to actual participation in terrorist acts (for example by directing them). Vague notions such as providing communications support to terrorism or extremism, the ‘glorification’ or ‘promotion’ of terrorism or extremism, and the mere repetition of statements by terrorists, which does not itself constitute incitement, should not be criminalised.

Terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy. Moral condemnation of conquest in which men are killed, their widows raped4 and orphans sold into slavery5 is not consequent upon the terror inflicted, it is consequent upon malum in se; the pure evil of aggression against innocent persons. Sanctification of conquest, with a divine mandate to perform it until the entire globe is dominated by Islam6, would be sufficient cause to outlaw the propagation of Islam, even in the absence of its 1398 year history of rapine.

Not withstanding those reservations, I endorse the rest of the statement, particularly the following:

The concept of ‘defamation of religions’ does not accord with international standards regarding
defamation, which refer to the protection of reputation of individuals, while religions, like all beliefs, cannot be said to have a reputation of their own.

Restrictions on freedom of expression should be limited in scope to the protection of overriding individual rights and social interests, and should never be used to protect particular institutions, or abstract notions, concepts or beliefs, including religious ones.

Restrictions on freedom of expression to prevent intolerance should be limited in scope to advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.

International organisations, including the United Nations General Assembly and Human Rights
Council, should desist from the further adoption of statements supporting the idea of ‘defamation of religions’.

In my opinion, that last sentence was poorly written, introducing an ambiguity which should not be allowed to persist. The named bodies should rescind their previous resolutions as listed in the statement, and refrain from passing further resolutions condemning or attempting to outlaw criticism of Islam.

  1. Genocide:
    1. until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. [8:67]
    2. smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them [47:4]
    3. those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed [Abu Dawud 38.4390]
  2. Conquest:
    1. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [8:39]
    2. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allahamong the people of the Scripture … until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. [9:29]
    3. The Good News that Muslims will conquer the Known World, and ultimately the Entire World
  3. Terrorism:
    1. We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve [3:151]
    2. 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]
    3. Allah brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts [33:26]
  4. Rape:
    1. Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess…. [4:24]
    2. …”We went out with Allah’s Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. … [Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459]
  5. Slavery: and a group (of them) you made captives. [33:26]
  6. Global domination:
    1. …) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world ]…. [8:39]
    2. to make it superior over all religions even though the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) hate (it). [9:33]
    3. The Good News that Muslims will Dominate the People of the Book

December 20, 2008 Posted by | Politics, Religion, United Nations | , , , , | 3 Comments

   

%d bloggers like this: