Obamination: Good Riddance Address; Repeated Lies About
Islam and Ilamic State
nHat tip: Fox News, who published the AssWhole's prepared remarks.
The farewell address, to reasonable people, the good riddance
address, is long and target rich but I have selected a few of the most
egregious lies related to national security.[I reserve the economic and
social issue lies for others.] In keeping with my
usual practice, I have placed superscripts in the partial
transcript. Each superscript is linked to a comment below the
horizontal line. Click one, read the commentary and use your Back Space
Key to return to your place in the spew of turd.
Nine more days, thank God, only nine more days of durance
vile!!!
January 20, long time coming. Each time I see the lying impostor's
image and hear his voice, I need to piss on his grave. Unfortunately I
will not live long enough and can not afford to travel to Kenya,
Indonesia, Hawaii, Chicago or Washington D.C.
The New York Times claims that this is
a video of the speech. I can not
bear to listen to it. If you can, go ahead, waste an hour, its your
time. I will show you what really happened below the video.
[...]It's that spirit1
- a faith in reason, and enterprise, and the primacy of right over
might, that allowed us to resist the lure of fascism and tyranny during
the Great Depression, and build a post-World War II order with other
democracies, an order based not just on military power or national
affiliations but on principles - the rule of law2,
human rights, freedoms of religion3,
speech4,
assembly, and an independent press.
That order is now being challenged - first by violent fanatics
who claim to speak for Islam5;
more recently by autocrats in foreign capitals who see free markets,
open democracies, and civil society itself as a threat to their power.
The peril each poses to our democracy is more far-reaching than a car
bomb or a missile. It represents the fear of change; the fear of people
who look or speak or pray differently6;
a contempt for the rule of law that holds leaders accountable; an
intolerance of dissent and free thought; a belief that the sword or the
gun or the bomb or propaganda machine is the ultimate arbiter of what's
true and what's right7.
Because of the extraordinary courage of our men and women in
uniform, and the intelligence officers, law enforcement, and diplomats
who support them, no foreign terrorist organization8
has successfully planned and executed an attack on our homeland these
past eight years9. And
although Boston and Orlando remind us of how dangerous radicalization10
can be, our law enforcement agencies are more effective and vigilant
than ever. We've taken out tens of thousands of terrorists - including
Osama bin Laden11.
The global coalition12
we're leading against ISIL has taken out their leaders, and taken away
about half their territory.
ISIL will be destroyed13,
and no one who threatens America will ever be safe. To all who serve,
it has been the honor of my lifetime to be your Commander-in-Chief.
But protecting our way of life requires more than our
military. Democracy can buckle when we give in to fear. So just as we,
as citizens, must remain vigilant against external aggression, we must
guard against a weakening of the values14
that make us who we are. That's why, for the past eight years, I've
worked to put the fight against terrorism on a firm legal15
footing.
That's why we've ended torture16, worked
to close Gitmo17, and
reform our laws governing surveillance18 to
protect privacy and civil libertiessurveillance. That's why I reject
discrimination against Muslim Americans19.
That's why we cannot withdraw from global fights - to expand democracy,
and human rights, women's rights, and LGBT rights20
- no matter how imperfect our efforts, no matter how expedient ignoring
such values may seem. For the fight against extremism and intolerance
and sectarianism21
are of a piece with the fight against authoritarianism and nationalist
aggression.
If the scope of freedom and respect for the rule of law
shrinks around the world, the likelihood of war within and between
nations increases, and our own freedoms will eventually be threatened.
So let's be vigilant, but not afraid. ISIL will try to kill
innocent people. But they cannot defeat22
America unless we betray our Constitution and our principles in the
fight. Rivals like Russia or China cannot match our influence around
the world - unless we give up what we stand for, and turn ourselves
into just another big country that bullies smaller neighbors.
Which brings me to my final point - our democracy is
threatened whenever we take it for granted23.
All of us, regardless of party, should throw ourselves into the task of
rebuilding our democratic institutions. When voting rates are some of
the lowest among advanced democracies, we should make it easier, not
harder, to vote. When trust in our institutions is low, we should
reduce the corrosive influence of money in our politics, and insist on
the principles of transparency and ethics in public service. When
Congress is dysfunctional, we should draw our districts to encourage
politicians to cater to common sense and not rigid extremes.
And all of this depends on our participation; on each of us accepting
the responsibility of citizenship, regardless of which way the pendulum
of power swings. [...]
Spirit
Spirit my foot! The two global wars and
great depression were struggles for survival. Other nations, slave and
free, some not sharing our values, struggled along with us.
rule of law
Christ help me,. I need to curse!!! The
accursed liar hates our Constitution and has no respect for the rule of
law. He violated both the organic law and statutes, ruling by decree
with his phone & pen.
Freedom
of religion
But not for Catholics &
Protestants, just for his Muslim brothers. Suing the Little Sisters Of
The Poor to compel them to enable abortion!!!
The first amendment's free exercise
clause is for religions, not organized crime disguised as religion. Get
a God blessed clue for Chrissake! What legitimate religion
recruits and retains congregants by lethal force? Does
"Convert or die." have meaning for you? How about a divine
imperative to wage war on Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians until
we are subjugated and make annual extortion payments? How
about "my provision is placed under the shade of my spear"?
In which article, section &
clause does Obamination discover the right to attack, kill, rape,
plunder or enslave neighbors who do not share your superstition?
In that same constitutional provision you will find the right
to manifest, practice & propagate Islam. Need proof?
Here it is!!
Obamination and Shrillery would shut
down The Drudge Report, Breitbart News, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity
& Mark Levin if they could. Free speech is only for
them and their surrogates. They are trying to prosecute climate change
deniers. They signed onto HRC Res 16/18 in an attempt to silence the
critics of Islam.
violent
fanatics
One man spoke for Islam: Muhammad, who
died in 632. He killed one man by his own hand and commanded
86 battles, only one of them defensive, participating in 17.
Obamination wants us to believe that
Islam is anodyne, beneficent & peaceful. In fact, it is
inherently violent by design. It was contrived for the purpose of
giving the imprimateur of divine sanction to the natural proclivity of Arabs: barbarian rapine.
After his cougar died, Moe got his
living by his spear: taking it from those who created it.
{I was sent with the sword
just before the Hour so that Allah be worshipped alone without
partners. My provision was placed under the shadow of my spear, and
those who defy my order were disgraced and humiliated, and he who
imitates a people is one of them.) Tafsir Ibn Kathir
CamelShit! Skin
color, physignomy & language are irrelevant. Rational objection
to Islam/Muslims is based on knowledge obtained from the canonical
texts of Islam including the Qur'an, sahih ahadith, tafsirs, sira
& shari'ah. Obamination's accusations of racism and
bigotry turn around to point directly at him, he hates whites.
Projection!
Obamination described himself perfectly
in that sentence.
Accursed liar!!! The Boston Marathon
bombing, San Berdino Massacre, Pulse Club Massacre and Fort Hood
Massacre were failures? Damn! Damn! Damn!! Direct planning
& execution by Al-Qaeda & flkying aircraft into towers
are not essential elements of all terror attacks!
radicalization
It's Islam, AssWhole!!!!!
Normative, off the shelf Islam as preached and practiced by
Moe 1400 years ago. Not radical, extreme, perverted, hijacked or
distorted: Islam!!!
Terrorism: what Allah commanded; what Moe did &
Believers do!!! 3:151, 8:12,39,57,60,65,67,
9:5,29,38, 39,111,120,123,
33:26,27,
47:4,49:15,
59:2,13,61:10-13; Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220. The damnation
of Obamination can not come too soon!
taken
out terrorists
And that stopped terror attacks, right?
Bataclan, Berlin, Nice, Orlando & San Bernardino
attacks came after Osama was shot. One thousand down, 1.6
billion to go. Terrorism ends when there are no living Muslims, not
before!!! Click each of these links to the Qur'an &
hadith, read them and get a clue for Chrissake!!! 3:151, 8:12,39,57,60,65,67,
9:5,29,38, 39,111,120,123,
33:26,27,
47:4,49:15,
59:2,13,61:10-13; Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220.
ISIL destroyed
What of Hisb Ut-Tahrir, Hezbollah, Boko
Haram etc et al and every GdM who believes in Allah,
his imperatives, threat and promise? Al-qaeda was "on the
run" and Islamic state was the "JV team". Terrorism will continue until
there are no more Muslims.
global
coalition
We do not have Muslim friends, allies or
partners. Muslim regimes sponsor terrorism, they do not combat it. GdFs
do not know that the Qur'an explicitly forbids inferior and
equal relationships with infidels. "Take not as friends"! Do not be a
fool: read'em and curse Islam & lying Traitors..
National suicide, defeat, surrender and
submission are not our values! Victory at any cost to
preserve life, liberty & prosperity are our values.
Giving sanctuary to enemy combatants disguised as refugees is
not our value. Allowing terror training camps to proliferate is not our
value. letting terrorists live is not our value. Worrying about their
wives and brats is not our value. Hiroshima & Nagasaki reflect
our values.
legal footing
When dealing with Islam, there is one
law: extinction. Make it extinct by every means necessary!!!
The Constitution and laws are not suicide pacts. Enemy
combatants who attack us have no rights in our legal system.
They belong at he end of a rope or in the holding tank of the
nearest hog farm.
torture
Waterbarding is not torture. Our own
troops were subjected to it in training. There is nothing
illegal, immoral or wrong with it. Those who bitch about it should be
drowned in a hog farm holding tank.
close Gitmo
Release your Muslim brothers to return
to the battlefield and plot new attacks against us. What can go wrong
with that? AssWhole! No words can
express my contempt!!
surveillance
Several recent attackers were on watch
lists and under surveillance. What good did that do? Get them
to Hell out of here! Expel all Muslims presently in Dar al-Harb and do
not admit any more!!!
Muslim
Americans
The ultimate oxymoron! Muslim and
American are polar opposites! One can not be both! Their value system
is the polar opposite of ours. Their paradise is a carnal house and
being killed in battle against infidels is their price of admission.
They are enemies, not Americans. Expel them and do
not let any more in!!
global fights
Islam is theocratic, not democratic and
can not be altered. Reform is impossible! Islamic law
requires the execution of Queers. Islamic law does not allow freedom of
religion or speech. Not being Muslim is a capital offense.
Your damned fool Arab Spring is part of the problem, not part
of the solution.
fight against
Islam, you GdM!!!
Tolerance?
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.
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).
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.
defeat America
America was defeated by the lame stream
media in Korea and Vietnam. AssWholes lying about
the identity and character of the enemy and its persistent
existential threat will be the cause of our defeat by Islam.
It is death by a thousand cuts, wearing
down by attrition. Islam is persistent, it never quits attacking.
Muslims go to war or to Hell. While they believe, they will wage war.
If you continue bringing in more rapefugees & gimmigrants, we
will be defeated demographically.
democracy
threatened
The greatest threat to our
representative republic was your election and re-election by Goddamned
Fools who listened to your siren song of shit uncritically
and projected their dreams onto an unworthy vessel. The
second greatest threat was the nomination of the Bloody Bitch Of
Bengthazi despite her long litany of obvious lies.
Now we must be vigilant in keeping
President Trump's feet to the fire, holding him true to his campaign
promises. We must be inolved in the primary election cycles in ' 18, 20
& 24 and replace the damned RINOs with
Conservatives!!!
Patriots, get off the couch! Turn off
the idiot box, get nominating petitions and run for school boards,
township boards, county supervisor, city commissions and precinct
delegates. #MAGA!
Hijab 103 Authentic History Of The Islamic Head Bag
My colleague has shown to you a commentary on the verse of the hijab.
Being an equal opportunity offender who eventually pisses off everyone,
I take her lesson a step further.
Debi cited the Mariful Qur'an, a
translation & tafsir written by the father of M. Taki Usmani,
the Shari'ah Finance expert who sat on Pakistan's high court and was
involved in updating the translation. The tafsir is an eight volume
set, with an index volume which you can download from http://www.archive.org
You can read the page noted in her citation here.
Debi also displayed to you a Canuck
video criticizing a seminar purporting to give the history of the
hijab. I intend to display to you some history you will not
easily find elsewhere. But first, a little background information.
Arab and related cultures consider women
to be chattel property. Girls are owned by their fathers and sold to
husbands. The Muslim purchases the girl's awrah with his mahr.
Because I doubt your will to read Ishaq's Sira, I now exhibit
to you a quote from Guillaume's translation. I
could not make OCR work, so here is a screen shot of the page
with the hot section highlighted.
The Muslim's wife is a prisoner [Tabari translates it differently:
"domestic animals"[ Al-Tabari, Vol. 9, pp. 112-113],
having no control over her life.
Now we dispose of the modesty claim: it
does not apply to slaves. It is purely carnal, not pious.
24:31. And tell the
believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things),
and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.) and
not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent
(like palms of hands or one eye or both eyes for necessity to see the
way, or outer dress like veil, gloves, head-cover, apron, etc.), and to
draw their veils all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their
bodies, faces, necks and bosoms, etc.) and not to reveal their
adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's
fathers, their sons, their husband's sons, their brothers or their
brother's sons, or their sister's sons, or their (Muslim) women (i.e.
their sisters in Islâm), or the (female) slaves whom their right hands
possess, or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children who
have no sense of the shame of sex. And let them not stamp their feet so
as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And all of you beg
Allâh to forgive you all, O believers, that you may be successful.
Read the verse of Hijab:
33:59. O Prophet! Tell
your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw
their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (i.e.screen themselves
completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way). That will be
better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not
to be annoyed. And Allâh is Ever OftForgiving, Most Merciful.
So as not to be annoyed; what does that
mean? We will delve into hadith for the answer. The Profiteer
did not have indoor plumbing or an outhouse. When nature called, he
went ino the desert to answer it. Being a kind husband, he gave his
wives permission to go out to the desert at night for their personal
needs, meaning to defecate.
Umar, caliph in waiting, was campaigning
for the hijab. As part of his campaign, he hassled Sauda, the Profit's
second wife, while she was taking a dump in the desert.
Sauda complained to Moe, who revealed the Verse of Hijab as a result.
The wives of
the Prophet used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at
Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. 'Umar used to say to the
Prophet "Let your wives be veiled," but Allah's Apostle did not do so.
One night Sauda bint Zam'a the wife of the Prophet went out at 'Isha'
time and she was a tall lady. 'Umar addressed her and said, "I have
recognized you, O Sauda." He said so, as he desired eagerly that the
verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be
revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of "Al-Hijab" (A complete body
cover excluding the eyes).
(the wife
of the Prophet) 'Umar bin Al-Khattab used to say to Allah's Apostle
"Let your wives be veiled" But he did not do so. The wives of the
Prophet used to go out to answer the call of nature at night only at
Al-Manasi.' Once Sauda, the daughter of Zam'a went out and she was a
tall woman. 'Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her while he was in a gathering,
and said, "I have recognized you, O Sauda!" He ('Umar) said so as he
was anxious for some Divine orders regarding the veil (the veiling of
women.) So Allah revealed the Verse of veiling. (Al-Hijab; a complete
body cover excluding the eyes). (See Hadith No. 148, Vol. 1)
Remember this next time you see a Muslima pictured smugly smirking,
brim full of supremacism in her head bag. Imagine her squatting over a
pile in the desert. Not to be outdone, I now exhibit to you a priceless
graphic novel illustrating the incident described in the ahadith
displayed above. Note: the incident of Moe's adultery with Miriam is
documented in my various posts about "Innocence Of Muslims", look for
it in the right sidebar.
Given, shariah is Islam, and Islam is the sunnah and the shariah of the alleged "prophet of Islam," why not speak directly to the reality of the danger, which is Islam?
No history on Hijab--is that the position of the falsehood in Hijab 101?
That claim is nonsense.
The "suggestion" or choice to wear or not to wear hijab goes no further then one verse sorta-kinda alluding to it in the Qur’an?
Garbage.
As the Qur’an commands, obedience to “Allah” is commanded, and “Allah” commanded obedience to the alleged “prophet of Islam.” Tafsir further provides, sunnah of the “prophet” is part of the “revelation” received, and in that sunnah, as sira provides, the “prophet” supported and thus taught the house was the ideal covering “Allah” desired for women.
Therefore tafsir, as well as ahadith, is perfectly clear on the mandate of the Burka.
In brief.
Therefore, in condensed version, here follows:
“Burka” mandate of Islam
On the above topic, for those seeking to know and understand the verses of the Qur’an and the intended meanings of those respective verses with respect to the stated topic; for such, the great scholars of hadith and masters and Imams of tafsir—Tabarani, ibn Kathir, Imam Baghawi, Hakim, Qurtubi, Mazhari, Baihaqi, al-Mahalli, etc.-- provide the following explanations and clarifications:
The degrees of Islamic legal Hijab and the injunctions relating to them
The sum of seven verses of the Qur’an and seventy narrations of Hadith about the Hijab of women seems to be that the real objective desirable in the sight of the Shariah is Hijab-ul-ashkhas i.e. physical hiding of women from strangers. In other words, women and their movement should remain hidden from the sight of men, something that can be accomplished by means of the four walls of homes or tents or hanging curtains. All forms of Hijab allowed other than this [sic] are all restricted by or conditional with the ground of need, time of need, and measure of need.
Thus, the first degree of Hijab –which is the really desired objective of the Shariah—is that women stay in their homes. But, the Shariah of Islam is a comprehensive and complete social system in which full consideration has been given to all human needs. Then, it is all too obvious that women will face inevitable circumstances when they have to go out of the house at some or the other time. For this purpose, the second degree of Hijab, in the light of the Qur’an, and Sunnah, seems to be that they should go out wearing a burqa ‘ or long shawl concealing their whole body. To see their way, they leave only one eye open from inside the sheet,or use a patch of net before the eyes as is placed in a burqa ‘ for this purpose. On occasions of need, this second degree of Hijab too – like the first one – is agreed upon among all Muslim scholars and jurist.
(Mariful Qur’an, By Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi, translated by, Muhammad Shamim and Muhammad Wali Raazi, Revised by Maulana Muhammad Taqi ‘Usmani, Fourth Edition, 2007, Maktaba-e-Darul- ‘Uloom, Karachi, 14 Pakistan. Vol. 7, Surah al-Ahzab : 33: 53 – 55, P. 218.)
Therefore, Feminist, fighters and defenders of women’s rights--aka, in the face of Islam, fools and silent gutless wonders--anyone who objects to a woman, when outside her home, having to be so concealed, so imprisoned; then fight that which demands and commands such: Islam.
As stated above, it is the doctrine and thus the instruction from the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and thus the consensus of all Muslim scholars and jurist.
Moving forward on the topic, we note, The “Holy Prophet” reportedly said: “When a woman comes out (of her
house), the Shaytan marks her out (that is, makes her a means of spreading evil
among Muslims).” (Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi , Vol. 7, Surah al-Ahzab : 33:
53 – 55, Ibid, P. 221.) Hence, from the Islamic
perspective, the reason for the mandate of legal hijab .
Additionally, as the source provides, “ Ibn Khuzaymah and Ibn Hiabban
have also reported,” in their rendition of the above cited hadith, there also
these additional words: “(and [a woman] is closer to her Rabb [Lord] when she
is [hidden] in the midmost [section] of her house.” (Ibd.)
What’s more, as the revered scholar provided, this, “reported by
Tabarani, as quoted by Kanz,” once more, word hadith attributes to the “Holy
Prophet”: “For woman, there is no share in going out except when inevitable.)”
(Ibid.)
Therefore, as we move forward in this topic, we will dive deeper into
the details of the first and second degree of hijab, and what the “sacred
texts” of Islam have to say on it.
In the Commentary mentioned above, Ma’ariful Qur’an, well-versed on
the consensus of the notable scholars that proceeded him,
the revered scholar and author
provides, “The first verses on the subject of hijab for women are the ones
which were revealed in Surah Ahzab at the time of marriage of the mother of the
believers Sayyidna Zainab bit Jahash with the Holy Prophet.”
The most agreed
upon time of the above marriage and thus of the time in which the injunction of
Hajib was allegedly revealed is 5th
Hijrah. (ibid. [Vol.. 6, P. 407.]) Shortly, we will read of the noted marriage
account mentioned above.
Surah Ahzab has
five verses that speak to the topic of the mandate for hijab; Surah An-Nur has
two verses on the topic, the latter said to have been revealed at the time of
“the episode of Ifk (false imputation) …. Ifk means the worst type of lie,
imputation, or slander,” in this instance, that specifically brought against
Aishah. (Ibid, P.373.)
Speaking further
on “the episode of ifk,” limiting our focus on the incident to only providing
the time in which it occurred, referring to Aishah, Ma‘ariful Qur’an provides,
“The common practice was that first she would sit in her litter and then it was
placed on the back of the camel. It was because by this time the injunction of
hijab had been revealed.” (Ibid.)
As we will read
shortly, as just spoken to in the above citation, because secondary to the
alleged commandment for full seclusion of the Muslim woman; when traveling, the
litter served as the mandated hijab in place of the full covering and seclusion
the house provided for the women when stationary at home-base or elsewhere.
Though the verses
in Surah Ahzab are claimed to have come first, notwithstanding that, since the
information provided in Surah Ahzab on the topic is expansive, and once into
it, we will be there a good while; first, we will cite the verses in Surah
an-Nur on the injunction, which are these:
Say to the believing men that they should lower their gazes and guard
their private parts; it is more decent for them. Surely Allah is All-Aware of
what they do. (30.)
And say to the believing woman that they must lower their gazes and
guard their private parts and must not expose their adornments, except that
which appears thereof, and must wrap their bosoms with their shawls, and must
not expose their adornments except to their husbands or their fathers or the
fathers of their husbands, or to their sons of the sons of their brothers or
the sons of their sisters, or to their women, or those owned by their right
hands, or male attendants having no (sexual) urge, or to their children who are
not yet conscience of the shames of women…. (vs. 31.)
We will eventuate
in returning to commentary on the above verses. But briefly, now, stepping away from those
verse and Ma’ariful Qur’an, we go, first, to the two Sahihs; first to Bakhari,
and later on to Muslims wherein the reader is provided a bit of the background
setting in which and for which the above verses on the injunction of the veil were
allegedly revealed.
In Sahih Bukhari,
the chapter in focus here opens hearkening back to and citing verse 5 of
chapter 11, we reads as follows:
“No doubt! They did fold up their breast, that they may hide from Him.
Surely, even when they cover themselves with their garments, He knows what they
conceal and what they reveal. Verily, He is the All-Knower of the (innermost
secrets) of the breast.” (V. 11:5)
Narrated Muhammad bin ‘Abbad bin Ja’far that he heard Ibn ‘Abbas
reciting: “No doubt! They did fold up their breast …” (V.11:5) and asked him
about its explanation. He said, “Some people used to hide themselves while
answering the call of nature in an open space lest they be exposed to the sky,
and also when they had sexual relation with their wives in a [sic] open space,
lest they be exposed to the sky; so the above revelation was sent down
regarding them.”
(Sahih Al-Bukhari, Translated by:
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Darussalam, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1997, Vol. 6, Book
65 (Book of Commentary) P. 160, #4681.)
Tafsir Ibn Kathir provides this on the
verse just cited above (11:5):
Ibn Abbas said, “They used to
dislike facing the sky with their private parts, particularly during sexual
relations. Therefore, Allah revealed this verse.” Al-Bukhari recorded by way of
Ibn Jurayj, who reported from Muhammad bin ‘Abbad bin Ja’far who said, “Ibn
‘Abbas recited,
“Behold their breast did fold up.”
Clear as mud, right?
Indeed. Therefore, ibn Kathir relates the following actions
of Ibn Jurayj:
So I said: “O Abu Al-Abbas! What
does –their breast did fold up—mean?”
Good question, ibn Jurayj.
And to his posed question, ibn Kathir relates, Bakhari
related, Ibn Abbas answered with the following explanation:
“The man used to have sex with his
woman, be he would be shy, or he used to have answering the call of nature (in
the open space) but, he would be shy. Therefore, this verse,
“No doubt! They did fold up their
breast, was revealed.’”
ibn Kathir also provides this on the meaning of the somewhat
odd verse:
In another wording of this
narration, Ibn Abbas said, “there were people who used to be shy to remove
their clothes while answering the call of nature in an open space and thus be
naked exposed to the sky. They were also ashamed of having sexual relations
with their women due to fear of being exposed towards the sky. Thus, this was
revealed concerning them.”
Al-Bukhari reported that ibn ‘Abbas
said that “they cover themselves,” means that they cover their heads.
And then Ibn Kathir provides, al-Bakhari provides for the
reader, verse 6 of Surah 11—a Meccan chapter, worth noting:
And no moving creature is there on
earth but its provision is due from Allah. And He knows its dwelling place and
its deposit. All is in a Clear Book.”
(TAFSIR IBN KATHIR [ABRIDGED] V. 4,
ABRIDGED BY A GROUP OF SCHOLARS UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF SHAYKH SAFIUR-RAHMAN
AL-MUBARAKPURI, DARUSSALAM, Riyadh, Second Edition, 2003, Vol. 5, Surah 11. Hud
(5-6)pp. 21-22. [Qur’anic Text: parenthetical] )
Well, as stated earlier, that certainly clears the verse
up….
Therefore, therefrom, onward we go, to yet another Sahih
Bukhari provided hadith on the subject: the aforementioned wedding of the
alleged “prophet” and to Zainab bint Jahsh:
Narrated Ana: A wedding banquet of
bread and meat was held on the occasion of the marriage of the Prophet to
Zainab bint Jahsh. I was sent to invite the people (to the banquet), and so the
people started coming (in groups); they would eat and then leave. Another batch
would come, eat and leave. So I kept on inviting the people till I found nobody
to invite. Then I said, “O Allah’s Prophet! I do not anybody to invite.” He
said, “Carry away the remaining food.” Then a batch of three persons stayed in
the house, chatting. The Prophet left and wen towards the dwelling place of
“Aishah and said, “Peace and Allah’s Mercy
be on you, O the people of the house!” She replied, “Peace and the Mercy
of Allah be on you, too. How did you find your wife? May Allah bless you.” Then
he went to the dwelling places of all his other wives and said to them the same
as he said to ‘Aishah, and they said to him the same as ‘Aishah had said to
him. Then the Prophet returned and found a group of three persons still in the
house, chatting. The Prophet was a very shy person, so he went out (for the
second time) and went towards the dwelling places of ‘Aishah. I do not remember
whether I informed him that the people have [sic] gone away. So, he returned
and as soon as he entered the gate, he drew the curtain between me and him, and
then the Verse of Al-Hijab was revealed.
(Ibid, pp. 270 – 271, #4793.)
Then there is this incident:
Narrated ‘Aishah: Sauda (the wife
of the Prophet) went out to answer the call of nature after it was made
obligatory (for all the Muslims ladies) to observe the veil. She was a fat huge
lady, and everybody who knew her before could recognize her. So, ‘Umar bin
Al-Khattab saw her and said, “O Sauda! By Allah, you cannot hide yourself from
us, so think of a way by which you should not be recognized on going out.”
Sauda returned while Allah’s Messenger was in my house taking his supper, and a
bone covered with meat was in his hand. She entered and said, “O Allah’s
Messenger! I went out to answer the call of nature and ‘Umar said to me
so-and-so.” Then Allah revealed upon him (the Prophet) and when the state of
Revelation was over and the bone was still in his hand as he had not put it
down, he said (to Sauda), “You (women) have been allowed to go out for your
needs.” (Ibid. pp. 272-273, #4795.)
That instant there of alleged “revelation” is worth noting.
Considering, though it seems almost trifling, and actually given and allegedly
received in between bites of the chunks of meat on the said bone; according to
what tafsir provides on the alleged revelation of permission granted to the
women to go out for their needs, in that, their “needs” were also provided, and
detailed, as we will read shortly.
That said, Sahih Bukhari also provides the following on the
injunction of the veil, and ‘Umar’s contribution, if you will, to it:
Narrated ‘Umar: I said, “O Allah’s Messenger! Good and bad persons
enter upon you, so I suggest that you order the Mothers of the believers (i.e..
your wives) to observe veils.”
Then Allah revealed the Verses of Al-Hijab. (al-Bukhari, Ibid. P.269, #4790.)
Footnotes
thereat, in volumes sold, purchased, and read throughout the Muslim world,
read, “i.e. The observing of veils (complete body cover excluding the eyes) by
the Muslim women.” (Ibid.)
As we will cover
and show more on, as we advance herein, the alleged Allah-orders to the
“blessed” wives of the so-called prophet, because the said wives were examples
for all the Muslim women to emulate, were thus orders for all the women of
Islam.
In sum, as
Ma’ariful Qur’an provides, “all these instructions are not restricted to the
blessed wives in particular, in fact, virtually all Muslim women are obligated
to observe these,” provides the ruling. (M.Q. Vol. 7, P.138.)We will add more
to this topic later.
However, for now, we go to Sahih Muslim, read what Muslim provides
on the subject. There, we read the following:
Ibn Umar reported that Umar had said: My Lord concorded [sic] with (my
judgments) on three occasions. In case of the Station of Ibrahim, in case of
the observance of the veil and in case of the prisoners at Badr.
Our focus here
today, obviously, the second of the three occasions mentioned above. Hearkening
back to the challenge, so to speak, of
the open-air scenario mentioned earlier herein, with respect to that and the
hadith just cited, footnotes on the above-cited hadith read as follows:
The second case is that of the veil of the women. Hadrat “Umar did not
approve of going out of women, especially the members of the household of the
Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him), without veil. He asked the Holy Prophet …
to press his wives to observe pardah. The Holy Prophet … did not like to press
his wives to observe the pardah. The Holy Prophet … did not like to issue any
command which had not the sanctin [sic] and will of God behind it. But not much
time was passed that Allah revealed the verses pertaining to veil.
(Sahih Muslim, By Imam Muslim, Rendered in English by ‘Abdul Hamid
Siddiqi, Islamic Book Service, Fourth Edition, 2005, Vol. IV, Book Pertaining
to the Merits of the Companions, Excellent Qualities of Umar, (Allah be pleased
with him), P. 95, hadith, 2399, FN, respectively.)
[* “purdah” (sometimes spelled pardah, as above): “A Persian/Urdu word
for the seclusion of women. (A
Glossary of Islamic Terms, Aisha Bewley, Ta-Ha Publishers, LTD, 2009, P. 17.)]
(seclude: 1.to place in or withdraw into solitude; remove from social contact and
activity, etc. 2.to isolate; shut off; keep apart:
They secluded the garden from the rest of the property.
[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/seclude].)
Al-Bukhari
relates the narrative this way:
Narrated Anas: “Umar said, “I agreed with Allah in three things,” or
said, “My Lord agreed with me (accepted my invocation) in three things. I said,
‘O Allah’s Messenger! Would that you took the Maqam (place) of Ibrahim
(Abraham) as a place of Salat (prayer).’ I also said, ‘O Allah’s Messenger!
Good and bad persons visit you! Would that you ordered the Mothers of the
believers to cover themselves with veils.’ So the Divine Verses of Al-Hijab
(i.e., veiling of the women) were revealed…. (Bukhari, Ibid, P.29, # 4483.)
We deduce from
the rendition provided by Muslim, that, according to Islamic teaching, when the
alleged prophet informed his ummah on the allegedly, as Bukhari puts it,
“divinely” revealed injunction of the veil; henceforward, it was then a mandate
with “the sanctin [sic] and will of God behind it.”
Footnotes
provided in Ibn Majah echoe much the same as that in Muslim, as we read in the
following:
There were several instances in the life of ‘Umar where he said
something out of his own judicious opinion or judgment, and Allah’s ordainment came in accord with
that judgment. Cases in point are: the commandment
regarding Hijab (women’s veil); the question of the prisoners of the Battle
of Badr …. This attribute of forming correct opinions was certainly a special
gift or favor granted to ‘Umar from Allah.
(Sunan Ibn Majah, English Translation, Compiled by: Imam Muhammad Bin
Yazeed Ibn Majah Al-Qazwini, Ahadith edited & referenced by: Hafiz Abu
Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’I, Translated by: Nasiruddin al-Khattab [Canada], Final review by: Abu Khaliyl [USA], Darussalam. Vol. 1, The Book of the
Sunnah, Virtues of Umar, P. 146, FN. On # 100.)
We note, in the
first of the two just cited ahadith, the injunction of the veil—“purdah … the
seclusion of women”--is referred to as “the observance of the veil,” and in the
second comments on it, the revered Imams refer to the issue as “the commandment
regarding Hijab.” Moreover, they precede
the latter with the qualifier, “Allah’s
ordainment.” Additionally, we gain from the definition of purdah, which
means “seclusion,” the commandment was for the women of Islam to be, in short,
removed “from social contact and activity, etc.” and to be isolated, “shut
off,” kept apart from it.
We likewise
regard, a suggestion is a suggestion, a recommendation is a recommendation, and
a commandment is a commandment. The latter, non-optional.
We also note that
we have four instances in which and “needs” for which the alleged revelation
allegedly came:
1.“the
time of marriage of the mother of the believers Sayyidna Zainab bit Jahash with
the Holy Prophet.”
2.The
instance in which Umar relates, he was visiting the house of the so-called
prophet, and he said, “‘O Allah’s Messenger! Good and bad persons visit you!
Would that you ordered the Mothers of the
believers to cover themselves with veils.’”
3.The
instance that I will call the “open-air” scenario and the disquiet it
presented.
4.And
finally, the alleged revelation while at the bone, so to speak, when Umar told
Sauda to think of a way to keep herself from being recognized when out
answering the call of nature.
With that said, the above
tucked in mind, so too, with the Qur’anic command, ““Obey God and obey the
Messenger and those who are in charge…” (al-Nisa,
4:59), we go now to what the “sacred texts” provide
that the “Messenger of Allah” had to say on the topic of the veil. The
following event related as that which happened during the final pilgrimage,
therefore, after the alleged revelation of the “the commandment regarding Hijab”:
Abu Waqid Al-Laithi narrated that he heard the Messenger of Allah say
to some of his wives during the Farewell Pilgrimage, “This, and then the
surface of mats.” [1] (Hasan.)
[1] Indicating that they may stay home from its performance in
following years after it that year.
(Sunan Abu Dawud, Compiled by: Imam Hafiz Abu Dawud Sulaiman ibn Ash
‘ath, Ahadith edited and referenced by: Hafiz Abu Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’i,
Translated by: Nasiruddin al-Khattab (Canada), Final Review by: Abu Khaliyl
(USA); First Edition, Darussalam, 2008; Vol. 2, The Book of the Rites of Hajj
and Umrah, Chapter 1, p. 332, # 1722, FN
respectively.)
Waqidi relates
the event in these words, providing first for the reader, the setting:
When the Messenger of God …. Set out for Hajj he went before
al-Shajara. When he returned from Mecca he entered Medinah from the resting place
of al-Abtah. The Messenger of God was in his resting place in Batn al-Wadi. The
people were with him at night. And it was said to him, “Surely, you are blessed
in Batha! The Messenger of God said to his wives, “This is the Hajj, then the
back of the carpet” –meaning, stick to your homes.
(The Life of Muhammad, Al-Waqidi’s Kitab al-Maghazi, Translated by
Rizwi Faizer, Amal Ismail, and AbdulKader Tayob, Routledge; New York, NY, 1st
Publication, 2011. P. 545.)
And Ma’ariful
Qur’an provides the narrative this way, and, given this comment is found in
those provided for Surah 33, we go to a few of those pages on the topic now:
… On the occasion of the Last Hajj (Hajjatul-Wadaa’), the Holy Prophet
helped his blessed wives perform Hajj with him personally, the remark that he
made on return was: (This is it. After that, should stick to the mats at home).
The first word (hadhihi: translated here as ‘this is it’) refers to this very
Hajj and (husur) is the plural form of (hasiir) which means a mat (of straw, a
modest version of other floor spreads such as rug, carpet, daree, ets.). In
essence, the Hadith is saying: Your going out for this alone is done. After
that, you stick to the mats of your homes necessarily without having to part
therefrom.
Now we are about
to see, how, according to Islamic teaching and the consensus provided by the
revered scholars of Islam on the injunction in focus here; the alleged
“revelations,” as spoken to above, were by no means, as inconsequential as they
seemed. By no means, simply limited to the tossing, if you will, of a veil or
shawl over one’s head, “bosoms,” shoulders or body. Not by a long shot. For
what tafsir provides is that the covering detailed in the “revealed” verses on
Hijab (seclusion of the women) was in fact the Allah-preferred observed
full-covering provided by a house. Therewith providing the end Islamic mandate
of full seclusion of the Muslim women.
Hence the just
cited occasions of the command, “’This is the Hajj, then the back of the
carpet’ –meaning, stick to your homes.” (Waqidi rendition.)
For the same
authoritative tafsir referenced last—Commentary, as mentioned before, embraced
by the Muslim world-- also provides, that, “the sense of Islamic legal Hijab as
understood by the Holy Prophet and his blessed wives was but that women stay in
their homes and, if traveling, in their shughduf (camel-litter), their presence
was not to be exposed before men.” (Ma’ariful Qur’an, Vol. 7, P. 222.)
For such reasons,
as touched on herein, the incident with Aishah referred to in the opening pages
of this chapter; the incident of ifk; hence, with respect to that incident, and
the topic in focus here, this:
The reason why Sayyidah Aishah
was left behind in the wilderness during the event of Ifk was no other but that
the Hijab of the blessed wives was not simply restricted to the burqa or long
sheet, in fact, even while traveling, they used to be in their camel-litter
(shughduf or hawdaj). This shughduf itself was mounted on the camel and was
dismounted as such. A shughdul is like a miniature roomette for the traveler…. (ibid.)
A camel-borne
miniature mobile home, so to speak.
Because, for the
women of Islam, to observe the covering provided by the home, be that a home
mobile or stationary; “in the Shariah, it is a hijab that stands achieved by
their staying at home, that is, the home becomes their veil or cover
(al-hijab-bil-buyut).” (ibid, P. 141.)
Hence the
earlier-cited narratives of the order, “to the mats of your homes necessarily
without having to part therefrom.” ( Ibid.142.)
The same source
sums up the principle of the hadith with this clarification and buttressing:
This concerns the observance of full hijab (purdah or veil). It was
said: (And remain in your homes, and do not display (your) beauty …. -33)….(p.
140. ibid)
In this verse, the essential injunction about hijab is that women stay
at home (that is, do not go out without the need as admissible in the Shariah).
Along with it, it was also said that they should not go out moving around in
public without hijab …. The word : (tabarruj) essentially means manifestation
or display and, at this place, it means the display of personal embellishment
before non-Mahram men—as it appears in another verse: (not displaying
embellishment –An-Nur, 24:60).
….
The verse tells us two things about hijab:
(1)For
women, the real thing desirable with Allah is that they should not go out of
their homes. Their creation is an answer to whatever needs to be done at home.
Let them stay involved in it. As for the real hijab desirable in the Shariah,
it is a hijab that stands achieved by their staying at home, that is, the home
becomes their veil or cover (al-hijab-bil-buyut).
(2)The
other thing it tells us is: If a woman has to go out of the home to take care
of some need, let her not go out with any display of embellishment. Instead,
she should wear what covers her whole body, a burqa ‘, or jilbab (women’s gown,
garment or cloak)—as in the verse of the very Surah Al-Ahzab: (bring down over
themselves part of their outer garments—33:59), the details about which shall
appear later….(Ibid, P. 140, 141.)
The verses in Surah Al-Azab and, some, commented on above are these:
[31] O
wives of the prophet, you are not like any other women, if you observer *taqwa. So, do not be too soft in your
speech, lest someone having disease in his heart should develop fancies (about
you); and do speak with appropriate words. [32] And remain in your homes and do
not display (your) beauty as it used to be displayed in the days of earlier
ignorance. And establish salah, and pay zakah, and obey Allah and His messenger.
Allah only intends to keep (all sorts of) filth away from you, O members of the
family (of the prophet), and to make you pure through a perfect purification.
[33] And be mindful of Allah’s verses
and the wisdom that is recited in your homes. Surely, Allah is All-Kind,
All-Aware. (ibid. P. 131.)
And the following verse:
O prophet,
tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the beleivers that they
should draw down their shawls over them. That will make it more likely that
they are recognized, hence not teased. And Allah is Most-Forgiving,
Very-Merciful. [59] (ibid. P. 238.)
The injunction, the source tells us, is “the avoidance of addressing
non-Mahram men soflty and tenderly and avoidance of going out homes unnecessarly.”
That injunction, the source provideds, is “The same tells us, that the original
word used in the last cited Qur’anic verse is “jilbab.” And “jilbab” is further
defined as “a long sheet in which a woman gets to be hidden from the head to
the feet. (This has been reported from Sayyidna Ibn ‘Abbas)” (ibid, P. 222.)
Ibn Jarir is then cited, “citing his own chains of authority,” that,
reportedly, Sayyidna ‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Abbas asserted, “The manner in which jilbab
is used, that is, a woman should be wrapped therein, from the head to the feet,
and that her face and nose too be hidden behind it—leaving only one eye
uncovered to see the way.” (ibid. P. 223.)
We will return to more on the “only one eye uncovered” mandate later.
But for now, speaking to that provided in the alleged revelation received “at
the bone,” with respect to the woman being granted permission to go out for
certain needs; this, provided under the subheading, “Occasions of need have
been exempted from the obligation of ‘staying in homes’”:
In
the opening sentence of verse 33: (And remain in your homes), staying in homes
was made obligatory (wajib) which apparently purports that it should be
absolutely prohibited and haram for a woman to go our of her home, but verse
has [sic], at the first place, already indicated through the use of the words:
(And do not display your beauty) within the verse that going out as needed is
not prohibited in an absolute sense. Instead, what is prohibited is going out
in a manner which displays embellishment. Then, there is the injunction of:
(bring down over themselves part of their outer garments –33:59) to appear
later in Surah Al-Ahzab. This injunction is itself telling us that to a certain
degree women do have the permission to go out of the home, of course on
condition that they go out in hijab wearing an outer garment like burqa’ etc.
(ibid, P. 141.)
Then the revered scholar, Maulana
Mufti Muhammad Shafi, hearkening back to “the bone” alleged revelation,
provides the following:
In addition to that, the Holy Prophet has
himself clarified that occasions of need are exempt from this injunction, as in
a Hadith where, while addressing the blessed wives, he is reported to have
said: (You are permitted to go out for your needs –reported by Muslim). Then,
the conduct of the Holy Prophet after the revelation of the verse of hijab
proves that women have permission to go out of home on occasions of need, as
the going of the blessed wives with the Holy Prophet for Hajj and ‘Umrah stands
confirmed on the authority of sound and authentic Ahadith. (Ibid.)
Indeed,
as spoken to above.
Maulana
Mufti Muhammad Shafi adds, sound and authentic ahadith likewise provide, it
stands proved thereby, in many of the battles in which the so-called prophet
fought, thereto, it was common for some of his wives to accompany him.
He
adds, the same likewise reveal, on many occasions, “the blessed wives used to
go out of their homes to visit their parents, did their duty by calling on the
sick among relatives and offering
condolence on the death of someone among them.”
He adds, during the time of the “prophet” “they also had the permission
to go the Masajid.” (Ibid.) As well as going out, as we showed above, for Hajj
and ‘Umrah.
Hence
the previous citation: “Your going
out for this alone is done. After that, you stick to the mats of your homes
necessarily without having to part therefrom.” (ibid. P. 142.)
The revered writer then tells the reader,
two of the “blessed wives” took that to mean, “ ‘your going out was permissible
for this very Last Hajj. Beyond that, the consensus of the rest of the wives
“—including a jurist of the class of Sayyidah ‘A’isha, unanimously interpreted”
the above cited “ words of the Holy Prophet,” to mean this:
‘your
going out of your homes is permissible for this kind of journey which aims at
performing a recognized act of worship, otherwise you should stay at home’ In
[sic] gist, from the sense of the verse: (And remain in your homes –33)—as
supported by indicators of the Qur’an, the practice of the the Holy Prophet and
the consensus of the noble Sahabah—occasions of need are exempted which include
religious obligations of Hajj and Umrah, taking care of the natural duties
towards parents, visiting Mahram relatives in health and sickness and attending
to other requirements of this nature. (Ibid.)
Additionally, the source relates, if a
woman must go out to earn her living, there too, the exemption to go out
applies, as long as she does so in hijab—full seclusion, as spoken to above, with only one eye uncovered, thus,
allowing her to see her way. But it is once more underscored, when she goes out
she must do so in “full mantle or chadar,” thus, refraining from displaying not
only details of her physical body, excepting one eye, but also any of her
personal beauty and embellishment.
Driving that message home, the source
restates the above-cited instruction, stating:
It
has been made amply clear in the previous paragraph that the sense of the
imperative of
‘remain
in your homes’ (33) as proved from the
very indicators, rather, expressions of the Qur’an, as well as from the
practice of the Holy Prophet and after him from the consensus of the noble Sahabah,
it is confirmed that occasions of need are exempt from it—which includes going
for religious needs of Hajj and Umrah etc. (ibid, P. 143.)
Ibn Kathir addresses the topic with these
words:
“And
stay in your houses,” means, stay in your houses and do not come our except for
a purpose. One of the purposes mentioned in Shariah is prayer in the Masjid, so
long as the conditions are fulfilled, as the Messenger of Allah said:
“Do not prevent the female servants of
Allah from the Masjids of Allah, but have them go out without wearing
fragrance.”
According to another report:
“even though their homes are better for them.”
(TAFSIR IBN
KATHIR [ABRIDGED] V. 4, ABRIDGED BY A GROUP OF SCHOLARS UNDER THE SUPERVISION
OF SHAYKH SAFIUR-RAHMAN AL-MUBARAKPURI, DARUSSALAM, Riyadh, Second Edition,
2003, Vol. 9 p. 174. Vol. 7. 33: 33, P.
679.)
As stated earlier before adding in this update, there remains, much more one can, and will, when time allows, add to this topic.
Update 12/05/17: According to news reports, President Trump will announce recognition of Jerusalem as the capital city of Israel and sign the damned waiver, kicking the can down the road.
He has no intention of moving the embassy, otherwise he would abandon the waiver.
This is an obvious attempt to apply pressure on the Falestinians to come to the negotiating table. It will fail. Muslims want genocide & politicide, not peace. They can not negotiate in good faith 'cuz Islam is a false faith.
There is no two state solution. There is only a one state solution: Israel alone with no Muslims within rocket range.
Islam is existential war. It's extinction is the only victory; the only path to peace. See my 8 part series on Why Peace Is Impossible. US Embassy: This Year In Jerusalem!!!
Update 03/06/'17 An optimistic sigh:
https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/84626/congressional-embassy-factfinders-trump-will-not-renew-veto-jerusalem-move-may/?utm_source=Breaking+Israel+News&utm_campaign=4ed64be164-BIN_evening_3_17&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b6d3627f72-4ed64be164-86685089&mc_cid=4ed64be164&mc_eid=2f47ab2abf#e9LzbZ4IzbFD3BWd.97
Breaking Israel News quotes Rep. Ron DeSantis as hoping that President Trump will allow the embassy relocation waver to lapse. As is to be expected, he leaves som wiggle room.
President Trump would not renew the waiver that enables the President to postpone implementing the Congressional decision to relocate the US embassy to Jerusalem, said Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Florida), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on National Security, on Sunday. He is heading the committee’s tour to Israel to investigate moving the embassy.
Speaking as a press briefing at Jerusalem’s King David Hotel, he said that he did not think President Trump would sign the waiver, which is due for renewal in May.
“May will be close to the 50th anniversary of the liberation of Jerusalem, and I expect President Trump will let the waiver expire.”
Ever since Congress enacted the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, the president has the right, under section 7, to sign a semi-annual national security waiver that enables him to postpone implementing the decision, citing national security interests. So far, all the presidents (Clinton, Bush, and Obama) who have held office since the measure was passed have consistently postponed relocating the embassy by renewing the waiver every six months.
Read more at https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/84626/congressional-embassy-factfinders-trump-will-not-renew-veto-jerusalem-move-may/#TCZwwAyDxtMKFjkJ.99
Hat tip to Jihad Watch.
So the AssWholes declare war.
Big deal! They have been waging war against us since 1776 [Barbary
Pirates] [Who shot Bobby Kennedy?]. For 19 years, Jordan illegally
occupied Jerusalem, expelled Jews, destroyed their property and
desecrated cemeteries. And they call it war when we put our Embassy in
Israel's rightful capital which never was the capital city of any other
entity: There is no good reason why Jews should not ascend the Temple
Mount, pray and rebuild the Temple! There is no good reason why Muslims
should occupy israel! Bibi: send them home!
God damn!!!
Words are insufficient to express my contempt for the
supremacist usurpers who unlawfully occupy Jerusalem. .
This obnoxious effrontery must not
stand. We must not be intimidated. We must raise high the impudent
digit of contumacious defiance and do what is right and just.
The SandSharks &
United Nazis don't like it: tell them to go to Hell!
@President Donald J. Trump: I call upon
you to keep your campaign promise: move the Embassy to Jerusalem as
soon as possible, without compromise; without apology. If,
like the traitors who held your office before you, you waive the move
on national security or any other grounds, my voice will be among those
calling for impeachment.
Failing to keep your promise to move the
embassy wold destroy your credibility and mark your consequence as
another lying opportunistic demagogue.
The Messenger of God rose the next morning…
called Usama b. Zayd and said, “Usama, go to where your father was killed, and
attack them with the horses … Attack the people of Ubna in the morning ….
The Messenger of God handed a banner to Usama
and said, “O Usama, attack in the name of God and in the path of God, and fight
those who do not believe in God. Attack…. (Waqidi)
On
Monday, 26 Safar of the eleventh year from the Hijrah of the Apostle of Allah,
may Allah bless him, the Apostle of Allah …. called Usamah Ibn Zayd and said to
him: Proceed to the place of your father’s assassination and trample them (the
enemy) under your horses. I have appointed you commander of this army. Attack
the people of Ubna early in the morning and set fire (to their camp). (Ibn Sa ‘d.)
Same
account spoken of, this from the narrative provided on it in the Biography of
Abu Bakr As-Siddeeq (as-Sallabee): :
“Go to where your father was killed and trample (the enemy) down with your
horses.”
Therefore, we witness and absorb
today, this command of the alleged “Messenger of God,” today, as referenced to
above, the “driver
and truck replacing the Muslim cavalryman and his mount.”
As spoken to in http://islamexposed.blogspot.com/2017/01/esteban-santiago-and-watchword-one.html, should any of the details Pamela Geller skillfully covers in the above post be of any moment to us?
Of course not.
Because, when it comes to Islam and those who live by its Guidance, our part is to play the role of the fools, the gullible, the subjects, the susceptible, and the defenseless ‘unsuspecting’ prey of the "lions" and "cubs" of the Ummah.
As such, our part is to absorb the brunt blow of the heaving swelling chest of the horsemen’s mount as it barrels into and over us. ' if we're lucky, seize if not a leg then a stirrup, if not that, then a perhaps a hoof, and if not that, then, hopefully, minimally, at least a strand of hair from the tail of the steed that trampled us.
And prepare for the next bloodletting and loss of peace, property, freedom, loved ones, life and limbs, as the Muslims, enjoying among us the freedom to practice the tenets of their faith, do just that.
As spoken to in the above post posted at Jihad Watch, so
too, at https://www.everipedia.com/esteban-santiago/, as
provided by commentator, "mortimer," in comments section of the
latter above, Fort Lauderdale shooter, Esteban Santiago, was a good Muslim.
Thus, with that tabled, to the following:
“Bilal, who became Abu Bakr’s freedman,” reads the Sira
record, “He was a sincere Muslim.” 1
Was so, not only after Islam became strong and dominate,
post Hijra, but was so when Islam was yet weak, in Mecca, when the orders to
the believers were much like those to the Christian: when railed upon, when persecuted,
turn the other cheek. Like a good soldiers, endure suffering.
In that period, as Bilal endured his portion of suffering as
a Muslim, the sira record relates, “Umayya b. Khalaf would place him outside at
the heat of noon, then order that a huge rock be placed on his chest. He would
then,” reads the narrative, tell Bilal, “By God, you’ll stay like this till you
die, unless you disavow Muhammad and pray to al-Lat and al-‘Uzza.” 2
Often times, relates the said record, "the guards … paraded him in the quarters of Mecca.” 3
And “ “Bilal,””sira relates, “ “while in that state, would
only say, ‘One! One!’”” 4
The same record provides, “ “Waraqa b. Nawfal used to pass
by Bilal when he was being persecuted in this way as he was saying, ‘One! One!’
Waraqa would then say to Bilal, ‘One! One! by God, O Bilal!’”” 5
Meanwhile, while that suffering was being endured, in the mind,
soul, and heart of the alleged “prophet of Islam” was seething, the making, if
you will, of a new and better “revelation”--the will, the resolve to toss to
the side Christian principals of turning the other cheek. In their place make
the rule the promise spit out by the said “prophet,” when he declared to the
nobles of the Meccan Quraysh, “Are you listening,
O Quraysh? By Him in whose hand is my soul, I’m bringing you slaughter!’” 6
Therefore, not long after that, concerning those who opposed
the “prophet” and his “religion,” the order of the day soon was as was a common watchword among the Muslims: “Kill! Kill!" 7
As the sira record relates, as was common at that time, “friends were generally distinguished
from foes by the use of watchwords,” therefore, “a general watchword” among the
Muslims became, “O Victorious slay” (ya mansur amit).” So too, was the watchword, the battle cry, “ “One
God, One God” (Ahad, Ahad).” 8
Such was, provides the stated record, “to wit ‘O cavalry of
God’ for the horsemen, ‘O Banu Abd ar-Rahman’ for Meccan migrants….they needed
not be secret, since … these watchwords (shi’ar) were to be used,” as stated
above, “to
distinguish” friend from foe. 9
But should any of that, or more from the Islamic “sacred
texts,” be of any moment to us?
Of course not.
Because, when it comes to Islam and those who live by its
Guidance, our part is to play the role of the fools, the gullible, the
subjects, the susceptible, and the defenseless ‘unsuspecting’ prey of the "lions" and "cubs" of the Ummah.
As such, our part is to absorb the brunt blow of the heaving swelling chest of the horsemen’s mount as it barrels into and over us. ' if we're
lucky, seize if not a leg then a stirrup, if not that, then a perhaps a hoof, and if not that, then, hopefully, minimally, at least
a strand of hair from the tail of the steed that trampled us.
And prepare for the next bloodletting and loss of peace, property,
freedom, loved ones, life and limbs, as
the Muslims, enjoying among us the freedom to practice the tenets of their faith, do
just that.
Citations:
1. Ibn
Kathir, ‘Imad ad-din Isma ‘il Ibn ‘Umar ibn Kathir, Abu’ l-Fida, The Life of the Prophet Muhammad, Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya, Vol. 1, Translated by Professor Trevor Le Gassick, Reviewed by Dr. Ahmad Fareed, First
Edition 1998, First Paperback Edition 2000, Reprinted 2002, 2004, 2006, 2010;
ISBN-13:978-1-85964-142-2; ISBN-10:1-85964-142-3, P. 356.
2. Ibid, P. P. 356 -357.
3. Ibid, P. 358.
4. Ibid, P. 357.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid, P. 342.
7. Al-Waqidi, Abu 'Abdullah Muhammad b. 'Umar, The Life of Muhammad, Kitab al-Maghazi, Translated by Rizwi Faizer, Amal Ismail and Abdulkadar Tayob, Routledge; New York, NY, 1st Publication, 2011; ISBN: 978-0-415-57434-1 (hbk), ISBN: 978-0-203-84458-8 (ebk); P.128.
8. Hamidullah, Dr. Muhammad, The Battlefields of the Prophet Muhammad, Kitab Bhavan, New Delhi, Revised, 1992, Publishers, LTD, 2009; ISBN 81-7151-153-8; P. 37.
