Monday, August 09, 2010

Are We Wising up to Islam?

Barenaked Islam    quoted  a New York Times article: Across Nation, Mosque Projects Meet Opposition,  which first lists several locations where opposition  to Mosque construction has arisen and then brings out the key revelation.


"In all of the recent conflicts, opponents have said their problem is Islam itself. They quote passages from the Koran and argue that even the most Americanized Muslim secretly wants to replace the Constitution with Islamic Shariah law."

Either the opponents have begun to study the enemy's canon or they have been emboldened to  use to a new level of direct counter attack on the ideological plane. The next paragraph trots out the implicit false premise: "Islam is a religion, equal  to Christianity and must be tolerated as such as a matter of First Amendment right."

"These local skirmishes make clear that there is now widespread debate about whether the best way to uphold America’s democratic values is to allow Muslims the same religious freedom enjoyed by other Americans, or to pull away the welcome mat from a faith seen as a singular threat." [Emphasis added for clarity.]

Many left wingers are slick in their use of loaded expressions.  "America's democratic values" is heavily laden with all things bright and beautiful.  The use of that expression lays the foundation for accusing Islam's opponents of racism, bigotry & xenophobia.    They are off to a fast start, ahead of the starter's pistol, mis-framing the debate.  Only religions are protected by the First Amendment's free exercise clause.  They have evaded\ the crucial question: "Is Islam a religion worthy of First Amendment protection?".  

    It has a scripture, it has theology, it has cosmology, it prays, it sways, it practices charity; it must be a religion.  Yeah, right.  Islam is a deen: way of life which dictates all aspects of human life. One critical aspect of that way of life makes it incompatible with our Constitution and intolerable in our society.  Open your eyes and prepare to learn; I am about to show you something that nobody else will expose you to.  This oral tradition exposes the reality of the Islamic deen.

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.

Moe presented jihad and agriculture as alternatives, the former being acceptable to Allah and the latter carrying a curse.   Allah will curse the Muslims if they abandon jihad in exchange for agriculture.  Jihad Akbar is striving against your ego and temptations.  Is Jihad Akbar an alternative to farming for a living?  Jihad asghar is defined in Islamic law as "to war against non-Muslims".  Is that an alternative to farming as a way of making a living?   For the answer, examine this hadith, which Khan bowdlerized but Aisha Bewley included in her translation of Sahih Bukhari.

   
How did Moe make his living?  By his spear.  Was it by hunting wild game?  Is the life style of a hunter/gatherer consistent with making commands; abasing and humiliating anyone who disobeys? What kind of command is involved in that saying? Here is one sample.

... 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. My messengers deserve honour. Treat them with respect. Whatever pleases my messengers, will also please me....[LETTER TO THE CHIEFS OF AQABA]

Moe sent a letter to Christians, giving them the choice of conversion to Islam, dhimmitude & Jizya or war.  He commanded people to submit to Islam and attacked them if they refused.   What is consistent with issuing commands and punishing the disobedient?  Pillage & plunder.   Do you see the pattern yet?

    For those who can not perceive the pattern, I have more clues from the Qur'an: Surah al-Anfal:; "Spoils of War".  To whom do the spoils belong? How are they allocated?  What was Moe's motivation?

8:1. They ask you (O Muhammad ) about the spoils of war. Say: "The spoils are for Allâh and the Messenger." So fear Allâh and adjust all matters of difference among you, and obey Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad ), if you are believers.

8:41. And know that whatever of war-booty that you may gain, verily one-fifth (1/5th) of it is assigned to Allâh, and to the Messenger, and to the near relatives [of the Messenger (Muhammad )], (and also) the orphans, Al-Masâkin (the poor) and the wayfarer, if you have believed in Allâh and in that which We sent down to Our slave (Muhammad ) on the Day of criterion (between right and wrong), the Day when the two forces met (the battle of Badr) - And Allâh is Able to do all things.

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. [Emphasis added for clarity.]

Moe gets the spoils; the  best 20% off the top. Moe's motivation was the spoils & ransom for captives.  We  have it on Allah's authority.   But spoilation was taboo among Arabs, how did Moe get away with it?  Allah gave him special dispensation.  Nay more! Allah gave Moe the keys to the treasures of the world.  How did Allah make Moe wealthy?  

Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 ...3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me.

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).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 3, Book 37, Number 495:

    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    Whenever a dead man in debt was brought to Allah's Apostle he would ask, "Has he left anything to repay his debt?" If he was informed that he had left something to repay his debts, he would offer his funeral prayer, otherwise he would tell the Muslims to offer their friend's funeral prayer. When Allah made the Prophet wealthy through conquests, he said, "I am more rightful than other believers to be the guardian of the believers, so if a Muslim dies while in debt, I am responsible for the repayment of his debt, and whoever leaves wealth (after his death) it will belong to his heirs. "
[
Emphasis added for clarity.]

    Islam's mission is mercenary, neither spiritual nor eleemosynary. This fact alone is sufficient to disqualify Islam from First Amendment protection.  There is another fact, equally potent as a disqualifier:  Islam is permanent war.  Moe created Islam for his personal emolument & empowerment, which were dependent on constant warfare. He began with razia on camel caravans,  graduated to ghazwat against local Jewish settlements, and went on to conquer Mecca and threaten nearby kingdoms and empires. 

    Since Moe was  the self-appointed spokesman for Allah, he had Allah issue commandments.  Two of them are crucial to the question before us.

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.

   
Those are commands, imperatives, not suggestions; not metaphors, not allegories.  They have neither geographic nor chronological limits; they are outcome oriented, of global scope.  I gave you links to four tafsirs and Islamic law for a reason: so that you can verify what I have written.  Those tafsirs  deny the mercenary motivation clearly exposed by Allah's own testimony in 8:67: "You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives)". None of them denies the fard al-kifaya of annual ghazwat.  None of them asserts limits of time or geography.  None of them asserts an expiration date.

    Besides bing fard al-kifaya, jihad is the essence of the relationship between Allah and the believers; he purchased them as slaves so that "...they kill (others) and are killed.".

        What makes  jihad  holy?  Is it fighting to establish the religion? [Read the footnote to 2:190.] No!  Jihad is only holy if nobody embezzles the spoils!

Sahih Muslim 19.4294: "...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...."

Jihad would be profaned by embezzling the spoils, which belong to Moe, fleeing from battle and mutilation  which was another  taboo.  Killing women and children  is prohibited because they were part of the booty, dead bodies had no value on the slave market. If you retain any doubt about this disgusting fact, I have some references for you: 33:26-27, Ibn Kathir and  Ibn Taymiyyah {"property for Muslims"}.

    What is the importance of Jihad?

"Abdullah Humaid (Shaykh). "... Besides these acts of worship, a Muslim is directed to abstain from evil deeds and to perform good deeds, so that he may achieve success in the Hereafter, as well as, in the life of this world. But, as regards the reward and blessing, there is one deed which is very great in comparison to all the acts of worship and all the good deeds-and that is Jihad!"

    By what stretch of the imagination is a mercenary and martial institution which wages war against us to be greeted with a welcome mat and given the protection which the First  Amendment extends to legitimate religions?  Given the fact that offensive jihad is a required  part of the practice of Islam, how can there be a right to practice Islam here?

    The Times tells us that there is a "growing cottage industry of authors and bloggers"  who testify against Islam and "interfaith groups led by Protestant ministers, Catholic priests, rabbis and clergy members of other faiths" who defend Mosques.  They don't tell us about the fact that only one side has relevant, verifiable evidence to support its case.  Throughout this post you will find links to source documents.  They are bold, blue underlined text. When clicked, they open  a relevant document in a new window.

    At the end of the article, the times quotes a spokeswoman for one Mosque.

"Camie Ayash, a spokeswoman for the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, lamented that people were listening to what she called “total disinformation” on Islam. ... “A lot of Muslims came to the U.S. because they respect the Constitution,” she said. “There’s no conflict with the U.S. Constitution in Shariah law. If there were, Muslims wouldn’t be living here.”

Does Shari'ah conflict with our Constitution and laws or not?  Reliance of the Traveller is a 1251 page book, translated from Umdat as Salik.  It is acknowledged by the Sheikhs at Al-Azhar University to be an authentic handbook of Islamic law.  We  have freedom of religion. American citizens can choose their own religion, and switch at will.  Muslims governed by Shari'ah can not. A Muslim who  apostatizes must be executed.

O8.1  When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.
O8.2  In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.  http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO8-2.html

Does that Islamic law conflict with our organic law or does it not?

    Islamic law concerning marriage and divorce can be somewhat shocking to the western mind.

M3.13: Guardians Who May Marry a Virgin to a Man Without Her Consent

Guardians are of two types, those who may compel their female charges to marry someone, and those who may not.

-1- The only guardians who may compel their charge to marry are a virgin bride's father or father's father, compel meaning to marry her to a suitable match (def: m4) without her consent.

-2- Those who may not compel her are not entitled to marry her to someone unless she accepts and gives her permission.

Whenever the bride is a virgin, the father or father's father may marry her to someone without her permission, though it is recommended to ask her permission if she has reached puberty. A virgin's silence is considered as permission.

As for the nonvirgin of sound mind, no one may marry her to another after she has reached puberty without her express permission, no matter whether the guardian is the father, father's father, or someone else.

The father of a prepubescent girl can marry her off without her consent.  Is that or is  that not in conflict with our laws?   What if she refuses

O1.2 The following are not subject to retaliation:
...
-4- a father or mother (or their fathers of mothers) fir killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring;

-5- nor is retaliation permissible to a descendant for (A: his ancestor's) killing someone whose death would otherwise entitle the descendant to retaliate, such as when his father kills his mother.

Honoricide, anyone?  But, of course, there is no conflict between Shari'ah and our Constitution.

    Now, back to the topic of divorce.


 Chapter N3.0: The Words that Effect a Divorce
N3.2 Using plain words to effect a divorce means expressly pronouncing the word divorce (O: or words

derived from it).  When the husband says' "I divorce you,'' or "You are divorced,'' the wife is divorced

whether he has made the intention or not.

(A: Here and in the rulings below, expressions such as "The wife is divorced,'' or "The divorce is effected,'' mean just one of the three times (def: n9.0(N:) ) necessary to finalize it, unless the husband thereby intends a two-or threefold divorce (dis: n3.5) or repeats the words three times.)   

    Is the Islamic law of divorce consistent with ours, or does it conflict?

   Lets touch upon a subject which, though not directly  involved in the federal  organic law,  does involve the Constitutions of the several states: duties of the governor.

O25.9  Authority in view of merit is that which is freely invested by the caliph through his own choice, and entails delegating a given limitary function and the use of judgement within a range of familiar alternatives. This investiture consists of the caliph appointing an individual to independently govern a city or region with authority over all its inhabitants and discretion in familiar affairs for all matters of government, including seven functions:

-1- raising and deploying armies on the frontiers and fixing their salaries, if the caliph has not already done so;

-2- reviewing laws and appointing judges and magistrates;

-3- collecting the annual rate (khiraj) from those allowed to remain on land taken b Islamic conquests, gathering zakat from those obliged to pay, appointing workers to handle it, and distributing it to eligible recipients;

-4- protecting the religion and the sacrosanct, preserving the religion from alteration and substitution;

-5- enforcing the prescribed legal measures connected with the rights of Allah and men;

-6- leading Muslims at group and Friday prayers, whether personally or by representative;

-7- facilitating travel to the hajj for both pilgrims from the regian itself and those passing through from elsewhere, that they may proceed to the pilgrimage with all necessary help,

-8- and if the area has a border adjacent to enemy lands, an eighth duty arises, namely to undertake jihad against enemies, dividing the spoils of battle among combatants, and setting aside fifth (def: o10.3) for deserving recipients.

Revisit the last item in that list. The local governor has a duty to undertake jihad against neighboring enemies and dividing the spoils.  Does that or does that not conflict with our federal and state Constitutions?  We have been assured that there is no conflict between Shari'ah and our Constitution.   What is the truth of the matter?  Does our Constitution guarantee freedom of religion?  How about Shari'ah?

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) ). [Emphasis and link added for clarity.]
 
The caliph makes war upon Jews & Christians until they become Muslim or pay extortion, in obedience to 9:29.  But, we are assured that this does not conflict with our Constitution.  I doubt that many Muslims have read it.  Of course there is a perfect right to build Mosques & Madrassahs wherein to preach the obligation (fard al-kifaya) of jihad. And its perfectly alright to  send 1\8 of the charity collected to those waging war against us.

H8.7: The Eight Categories of Recipients

It is obligatory to distribute one's zakat among eight categories of recipients (O: meaning that zakat goes to none besides them), one-eighth of the zakat to each category. (n: In the Hanafi school, it is valid for the giver to distribute his zakat to all of the categories, some of them, or to confine himself to just one of them (al-Lubab fi sharh al-Kitab(y88), 1.155). ) ...

H8.17: Those Fighting for Allah

The seventh category is those fighting for Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster (O: but who are volunteers for jihad without remuneration).  They are given enough to suffice them for the operation, even if affluent; of weapons, mounts, clothing, and expenses (O: for the duration of the journey, round trip, and the time they spend there, even if prolonged. Though nothing has been mentioned here of the expense involved in supporting such people's families during this period, it seems clear that they should also be given it).

Didn't President Obama have something to say about Zakat at Cairo?  "That's why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill Zakat."  Who did the Holy Land Foundation send $13. million to?  Why was that a big deal, requiring two trials in federal court?

We will conquer you if you do not change your laws

Google brought me news of "When Islam Acts Like a Conquering Army", at AINA.  The article turned out to be critical of Mayor Bloomberg's treacherous policy as a surrender to Islam but it was written by a Muslim of Syrian heritage: Farid Ghadry. A visit to Wikipedia  turned up some information. Ghadry is the founder of a Syrian reform party.  He appears to be a study in contradiction: democratic Muslim.  

    I found Ghadry's blog and checked to see if  there was more, but found that AINA had published the entire article. I want to share the conclusion with you.


... If we let Saudi Arabia fund and build the Mosque in New York as a token of their triumphalism over the US for 9/11, we are in fact not applying the Freedom of Religion laws but rather, we are giving my religion the chance to conquer New York by planting its flag of victory.

Farid Ghadry either knows who is behind the Ground Zero Mosque or is making the obvious assumption.  Note the caustic language coming from a Muslim: "token of their triumphalism"... "planting its flag of victory".  It is clear that he understands what is happening and that he does not approve.

Mayor Bloomberg is focused on one set of laws when he should be investigating every religious edict or Fatwa of Islam that emanated from our scholars the last 25 years. But what if religion acts like a conquering army? How could we reconcile this fact with our laws? Being an American, laws will always prevail, but being a Muslim also, I have a warning: We will conquer you if you do not change your laws accordingly.
The US better reconcile between Freedom of Religion and Islam as a conquering army soon. The two cannot co-exist for long.

    Mayor Bloomberg focuses on the First Amendment, incorrectly applying the definition of religion, which does not apply to Islam.  The idea that a Mayor could or would keep track of the entire  contemporary  output of the Ulema is beyond the pale. Most Governors and even most Presidents won't even keep abreast of the established fiqh of jihad.

    Islam does not "act like a conquering army",  it is a complex, multi-faceted institution, whose most important facet is a conquering army.  Since Islam is at war against us, it can not be treated as a religion under the umbrella of the First Amendment's free exercise clause.  It can not have a right to wage war against us from our own territory and it can't have a right to erect a symbol of triumph to serve as an arsenal, recruitment & training center two blocks from the scene of its most successful attack.  

    We have been warned, by a Muslim, that Islam will conquer us if we do not change our laws to exclude it from First Amendment protection.  We have a Muslim using expressions  that do not pass the lips of the most articulate  expert "Islamophobes".  If Islam is a conquering army, it can not be considered a religion for First Amendment purposes.  The process is one of decision making and Constitutional  amendment, not reconciliation.

    The Cordoba House project is one skirmish on the psychological battle plane.  If we win it, Islamic jihad suffers a  psychological loss, whose effect will probably be minor and temporary.  If we lose this skirmish, Islamic jihad will achieve a great victory which will spur its cause by aiding recruitment, financing and morale.  The effects will be intense in the short term and project into the long term.  We will suffer a psychological defeat affecting our will and resolve to continue resistance to Islam's onslaught.

    Islam takes a long view. Like Wylie Coyote, it is persistent, always licking its wounds, regrouping, rearming and preparing new tactics for the next attack. It did not conquer Constantinople on the first try, but it persisted.   We beat the crap out of Germany twice, each time thinking that the victory was permanent. It was not the first time   We can not apply that model to Islam.  We defeated Islam in 1805 & 18:15.   Islam can not be permanently defeated, it must be rendered extinct.

    In the short term, we must stop the Ground Zero Mosque.  Sign this petition and the others which are circulating on the web.    If possible, attend the protest September 11.  In the near term, we must amend the Constitution to acknowledge the fact that Islam is perpetual war, not a religion.   Sign the Outlaw Islam! petition.  Exhort your friends, family & associates to sign those petitions.  

Thursday, August 05, 2010

Ground Zero Mosque: Insult added to Injury

I have long maintained that the most intelligent Englishmen came to America, leaving the dullards behind.  It seems that Alex Massie wants to prove my case.  His blog post turned up in one of my Google Alerts. He had written an arrogant, mocking post about the opposition to the Cordoba House project, followed up by a mockery of the readers who commented on the first post.  It was the second post that triggered the alert.

    The initial post began this way, setting the tone for the series.

Yes, when I first read about plans for a mosque "at Ground Zero" my initial reaction was to wonder why, whatever the merits of an Islamic Cultural Centre in Lower Manhattan, such a project had to be built in such a location. It seemed likely to cause offense even if none were intended.
The reaction to the Cordoba House initiative, however, has changed my mind: I now think not only is there no reason not to carry on with the project but that, contra its critics, it now must be built a couple of blocks from the site of the former World Trade Center.


" It seemed likely to cause offense even if none were intended."  That happens to be the standard argument against the project.  I have not used it in my postings on the subject, because I regard it as invalid.  Offense is intended and irrelevant. Muslims build Mosques on the sites of former temples as a sign of Islamic supremacy and triumph.  Such Mosque  building is an intentional insult to conquered people.

    While the intended insult may be very sharp to the families of a few of the 3000 victims, others will fail to recognize it and go on with their lives diminished as they are by their tragic loss.  On the tactical plane, their suffering is insignificant. The significance lies in the psychology of the other side.

    In '01, Usama bin Laden spoke about the "strong horse".

when people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature, they will like the strong horse. This is only one goal; those who want people to worship the lord of the people, without following that doctrine, will be following the doctrine of Muhammad, peace be upon him.

Bin Laden comes from a tribal and predatory culture. Predators look for signs of weakness, selecting for the first attack, the victim that appears to be least able to out run them or offer effective resistance.  Muslims are evaluating our will and ability to resist.  Every sign of weakness gives them encouragement, which benefits their recruitment and funding drives.  Our failure to win in Korea & Vietnam did not go unnoticed.  Our failure to react effectively to the seizure of our Embassy in Tehran  and our ignominious withdrawal from Somalia  were the icing on the cake.  Having ousted the Soviet Union from Afghanistan, Bin Laden was ready for a new easy prey.

    Those who pontificate from the throne of ignorance do not understand the psychology involved, nor  Allah's promise.

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.

The Qur'an is primarily about incentivizing  jihad and persuading Muslims to march forth in it. Minimize the risks, maximize the rewards.   Every time we make a concession to Muslims or fail to respond forcefully and with resolve to an insult from them, we add to our image as the weak horse, emboldening the enemy and inviting a fresh attack.

    They pronounced the takbir while slitting the throats of the flight crews.  Five times every day they recite it in the call to prayer and in their  prayers they recite it again.  "Allah is greater."   Where?  Two blocks, about six hundred feet from the site of the towers.  Part of one of the jets penetrated the roof of the Burlington Coat Factory outlet and ended up in its basement.  That site is an extension of ground zero.  Building a Mosque there is a sign of Islam's triumph.  It is the ultimate insult, not only to the families of the victims, but to every person who desires to live as a freeman.  Allowing that insult to go unanswered is  sign of weakness and lack of will; an invitation: "hit us again, please"; "thank you, may I have another."

    Do you know what they do when they pray?  Do they recite the ten commandments?   Do they recite the Lord's Prayer?  Surely  their ritual must be as innocuous.  Yeah, right.  Five times a day they curse us by reciting Surah al-Fatihah.  Seven short verses, what is the big deal?

1:6. Guide us to the Straight Way 

1:7. The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians). 

Go read the context and read the footnotes.  They are reminding Allah of how he hates us and wants to burn us.  Got a clue yet?  For the slow segment of the audience, I have another clue.

3:87. They are those whose recompense is that on them (rests) the Curse of Allâh, of the angels, and of all mankind.

9:30. And the Jews say: 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allâh. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allâh's Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!

    Alex is on a roll, revealing how his mind was changed by the critics of the project, citing Mayor  Giuliani as his exemplar.

The people responsible for changing my mind are those Republicans and cultural conservatives most opposed to the plan. Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich are merely the more high-profile "campaigners" protesting that the proposed centre is offensive or that it "stabs the heart" or represents an American capitulation to "radical Islam". Rudy Giuliani's reaction was equally typical:
"This is a desecration," he added. "Nobody would allow something like that at Pearl Harbor. Let's have some respect for who died there and why they died there. Let's not put this off on some kind of politically correct theory.
"I mean, they died there because of Islamic extremist terrorism. They are our enemy, we can say that, the world will not end when we say that. And the reality is, it will not and should not insult any decent Muslim because decent Muslims should be as opposed to Islamic extremism as you and I are."

    It is a desecration, in the tradition of  Ayodhya and Constantinople.  Islam has a pattern of demolishing temples and churches, replacing them with Mosques.  It is the insult which adds to the injury of conquest and genocide.   Have we allowed a Shinto shrine at  Pearl Harbor? Why not?


    Respect  for those who died there?  Rudy, their cremains went to the landfill. They are dead, no further injury can be done to them.  Our concern should be for the living who will be maimed and killed in the next attack if we don't preventing it by getting the Muslims out of here and keeping them out of  here before they succeed again.

    No, Rudy, they died  because of Islam. Extremism is a meaningless shibboleth which serves to distract us from an unpalatable reality.  The enemy is Islam. It needs no adjectives or qualifiers.  The accursed abomination flows directly from Moe's recitation and sunnah just as the Hindu, Assyrian & Armenian genocides did.

    Decent Muslim?  Decent Muslim??  Decent Muslim???  Jesus Christ!!!!  It is the ultimate idiocy; the perfected oxymoron.  These politicians insult our intelligence every time they open their mouths to lie.  "Kill them wherever you find them."  "Fight them until..." "Fight those who..."  Get a clue!  No decent person worships a demon who demands great slaughter as a precondition of entry into Paradise.  No decent man worships a demon who commands him to wage war upon us until we cease to resist and worship only that demon.  No decent man worships a demon who commands him to wage war upon us until we are subjugated and extorted.  No decent person regards as a saint and seeks to emulate a man who took sex slaves from captive women and permitted his army to rape captives.   Muslims worship Allah. Muslims emulate Muhammad bin Abdullah.  No decent person does that.

    A few of them may not know about the doctrines of jihad, genocide and terror. They are Muslims because their ancestors were given the choice of Islam or death.  They may be Muslins in name only.  They may not really believe.  But we will not hear any of them publicly abjuring the doctrines enshrined in Surah al-Anfal & Surah at-Taubah and exemplified in the books of Jihad, Khumus & Expedition of Sahih Bukhari.  Islam is all or nothing, not a la carte.

    For those who are not regular readers of my blog posts, the documentation necessary to comprehend the offensive reality of the preceding paragraph is found here:  What's Wrong With Islam/Muslims?

    Instead of addressing the substance of Giuliani's statement, Alex spews the usual LeftTard crap.

If any of this was true then, yes, the objections would have some merit and might even be persuasive. But it's not. First, the cultural and community centre - which will, yes, include a prayer room - is not actually being built at Ground Zero but two blocks away (which, as anyone who knows NYC knows means it is not next door or on the same site at all) and that, moreover, Park Place is hardly connected to the former WTC site at all.  And in any case, muslims have been using the site as an overflow prayer room for a Tribeca mosque for some time anyway without anyone being upset.

Mosque & prayer room are the same entity.  The Mosque is the central purpose of the proposed structure, the rest is persiflage.  Two blocks, big deal!  How much of the debris had to be swept  from Park Street?  One landing gear is in the basement, that makes it part of the battlefield.  Perhaps it did not upset you, Alex, but it outraged me when I found out about it.

    So Muslims have a Constitutional right to erect Mosques and worship?  Do they?  Islam is not severable, it is all or nothing. Muslims can not keep the nice parts and discard jihad, genocide and terror, those are a regular part of worshiping Allah.  Attacking kuffar every year is fard al kifaya, a religious obligation.
http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-1.html  

    What must a Muslim do to avoid eternity in the fire?  Do you have a clue?  Surah as-Saff  would inform you most explicitly if you would read the last four  of its ts fourteen verses. What condemns a Muslim to the fire? Failure to join the jihad.  What is the relationship between Allah and Muslims?  They are his slaves.  What is their mission?  Killing us.  If they have a right to practice Islam, then our rights are abrogated.

    Tolerance, respect and rights do not work unless they are reciprocal.  Islam does not reciprocate.  Read this hadith carefully, paying close attention to the  clauses to which I added emphasis.

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."

    Muslims are commanded to fight us. Our blood and property are not sacred to them and we have no rights until we join them in slavery to Allah.  Do you understand why Islam can not be tolerated?    

Islam vs. Kuffar: Adv. War

Barenaked Islam posted an article about a campaign to counter  SOIA's  Refuge From Islam bus advertisements.  BNI linked to Atlas Shrugs, where large, clear photos of the bus advertisements are displayed.

    Geller also posted a video of a joint interview with Dr. Waseem Sayed, an Ahmadiyya leader. The video is not pleasant viewing.  The interviewer is shrill and frequently interrupts Pamela, not allowing her to finish her answers.  Dr. Sayed got away with making  gross misstatements of material fact, unchallenged.

Muslimsforpeace.org claims:

  • love for all
  • hatred for none
    A visit to http://www.muslimsforpeace.org/  discloses the fact that the outfit is part of  Ahmadiyya, a heretical sect.  On that site, they make more malignant claims.
  • Islam is peace
  • we condemn terrorism
  • Jihad: self defense only
  • separation of church and state
  • universal human rights
    Regular Muslims pronounced takfir on Ahmadiyya, because its founder claimed to be the Mahdi.  The sect is a persecuted minority in Asia.

    Love for all they say; what does Allah say? Who does Allah love?
  • Al-Muhsinûn those who do good, defined as participating in and financing jihad.  2:195  
  • Al-Muttaqûn the pious who fulfill their contracts 3:76
  • As-Sâbirin the patient ones who fight without weakening and degrading themselves  3:146
  • those who put their trust in him 3:160
  • Allah cursed the Jews but loves the  Al­Muhsinûn 5:12-13 
  • those who are equitable among the believers 49:9
  • those who fight in His Cause in rows (ranks) as if they were a solid structure  61:4

Allah only loves Muslims.


    Hatred for none, they say; what did Moe say?
  • "None loves the Ansar but a believer, and none hates them but a hypocrite. So Allah will love him who loves them, and He will hate him who hates them." Sahih Bukhari 5.58.127
  • Allah , the Exalted, hates the eloquent one among men who moves his tongue round (among his teeth), as cattle do. Sunan Abu Dawud 41.4987
    Islam is peace they say.  What did Allah say?
  • "Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh's Cause) is ordained for you" 2:216
    • "The Prophet said, "He who fights that Allah's Word (i.e. Islam) should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause." Sahih Bukhari 4.52.625
      • "to make it superior over all religions even though the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh) hate (it). 9:33
  • "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 ]. " 8:39
  • "And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery, etc.) to threaten the enemy of Allah and your enemy" 8:60
  • "O Prophet (Muhammad)! Urge the believers to fight. If there are twenty steadfast persons amongst you, they will overcome two hundred, and if there be a hundred steadfast persons they will overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve" 8:65
  • "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. "  9:29
What did Moe say?
  • "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 " Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387
  • "jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist).  Sunan Abu Dawud 14.2523
  • "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. " Sunan Abu Dawud  23.3455

Islam is peace: in a pig's anus.

    Islam says "we condemn terrorism".  What  does Allah say?
  • "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
  • "Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of God and your enemies" 8:60
  • "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. " 33:26
  • " But Allah's (Torment) reached them from a place whereof they expected it not, and He cast terror into their hearts, so that they destroyed their own dwellings with their own hands and the hands of the believers." 59:2
    What did Moe say?
  • "Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. " Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331
  • " have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy)" Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220

Terrorism: Islamic sacrament

    Islam says Jihad is only for self-defense.  Allah and Moe said  it was offensive, on Islam's initiative, their "original religion".  What does Islamic law say?

Jihad is offensive

    Islam says that Mosque and state are separated. What did Allah say?
  • "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. " 33:36

Moe united spiritual & temporal power

    Islam says that it supports universal human rights.  What did Moe say?
  • 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." 
Are our blood and property sacred to Muslims?  Do we have the same rights that Muslims have?  How do we obtain those rights?   If you can correctly answer those three crucial questions, then you have learned something; important knowledge which you must  share with others.  If you can not answer those questions, you need to read the hadith reproduced immediately above.  If that does not solve the problem, you need a remedial reading course.

    You now know that each and every one of the claims made by "Muslims for peace"  in their advertisement and on their web site is malignant malarkey.  Lets review:

Allah only loves Muslims.

Islam is perpetual war

Terrorism: Islamic sacrament

Jihad is offensive

Moe united spiritual & temporal power

Our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims

We have no rights.

Tuesday, August 03, 2010

Park 51: Place of Salat

Why build a Mosque?  To pray in, of course. What of those prayers?  What do they pray for?

    In each prayer service they recite  Surah Al-Fatihah, the first  chapter of the Qur'an.  It is a short chapter,  examine its contents.


1:1. In the Name of Allâh, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.  

1:2. All the praises and thanks be to Allâh, the Lord of the 'Alamîn (mankind, jinns and all that exists).  

1:3. The Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.  

1:4. The Only Owner (and the Only Ruling Judge) of the Day of Recompense (i.e. the Day of Resurrection)  

1:5. You (Alone) we worship, and You (Alone) we ask for help (for each and everything).  

1:6. Guide us to the Straight Way 

1:7. The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians). 

The Faithful ask for and abide by Guidance


    It seems fairly reasonable until we reach the last two ayat.  The Muslims ask Allah to guide them away from the path of Jews and Christians, who "earned your anger".  In doing so, they remind Allah of his anger toward us five times each day.  Why would they want to do that?

3:87. They are those whose recompense is that on them (rests) the Curse of Allâh, of the angels, and of all mankind.
3:88. They will abide therein (Hell). Neither will their torment be lightened, nor will it be delayed or postponed (for a while).

9:30. And the Jews say: 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allâh. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allâh's Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!

    What are they doing in their Mosque, five times every day when they pray?  They are cursing us.  They are reminding Allah that he hates us and wants to burn us.

    Other chapters are recited, voluntarily,  including Surah An-Nasr.

110:1. When comes the Help of Allâh (to you, O Muhammad against your enemies) and the conquest (of Makkah),

110:2. And you see that the people enter Allâh's religion (Islâm) in crowds,

110:3. So glorify the Praises of your Lord, and ask for His Forgiveness. Verily, He is the One Who accepts the repentance and forgives.

    In the spring of '08, Imam Muhammad Khan gave the invocation at the opening of the Iowa legislature with a supplication for victory over disbelievers.  The following damnable dua come from an Islamic supplications page.

"Our Lord! Put not on us a burden greater than we have strength to bear. Pardon us and grant us Forgiveness. Have mercy on us. You are our Maula (Patron, Supporter and Protector, etc.) and give us victory over the disbelieving people." (2/286)

"Our Lord! Forgive us our sins and our transgressions (in keeping our duties to You), establish our feet firmly, and give us victory over the disbelieving folk." (3/147)

    Damn right: Muslims have a right to pray; to erect their prayer house where the landing gear landed 9/11, two blocks from the death scene,  there to curse us and supplicate Allah for victory over us five times daily.  Yeah, right.

    They tore down pagan temples and built Mosques on the rubble as a symbol of  triumph and supremacy.  They turned great cathedrals into Mosques as a symbol of triumph and supremacy.  Why is there a Mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem?

    Get a Godblessed clue!

    Does any doubt remain  about why we hate the war cult?  Does any doubt remain about why we hold in deep contempt the traitors who appease Muslims?  If you have any doubt, take a remedial reading course, you really need it.

Monday, August 02, 2010

Facebook Jihad

In this blog post, Citizen Warrior links to Defeat The Third Jihad, which exposes how Revolution Muslim advocates Facebook jihad.  The post reproduces a  post on Revolution Muslim and provides a link to Defeat The Third Jihad,Second Helping which makes further  disclosures and suggestions.  The RM post shows how they operate: making gratuitous co-ordinated complaints to Facebook about our accounts, groups and pages.




    Organized Muslims are circulating lists of  "Islamophobes", urging their fellows to demand that Facebook delete our accounts, groups and pages.  Because Islam is false and malicious from its foundation, it has no credible defense against revelation of its mission, tenets & practices.  It therefore can not and will not tolerate criticism.

Blooming AssWholliness

Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch has made a revelation of the most disgusting hypocrisy.  The same New York City officialdom who rush to facilitate the erection of a shrine to the Magnificent Nineteen who slaughtered three thousand nine years ago  are frustrating the reconstruction of a Greek Orthodox Church [photos and news links ] which was crushed by the debris falling from the towers.  Nine years have passed, still the church  celebrated their saint's day in a tent.
   

    Nay more; Spencer reports an additional gratuitous insult.


In recent negotiations, the authority cut the size of the church slightly and told church officials that its dome could not rise higher than the trade center memorial.

    For Chrissake, get a Godblessed clue!  Reliance of the Traveller, Book O11.5: limitations on conquered Christians living as dhimmis.

-5- may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims' buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;
-7- and are forbidden to build new churches.


    A commentator, miira, posted some links whose contents should make your eyeballs counter rotate. This one exposes al-Qaeda connections to the funders of Park 51. 

    No Mosque should be built until that church is rebuilt and  dedicated.  No Mosque should ever be built within the shadow of the Towers.  Those politicians who kiss the eastern end of the west bound camel should be removed from office in the next election cycle.  

Sunday, August 01, 2010

Facebook Advocacy

An old post about a Muslim boycott of Facebook  demanding the  deletion of the Koran Toilet Paper Roll group still gets hits more than half a year after the boycott.  The group was pulled down, briefly restored and permanently deleted.

.Now two new pages have been created.  Everybody Burn Quran Day rapidly grew to 1974 followers.  It is evident that a fair proportion of those followers are Muslims who joined  so that they could comment on the wall posts.  The discussion threads have also been spammed by Muslims.

    Their plan is to commemorate the accursed abomination by burning  Qur'ans on September 11.  I hope that everyone will read it before burning it.  Only by reading the Qur'an can we discover the evil  enshrined between its covers.

    Several of their wall posts promote another new page:  I bet this 'Toilet paper' can get more fans than 'The Quran' which has 737 followers. Their wall is full of insulting, obscene and antisemitic statements and images posted by Muslims.

    International Burn A Koran Day, sponsored by the Dove World Church,  has 1740 followers.  Its wall is littered with Islamic graffiti.   This one is certain to increase in controversy as the summer heats up.

    Islamophobia  appears to be a new page with only 11 followers. Its name would lead one to expect  criticism of Islam's critics. Instead, the avatar is a photo of violent Islamic protest signs.  The wall posts include a video calling for termination of Islamic immigration  and another about the recent arrest of Christian missionaries in Dearborn.

    Against Islamophobia Worldwide (AIW) with 2727 members, appears to be tightly policed; I did not see any anti-Islamic postings on their wall.  When I clicked the Older Posts link at the bottom of the page, I found two posts advocating boycotting Israel. One more click lead to these wall posts. Click them to view full size images.




Evidently my guess about banning dissenters was correct, and they want another group I like to be "erased" .

   NO TO THE MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO has 60,240 supporters. I am one of  them because the planned Mosque is a symbol of Islamic triumph & supremacy.

    Come now, and let us reason together is a new group dedicated to rational exchange, without mindless bashing. It has grown to 63 members including two Muslims. 

Feisal Abdul Rauf: Apostate or Liar?

Zee News reported that  "The Anti-Defamation League joined the debate against the building of a mosque and Islamic Centre and said this is was not a question of rights of Muslims but a question of what is right."

    They quote the Imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf as saying: "My colleagues and I are the anti-terrorists. We are the people who want to embolden the vast majority of Muslims who hate terrorism to stand up to the radical rhetoric."

    That statement is problematic because terrorism is an intrinsic sacrament of Islam.  To profess Islam while opposing  terrorism  indicates al-taqiyya or extreme cognitive dissonance.  Allah said: "We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve".  Allah said:"to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies"[Abdullah Yusuf Ali].  Allah cast terror: "...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. "

    Reliance of the Traveller, Book O8.7, lists  twenty acts & attitudes which "entail leaving Islam".  The seventh item in that list is: "-7- to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;".  A Muslim who denies terrorism as intrinsic to Islam is guilty of apostasy and, according to O8.2, should be killed.
O8.1
When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.
O8.2
In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.
    The fourth item in the list is: "-4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);" By abjuring terrorists, they revile Moe, who said: "I have been made victorious with terror".   How does the Imam get away with it, why is there no fatwa on his head for apostasy?  Because Allah issued special dispensation to deceive kuffar to protect oneself and  advance the triumph of Islam.   Allah said "Let not the believers take the disbelievers as Auliyâ (supporters, helpers, etc.) instead of the believers, and whoever does that will never be helped by Allâh in any way, except if you indeed fear a danger from them."