Thursday, February 23, 2012

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

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. 

Monday, February 20, 2012



Update 02/20/12: The demise of broke the links to Tafsir Ibn Kathir.  The links have been changed to point to equivalent text at Islam-Universe.Relevant  references to Shari'ah have been added because they confirm the obvious better than anything else can. 


So Islam is "a great religion of peace" ? Explain these topic titles from Ibn Kathir's Tafsir. Click them and read their contents.  Why did Allah  command and order Muslims to commit aggression?

So terrorism is haram? Explain these tafsir which explain 8:60 and 8:12!!

    In Tafsir Ibn Kathir, you see the ayat which enjoin offensive warfare and the ahadith which confirm them, but you do not see their practical application.  For that you must turn to Shari'ah: Islamic law which is based on the Qur'an & hadith.

    Reliance of the Traveller is the most well known codification of Shari'ah. It reflects the fiqh of the Shafi'i school of Islamic law.  It is divided into books, each of which bears a letter as its name. Book O codifies the laws related to justice, including the definition, communal obligation & performance of jihad. 

    Reliance defines Jihad as "war against non-Muslims". It is a communal obligation, binding on all eligible male Muslims until a sufficient number have responded to the front.  Jihad must be performed in every year, and it is performed against disbelievers while they are in their own countries, peacefully minding their own affairs.

    The caliph makes war against Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians until they are subjugated and submit to annual extortion payments called jizya.  He fights all other peoples until they become Muslims. 

    That is not my opinion, I did not pull it out of any orifice, it is plain and clear on the face of the text of Reliance of the Traveller, which is certified authentic and accurate by sheikhs of  al-Azhar University at Cairo.  

    Would you like a second opinion? Try Risala, the handbook of fiqh belonging to the Maliki school of Islamic Law.  Risala defines jihad as " a technical term for the Muslim fighting the unbelievers who have no treaty with the intention of elevating the word of Allah or presenting Islam". Muslims must invite disbelievers to Islam. If they reject Islam, they must demand jizya. If  refused, they must wage war. 

    Would you like a third opinion?  Try Hedaya, the handbook of fiqh belonging to the Hanifi school of Islamic Law.  From Hedaya, we learn that jihad must be undertaken at all times by some party of the Muslims.  We learn that "destruction of the sword is incurred by infidels even though they be not the first aggressors".   We also learn that jizya is a punishment for infidelity and a payment in lieu of destruction. 

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Why Islamic Law is Intolerable

Why Islamic Law is Intolerable Spell it Sharia,  spell it Shari'ah or call it Fiqh, it is Islamic law, based on the Qur'an & hadith which are the primary sources of Islam.  Islam conflates spiritual & temporal authority and imposes its law on the entire society.

    The fact that Shari'ah imposes corporal punishments including amputation, decapitation, lashing & lapidation is common knowledge.  We recognize that such punishments are incompatible with our Constitutions.  Many people assume that incompatibility to impose a total exclusion on Shari'ah, but it does not. In the last three decades, there have been fifty cases and appeals involving Islamic Laws in American courts.

    Unfortunately, Islam is not an a la carte menu  from which you can select the items you like; it is all or nothing; a package deal.

2:85. After this, it is you who kill one another and drive out a party of you from their homes, assist (their enemies) against them, in sin and transgression. And if they come to you as captives, you ransom them, although their expulsion was forbidden to you. Then do you believe in a part of the Scripture and reject the rest? Then what is the recompense of those who do so among you, except disgrace in the life of this world, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall be consigned to the most grievous torment. And Allâh is not unaware of what you do.

If Muslims reject part of the Qur'an, they will be disgraced in this world and damned in the next.  Muslims can not reject jihad, corporal punishment inequality, indignity or the disgusting fiqh of marriage, divorce & child custody. 

    I have compiled screen shots of some crucial rulings into  gifs for your reading displeasure.  The first gif is entirely sourced from Reliance of the Traveller, which is the most widely accepted codification of Shari'ah.  These rulings impact issues of equality, dignity, justice and 'family law'.  They come from books M, N & O of Reliance of the Traveller. 

Islamic laws incompatible with our Constitution.

    The following table includes links to the three main codifications of Islamic law which you can purchase at Amazon in two cases or read on line in pdf format. Risala is the shortest and easiest to read but less detailed than the others. Hedaya uses arcane & archaic vocabulary & type face and is rather dense.  Reliance set the standard, and is accepted as authentic and accurate by sheikhs of Al-Azhar University in Cairo.

Reliance of the Traveller
Hedaya Volume II Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic ...
 40 reviews - $25.33 - In stock
Text: English, Arabic (translation) Original Language: Arabic. Product Details. Hardcover: 1232 pages; Publisher: Amana Corporation; Revised edition (July 1, ...

The hedàya, or guide; a commentary on the Mussulman laws: translated by order of the Governor-General and council of Bengal, by Charles Hamilton. ... Volume 2 of 4 by Ali lbn Abi Bakr Burhan a al-Marghinani (Paperback - May 30, 2010)

Buy new$51.75 $37.78

11 new from $28.10 1 used from $58.20 
In Stock

Reliance of the Traveller and Tools for the Worshipper.
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
Reliance of the Traveller and. Tools for the Worshipper. A CLASSIC MANUAL OF ISLAMIC SACRED LAW BY AHMAD IBN. NAQIB AL-MISRI (Died 1368 AD) ...

Islamic E-Book

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
The Risala : A Treatise on Maliki Fiqh. 'Abdullah ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani (310/922 -. 386/996). Translated by Alhaj Bello Mohammad Daura, MA. (London) ...

The Hedaya : commentary on the Islamic laws

Internet Archive BookReader - The Hedaya : commentary on the Islamic laws. The BookReader requires JavaScript to be enabled. Please check that your ...

The second gif follows; it displays the Qur'anic ejunctions of jihad, the confirming ahadith from Sahih Bukhari & Sunan Abu Dawud and their codification in Hedaya, Volume II, Book IX, Chapters 1 &2, and Risala. The subset of the law displayed here covers the following vital  issues:

  • Allah's commands to fight
    • Moe's confirmation of those commands
  • Islamic jurist's interpretation of those original sources
    • legal definition of jihad
    • obligation to perform jihad
      • communal
      • individual
        • in every year
        • continuously until Judgment Day
    • jihad is primarily offensive, not defensive
      • undertaken on Islam's initiative
        • proceeded by Dawah
          • involves killing men
          • involves enslaving women and children
    • jihad is undertaken by the caliph as the regular order of business
      • against Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians until they are subjugated and pay jizya
        • jizya is a punitive tax in lieu of execution
          • according to the Hanifi school, collected in a punitive & humiliating manner
      • against all other people until they become Muslims.

The most important points of the law of Jihad

Wednesday, February 08, 2012

Extend Santorum's Sweep

 Rick Santorum's sweep of several Western primaries and caucuses gives Conservatives some renewed hope. The delegate count will be minor, but the added momentum and positive publicity give Santorum a launching platform for the rest of the campaign and money is beginning to flow his way. 

    While there is no perfect politician and no perfect candidate, Santorum stands out above his rivals for consistent Conservatism.  The party establishment, media, experts & consultants want Mitt Romney.  Unlike his rivals, Santorum does not have a record of supporting mandatory health insurance and anthropogenic global climate change. 

    There is, in the Oval Office, ample evidence of the fact that a majority of the voters is indolent, unmotivated, ignorant and or intellectually incapacitated.  By sitting at home in front of the idiot box in '08, intelligent, educated and informed members of the electorate allowed ignorant morons swayed by the steady spew  from the propaganda mills, to nominate two incompetent and unqualified stuffed shirts, guaranteeing a bad outcome in November.

    From the outset, we have been informed by the experts, that Mitt Romney will be the nominee and that only Mitt Romney can attract the votes of 'moderates" & 'independents' and defeat Barack Obama.  By discouraging diversion of media attention, campaign donations and votes to the candidates they overlook and reject, the experts hope to morph their selective predictions into  self-fulfilling prophecy. 

    Others have their favorite sons and miracle glamor boys  who won one or two elections against great odds and have made a few headlines.  They wanted Pawlenty & Perry  to save the party by entering the race. How did that work out for you?  They may chant "anyone but..." but they will be members of the candidate of the month club, trying one and going for another, never satisfied. 

    With Romney & Gingrich going deeply negative, Santorum's improving performances in recent debates have earned him more attention from the voters and more votes.  I expect them to turn their propaganda guns on Santorum.  Santorum's reaction and the reaction of his financial contributors may well determine the outcome of Super Tuesday. 

    The party establishment hated Goldwater & Reagan and they hate Santorum.  They prefer candidates who will 'move right' in the primaries and 'move left' in the general election.  The conservative base wants candidates who will campaign on and heavily promote principled Conservative positions on the important issues with consistent enthusiasm. 

    Now is the time for the Conservative base to recognize the fact that Conservatives are in the majority, LibTards are in the minority, and we need to seize the moment, persevere and seize the day November 6, press on regardless.  President Reagan succeeded despite  opposition control of Congress.  Bush caved in and Shrub  failed to  fight effectively.  McCain  was unwilling to take the campaign to the enemy and pound the most important issues home. 

    If we will not learn from our mistakes now, when will we?  I will go to the poling place Feb. 28 and cast my vote for Rick Santorum.  My state, dominated by LibTards, will almost certainly go for Mitt Romney.  I do not jump onto bandwagons neither do I go with the flow.  I make an independent judgment based on the best evidence I can obtain. 

    Do not vote for the 'winner' who 'can get elected'; vote for the best man for the office and elect him.  Black ovals elect, white ovals reject, be careful when voting and make no mistakes.