Monday, November 28, 2011

Taliban being paid $150 a month to stop fighting

The Taliban must be laughing their asses off over this. Get paid to take a break from killing the kuffur while waiting for the allies to pull out of Afghanistan. What more could a jihadi ask for?

FROM NDTV.COM:

Taliban being paid $150 a month to stop fighting

Indo-Asian News Service, Updated: November 28, 2011 11:56 IST

London: Taliban cadres are being paid 100 pounds (over $150) a month for desisting from action and will be allowed to keep their weapons as part of a new initiative to end the insurgency in Afghanistan, a media report said on Sunday.

The "reintegration" program, which has the full support of NATO, is intended to keep them from attacking troops of the NATO-led International Seurity Assistance Force (ISAF), the Daily Telegraph reported on Sunday.

Those who have attacked and killed British forces are also given an amnesty, meaning they will not be put on trial.

The amnesty extends to all Taliban fighters, including those involved in atrocities, such as killing children, beheadings or hanging women.

The agreement is part of a policy signed by the British government in which insurgents are being allowed to "walk off the battlefield" and enter a "reintegration" scheme.

Instead of interrogating members of the Taliban joining the program, they are asked to fill up a questionnaire to seek from them their reasons for joining the insurgency.

The strategy has been formulated to encourage the Taliban to stop fighting and return to their communities with "dignity and honour".

Over 2,700 insurgents have been reintegrated into mainstream Afghan society since October 2010, with 800 now described as "showing interest in leaving the Taliban".

Major General David Hook, the director of the Joint Force Integration Cell in Kabul, admitted in an interview with The Sunday Telegraph that the program would be difficult for many British families to accept but insisted that reintegration was vital if peace was to be achieved.

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Germany backs peace talks with the Taliban

The Taliban have won. For the allied countries to negotiate with the Taliban is the height of folly if they think the Taliban will honor any commitment. The Taliban see this as a "hudna", a temporary truce used since the time of Mohammed as a tactic to bide time until they are strong enough to renew their attacks on the Afghan government. Once the allied troops leave in 2014, the Taliban will again attack the government and probably overthrow it.

These "peace talks" are of course nothing more than a face saving ploy for the West.


FROM THELOCAL.DE:

Germany backs peace talks with the Taliban

Published: 27 Nov 11 15:12 CET

Germany's foreign and defence ministers called Sunday for the Taliban to be included in Afghanistan peace talks, ahead of a major international conference for the war-ravaged country next month.

Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle and Defence Minister Thomas de Maiziere told the Bild am Sonntag newspaper that negotiations with the Islamist militant group was the only realistic option for lasting peace.

"Reconciliation does not happen among friends but rather between erstwhile opponents," Westerwelle was quoted as saying. "That is what we need to work on instead of speculation about who might not be ready to reconcile."

Germany has the third largest contingent of foreign troops in Afghanistan but had long rejected proposals to include the Taliban in peace negotiations.

Westerwelle, who will host ministers from more than 100 countries in the western city of Bonn on December 5 to discuss the future of Afghanistan after the withdrawal of NATO troops in 2014, said there was no guarantee of success. "But all agree that it must be tried," he said.

The West "cannot simply say, 'You are evil, we won't negotiate with you'," added de Maiziere.

"We cannot exclude everyone from the inner-Afghan reconciliation process who once had a sword in his hand," he said. Only when "a sufficient number of important groups" take part will the peace process have a chance of working.

Westerwelle said the war in Afghanistan could not be won militarily.

"After 10 years it is obvious that in Afghanistan, there can only be a political solution, not a military one," he said.

Taliban fighters frequently attack convoys supplying NATO troops in Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan, as part of a 10-year insurgency against the western-backed Kabul government since US troops toppled their regime in 2001.

This month, Afghan elders backed talks with Taliban who renounce violence, despite the assassination in September of peace envoy Burhanuddin Rabbani which officials blame on insurgents.

De Maiziere said Berlin would keep troops in Afghanistan after the NATO pullout at the end of 2014, to focus on the training of local forces.

Saturday, November 26, 2011

Maldives won't allow debates on anti-Islamic issues: Foreign Minister

This is Islam in it's purest form. This is what the Islamists want to impose on YOU.

FROM HAVEERU.COM:

Maldives won't allow debates on anti-Islamic issues: Foreign Minister

Ahmed Hamdhoon, Haveeru News Service
Nov 26, 2011 - 04:09

The government will not allow debates to be held in the Maldives on issues that are against the fundamentals of Islam, Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem said today.

The minister's comments come two days after the UN human rights chief called for a public debate in the Maldives on the practice of flogging women found guilty of extra-marital sex.

Minister Naseem told Haveeru that the government would not open a basic Islamic principle such as flogging for public debate in the Maldives despite requests to do so.

"What's there to discuss about flogging? There is nothing to debate about in a matter clearly stated in the religion of Islam. No one can argue with God," he said.

"Our foreign ministry will not allow that to happen."

Naseem stressed that the government will not act against the views expressed by Islamic Minister Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari on Navi Pillay's comments.

"The government will follow the recommendations given by the Islamic Ministry on religious issues. The government will not stand up against the views expressed by Bari, which is the view of the government [regarding Pillay's remarks]," he said.

"Maldives is a 100 percent Muslim country."

During her four-day visit to the country, Pillay told parliamentarians on Thursday that flogging women convicted of extra-marital sex is one of the most inhumane and degrading forms of violence against women.

"I strongly believe that a public debate is needed in Maldives on this issue of major concern," she said.

Pillay later told reporters that she held discussions with President Mohamed Nasheed, ministers and the judiciary on how to end the practice of flogging in the Maldives.

"At the very least, pending more permanent changes in the law, it should be possible for the government and the judiciary to engineer a practical moratorium on flogging," she proposed.

She also called on Maldivian authorities to remove the "discriminatory" constitutional provision that requires every citizen to be a Muslim.

"I would again urge a debate on that to open up the benefits of the constitution to all and to remove that discriminatory provision," she said.

Meanwhile, the UN human rights chief's comments sparked protests in capital Male with some calling for her arrest.

Protestors surrounded the UN Building yesterday, condemning Pillay's remarks and demanding an apology from the UN and parliamentarians.

Pillay's visit was the first such visit to the Maldives by a UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

Friday, November 25, 2011

Calling things by their names

Another brilliant essay by Caroline B. Glick. This time she delves into the insanity of US troops withdrawing from Iraq at this time. Iran has been working ceaselessly to make Iraq a puppet state and the American withdrawal will allow for complete domination of the country. Step by step, the Obama administration is withdrawing from engaging the global Islamic Jihad and so allowing it to surge over large expanses of the Arab world. The withdrawal from Iraq is the model for what will transpire in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and Syria as Islamists take over those countries in the near future.

FROM JEWISHWORLDREVIEW.COM:

Jewish World Review Nov 25, 2011 / 28 Mar-Cheshvan, 5772

Calling things by their names

By Caroline B. Glick

There is a price to be paid for calling an enemy an enemy. But there is an even greater price to be paid for failing to do so.

Next month, the US's long campaign in Iraq will come to an end with the departure of the last US forces from the country. Amazingly, the approaching withdrawal date has fomented little discussion in the US. Few have weighed in on the likely consequences of US President Barack Obama's decision to withdraw on the US's hard won gains in that country. After some six thousand Americans gave their lives in the struggle for Iraq and hundreds of billions of dollars were spent on the war, it is quite amazing that its conclusion is being met with disinterested yawns.

The general stupor was broken last week with The Weekly Standard's publication of an article entitled, "Defeat in Iraq: President Obama's decision to withdraw US troops is the mother of all disasters." The article was written by Frederick and Kimberly Kagan and Marisa Cochrane Sullivan. The Kagans contributed to conceptualizing the successful US-counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, popularly known as "the surge," that former president George W. Bush implemented in 2007.

In their article, the Kagans and Sullivan explain the strategic implications of next month's withdrawal. First they note that with the US withdrawal, the sectarian violence that the surge effectively ended will in all likelihood return in force. Iraq's Iranian-allied Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is purging the Iraqi military and security services and the Iraqi civil service of pro-Western, anti-Iranian commanders and senior officials. With American acquiescence, Maliki and his Shiite allies already managed to effectively overturn the March 2010 election results. Those elections gave the Sunni-dominated Iraqiya party led by former prime minister Ayad Allawi the right to form the next government.

Due to Maliki's actions, Iraq's Sunnis are becoming convinced they have little to gain from peacefully accepting the government.

The strategic implications of Maliki's purges are clear. As the US departs the country next month it will be handing its hard won victory in Iraq to its greatest regional foe - Iran. Repeating their behavior in the aftermath of Israel's precipitous withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May 2000, the Iranians and their Hezbollah proxies are presenting the US withdrawal from Iraq as a massive strategic victory. They are also inventing the rationale for continued war against the retreating Americans. Iran's Hezbollah trained proxy, Muqtada al-Sadr has declared that US Embassy personnel are an "occupation force" that the Iraqis should rightly attack with the aim of defeating.

The US public's ignorance of the implications of a post-withdrawal, Iranian-dominated Iraq is not surprising. The Obama administration has ignored them and the media have largely followed the administration's lead in underplaying them.

Article continues HERE.

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Islamic Apartheid: Mecca and Medina

This is an informative essay that explores the fundamental premise of Islam that declairs Islam, and Muslims to be superior to all other religions and people. It is critical to understanding that Islam is therfore required by the Quran to dominate all else on Earth.

FROM FAMILYSECURITYMATTERS.ORG:

November 23, 2011
Islamic Apartheid: Mecca and Medina

Alan Kornman

According to Saudi Arabian Law it is illegal for any non-Muslim to step foot in the cities of Mecca and Medina. In Medina however, non-Muslims are allowed to enter the Sheraton hotel on the outskirts of town. The Islamists allow a man made exception in their divinely inspired Shariah for the Sheraton Hotel Corporation, yet they make no exception for anyone else.

The equivalent of the Mecca/Medina Apartheid would be the Vatican issuing a decree excluding all non-Catholics/Christians from entering Vatican City, at threat of arrest and imprisonment. The Vatican however, welcomes all people without regard to race, religion, or national origin. Israel also welcomes all faiths, including Muslims, to their most holiest of places, the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem. Conversely, during the period of Jordanian occupation from 1948 to 1967, all Jews were barred entry into the entire Old City and the Wailing Wall was desecrated by the Islamists.

So what it is about non-Muslims that Muslims find so revolting that it is illegal for them to step foot inside the city limits of Islam’s two holiest cities, Mecca and Medina?

In order to understand the Islamist ideology we must understand what the codified Islamic texts teach at the most basic of levels. Once we connect with what the Islamists believes to be true, we can understand the foundation for the actions of the Islamist.

The only thing that matters now is what the codified Islamic texts say and what most Muslims believe. What you as a non-Muslim think and feel is irrelevant. The Islamist believes they are helping the non-Muslim find peace and the straight path through both violent and non-violent Jihad. If an Islamist is forced to use violence on the non-Muslim it is always the non-Muslims fault for not choosing the Islamic path that is “best” for them.

Article continues HERE.

Muslim that bashed his wife fears he will now be bashed

Well, this guy should fear returning to Saudi. He will certainly be flogged for drunkenness, but not for hitting his wife. Consuming alcohol is forbidden by the Quran, but hitting ones wife is actually recommended in certain circumstances.

FROM HERALDSUN.COM.AU:

Muslim that bashed his wife fears he will now be bashed

by: Mark Dunn
From: Herald Sun
November 25, 2011 12:00AM

A DEVOUT Muslim fears violent retribution for getting drunk and bashing his wife, a court heard yesterday.

Waleed Almazyad, who is sponsored by the Saudi Arabian Government to study accountancy in Melbourne, is supposed to adhere to strict sharia law, which bans alcohol.

But Melbourne Magistrates' Court heard that, after sharing five bottles of beer with university mates one night, he returned home and bashed his wife.

Defence lawyer Carolene Gwynn said Almazyad had to deal not only with shame. There had been two known incidents of severe bashings being meted out to conservative Muslims who drank alcohol in breach of religious laws, she said.

Almazyad, 35, pleaded guilty to assault after hitting his wife several times in late 2009.

Police prosecutor Senior Constable Brooke Sheers said at one point Almazyad, who the court heard had never drunk alcohol before, dragged his wife by the hair.

She smashed a vase over his head, inflicting a scar beneath his eye.

"She did quite well for herself ... he does have a permanent reminder," Ms Gwynn said.

Almazyad faced being sent back to Saudi Arabia if convicted.

Magistrate Ian von Einem noted that a conviction would also see Almazyad's wife and children sent back to Saudi Arabia early.

He placed him a good behaviour bond, but warned him against committing further violence.

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Afghan woman jailed for being raped by her cousin's husband is offered release if she marries her attacker

As horrible as this is, it's only the tip of the iceberg of Islamic "law" in action. Women in Afghanistan are regularly treated this way for the crime of being raped. In some even more backwards (if that can be imagined) regions of the Ummah, the woman would have been stoned to death. This is what Islamists wish to impose on all of humanity. The only bright spot in this article is that it is now being aired in the mainstream media, rather than being suppressed.

Forewarned is forearmed. All the little concessions given to Muslims in the West lead to just this end.


FROM DAILYMAIL.CO.UK:

Afghan woman jailed for being raped by her cousin's husband is offered release if she marries her attacker

* Gulnaz was convicted of adultery because she had sex outside of marriage by being raped
* After falling pregnant by her attacker, she and the baby were jailed for 12 years
* She has been given the choice to marry her rapist and be freed from jail

By Daily Mail Reporter

Last updated at 7:29 PM on 23rd November 2011

An Afghan woman raped by her cousin’s husband has revealed how she is faced with a horrific dilemma – marry him or spend the next 12 years in jail.

Gulnaz was aged just 19 when she was convicted by a court of adultery, even though she tried to prevent the attack.

Now she is in Kabul's Badam Bagh jail, serving out her sentence with her rapist’s child.

But now she has been given an option that most women would consider nothing less than repulsive - starting a new life with the man who attacked her.

And, even more incredibly, she is willing to.

Dressed in a veil, with her baby in her lap, Gulnaz explained how it was the only way out of jail, and the only way around the dishonour of having sex outside marriage.

She recalls the day that changed her life two years ago, which began her long nightmare.

Her assailant arrived at the house when her mother left for a brief visit to the hospital.

‘He had filthy clothes on as he does metal and construction work,’ she told CNN in an exclusive interview.

‘He closed doors and windows. I started screaming, but he shut me up by putting his hands on my mouth,’ she said.

After the attack, she hid what happened as long as she could. But soon she began showing the signs of morning sickness.

She received not sympathy but prosecution. But she appreciates she is lucky to get a second chance.

Many women in her position have been killed, for the shame such incidents bring on the community.

Now, if she marries her attacker she has a chance to restore her honour and to give her child a family.

‘I was asked if I wanted to start a new life by getting released, by marrying this man’.

She added: ‘My daughter is a little innocent child. Who knew I would have a child in this way. A lot of people told me that after your daughter's born give it to someone else, but my aunt told me to keep her as proof of my innocence.'

CNN tracked down Gulnaz's rapist in a jail across town.

He denied raping her, but agreed that she would be a likely target if she got out of jail.

He insists that it will be her family, not his, that will kill her.

But Gulnaz's plight has found international attention.

The European Union part-funded the team of documentary makers who interviewed her and other women facing a similar plight but have decided to spike the project after watching it.

The EU said it was concerned about the safety of the women in the film, saying they could be subject to reprisals.

The film-makers however suspect that the EU might also be motivated by its sensitive relationship with Afghan justice institutions.

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Arab Spring? This is turning into the winter of Islamic jihad

Here's an unblinking and accurate assessment of the coming to power of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. In the long run even the Egyptian military will not be able to stop the takeover by the Brotherhood. Egypt will lead the Arab world into the darkness of a most repressive form of Islam, equaled only by the fanatical Mullahs of Iran.

Eventually, the North African states will fall into an alliance to the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood and we will then see a power struggle of epic proportions with an alliance of Shia Iran and probably, Iraq, Syria and possibly Jordan for domination of the Mid Eastern Caliphate. Saudi and some of the other smaller Islamic kingdoms may form a weaker third alliance of self defence.

Whatever transpires, blood baths among the various Muslim factions will occur with regularity and genocidal ethnical clensing of all minorities not seen since WW II will occur.


FROM DAILYMAIL.CO.COM:

Arab Spring? This is turning into the winter of Islamic jihad

By John Bradley

Last updated at 8:25 AM on 22nd November 2011

The Arab Spring is rapidly turning into a winter of chaos and oppression.

As protests grip the Egyptian capital of Cairo, and Islamic fundamentalists gain in confidence there and elsewhere across the region, the hopes of Western leaders for a new era of democracy across the Middle East have been exposed as hopelessly naïve.

For far from paving the way for freedom and pluralism, the uprisings have led only to more intolerance, authoritarianism and division.

The sense of darkening crisis in Egypt this week is a disturbing example of this trend.

In February, the mass demonstrations in Tahrir Square were hailed by many gullible commentators and politicians as an inspirational outbreak of people power — the Arab equivalent of the Berlin Wall’s collapse.

But in the period that has followed the downfall of President Hosni Mubarak, the prospects for Egypt have become grim.
Cynical

The economy is worsening. Unemployment is rising, and living standards are plummeting.

Initially, in the wake of the revolution, the Army pledged to give up political control within six months.

Now, sparking the current Cairo protests, the Egyptian Army — which co-operated in the overthrow of Mubarak’s despotism — has cynically strengthened its stranglehold on power and demanded that the proposed new parliament will have no oversight on the military’s affairs.

Article continues HERE.

The Ideas Behind the Alleged NYC "Lone Wolf" Bomber

This analysis by Steve Emerson of Jose Pimentel's motivation provides a window into the mindset of an Islamic terrorist bomber.

FROM FAMILYSECURITYMATTERS.ORG:

The Ideas Behind the Alleged NYC "Lone Wolf" Bomber

Steve Emerson

November 22, 2011

Often it's the paper trail that brings down a would-be terrorist. Accused lone-wolf jihadist Jose Pimentel was arrested as he assembled a pipe bomb in his home. But he leaves an extensive collection of writings and online postings which show his devotion to waging jihad in America.

New York police arrested Pimentel Saturday for plotting to bomb American police and soldiers returning from Afghanistan and Iraq, using homemade pipe bombs based on an al-Qaida magazine article, "How to Build a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom." The unemployed Dominican convert to Islam answers to the name Muhammad Yusuf and is charged under New York state law with two counts of conspiracy, one count providing support for an act of terrorism and a weapons charge.

News reports indicate that the FBI declined to pursue Pimentel because agents considered him "mentally unstable" and not a serious threat. But Pimentel's blog, monitored by law enforcement officials for the past year, shows sophisticated reasoning and articulate expression of why he wanted to kill Americans. It is rare that terrorists leave behind such a clear trail of their radicalization process, with detailed identification of the influences that motivated their actions.

The case shows that, although the release of English-language jihadi materials has taken a hit since the September killing of al-Qaida ideologue Anwar al-Awlaki, the videos and writings he left behind still inspire terrorist plots.

Pimentel's website, trueislam1.com, mixes radical Islamist ideology and mainstream Islam, creating the picture of an educated and dangerous extremist.

His reading list includes classic commentaries of the Quran alongside radical texts, such as Muslim Brotherhood luminary Sayyid Qutb's Milestones and [Kitab al] Tawheed by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, the founder of Wahhabism. Milestones is a highly intellectual work that develops the case for political Islam and jihad to establish a modern Islamic state, while Wahhab's theological text forms the basis for a more puritanical form of Islamic law. Posts from Pimentel's website demonstrate his ability to synthesize ideas from sources like these into clear and coherent arguments.

Article continues HERE.

Monday, November 21, 2011

FBI Statistics Belie Islamophobia Hysteria

FBI report corrects CAIR's claims of massive hate crimes against Muslims. It demonstrates that CAIR has systematically lied in it's attempts to make Muslims the victims of persecution in order to garner sympathy.

FROM COMMENTARYMAGAZINE.COM:

FBI Statistics Belie Islamophobia Hysteria

Jonathan S. Tobin | @tobincommentary 11.20.2011 - 1:19 PM

It has become an accepted trope of contemporary journalism that American Muslims are under siege and beset by hatred and prejudice. But the evidence for this conventional wisdom is lacking. The story line of Muslim persecution in the United States has always been a matter of anecdotes and perception, not facts. That truth was confirmed this week when the FBI released their annual crime statistics report which showed once again that hate crimes against Muslims remain rare and are far outnumbered by attacks on Jews.

The report is not perfect, since not all parts of the country do a good job compiling the data, but it provides an important snapshot of the state of the nation regarding bias crimes. But the numbers speak for themselves. In 2010, only 13.2 percent of religion-based attacks were directed at Muslims. By comparison, 65.4 percent of such crimes were directed at Jews. This shows a slight increase over the last two years (the raw numbers show 887 anti-Jewish attacks with only 160 anti-Muslim attacks), but is not a statistical fluke. In 2009, the FBI reported
that 70.1 percent of religious-based hate crimes were anti-Jewish while only 9.3 percent were anti-Islamic. In 2008, the FBI said 66.1 percent were anti-Jewish while 7.5 percent were anti-Muslim. This has been true of every year in the past decade, even in 2001 when anti-Muslim crime spiked in the wake of 9/11. For all of the breast-beating about Islamophobia in this country, anti-Semitism remains a far greater problem.

As I wrote last year when I debunked the mythical backlash against Muslims in an article in the October 2010 issue of COMMENTARY, the notion of a rising wave of hatred against Muslims is unsupported by any statistical research. When you consider that Muslims claim to have about the same number of adherents in this country as Jews and that anti-Jewish crimes have always far outnumbered those committed against Muslims, the media hysteria about Islamophobia is exposed as a big lie. But even if there are fewer Muslims here than their groups claim, the conclusion is unchanged.

Because the far greater number of attacks on Jews is not viewed (even by those groups dedicated to monitoring anti-Semitism such as the Anti-Defamation League) as proof the country is boiling with hatred for Jews, how can anyone rationally argue that the far fewer number of assaults on Muslims can justify the conclusion that Islamophobia is rampant?

Muslims, who have had to labor under the burden of guilt-by-association with the 9/11 attacks and the rise of Islamist terror in the Middle East, cannot be blamed for worrying about perceptions of their community. Like every religious and ethnic minority, they face bias. There has been a disturbing and persistent record of home grown Islamic terrorists and groups that purport to represent American Muslims, like the extremist Council on American Islamic-Relations (CAIR), which have ties to terror groups or have rationalized extremism. But most American Muslims are hard working and law-abiding.

But despite the claim of rampant Islamophobia, it is the relative absence of hatred and discrimination against Muslims that has best characterized American life in the last decade. While any number of hate crimes directed at Muslims is regrettable and all deserve to be punished, there is no basis in fact for the notion Islam is under siege here. If anything, the latest FBI statistics point out that lingering anti-Semitism — bolstered, it must be admitted, by a rising tide of Jew-hatred emanating from the Muslim world — remains a more potent threat.

Reality of Islam hard to dispute

An interesting and informative report on the depth of the Muslim Brotherhood's influence on mosques in America and on Steve Emerson's long history on reporting on the Islamic invasion of America.

FROM TORONTOSUN.COM:

Reality of Islam hard to dispute

By Peter Worthington ,QMI Agency

TORONTO - Last week, on Michael Coren’s Agenda show on Sun News TV, Steve Emerson discussed realities of Islam in America in a way that is seldom heard, but is hard to dispute.

Coren, himself, seemed somewhat shaken by his guest’s knowledge and warnings about the future. Not many speak with Emerson’s authority.

According to Emerson, something like 95% of the mosques and Muslim organizations in America, are dominated or influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest Islamist party and extends throughout the world with links to terrorism and jihadism.

Started in Egypt in 1928, the MB began as politically activist involved in Islamic charities. Its slogan “Islam is the Solution” viewed Sharia law as the basis of society. Although it preached peace and non-violence, the Brotherhood has been linked with terror and assassinations. It has been banned in some countries (Syria, for one, Russia for another), but its tentacles are everywhere.

Emerson is Executive Director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, and is arguably America’s most knowledgeable expert on terrorism and Islamic extremism. His books and TV documentary Terrorists Among Us(itls) (updated after 9/11), stress that while most Muslims are moderate, Islamic extremism (or radicalism, or jihadism), are America’s greatest threat -- not only to Jews, Christians and democratic institutions, but to moderate Muslims who resist the call to wage holy war.

Emerson has long been on jihadist death lists.

Report continues HERE.

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Militants kill mosque cleric for resisting 'terrorist value' preaching

Here is a perfect example of why moderate or shall I say reform Muslims cannot stop their pious and observant brethren. The truly moderate Muslim is moderate because his basic humanity and love of his fellow man is coming out in spite of a lifetime of Islamic indoctrination in hatred of other. The moderate is always at a disadvantage because he will not use violence, while the pious and observant Muslim will always use violence.

The pious Muslim uses terror and fear as a weapon against his fellow Muslim more often than against the kuffar. Violence is the cornerstone of control in the Islamic world.


FROM TRIBUNE.COM.PK:

Militants kill mosque cleric for resisting 'terrorist value' preaching

Cleric resist­ed attemp­ts by milita­nts to preach terror­ist values and use the mosque to find new recrui­ts.

By Iftikhar Firdous
Published: November 19, 2011

NOWSHERA: A mosque cleric was shot dead by militants in Nowshera District, after resisting their attempts to preach terrorism in his mosque Police said.

Obaidullah Ustad, imam of the Shaidu village mosque in Nowshera had earlier stopped militants from preaching “terrorist values” at the mosque. “It was because of this resistance that the militants returned later in the evening and shot him inside the mosque” District Police Officer (DPO)Muhammad Hussein said while speaking to The Express Tribune.

Obaidullah was severely injured and rushed to the hospital where he succumbed to his injuries hospital authorities said. Sources said that the militants wanted to have access to the mosque and use it as a base to find new recruits. The militants reportedly belonged to the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

Nowshera and its surrounding area have been the hub of militant activities in the recent past. On October 28, a suicide bomber claimed the life of two police officers as he attempted to target Ajmir Shah, the SHO who had started a massive operation against militants in the area.

Idol worshipper arrested in Saudi Arabia

Another stunning example of Islamic tolerance of other religions or beliefs. If nothing else, Islam is consistent in it's intolerance of anything not sanctioned by the Quran.

FROM EMERATES247.COM:

Idol worshipper arrested in Saudi Arabia

By STAFF

Published Sunday, November 20, 2011

Saudi Arabia’s religious police arrested an African man after he was accused of worshipping an idol placed inside his shop, a newspaper said on Sunday.

Members of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice raided the shop in the western town of Taif after receiving complaints from local residents that the African bows and kneels for the idol god.

“They found the idol placed in corner of the shop…they impounded the idol and arrested the man,” Alsaudi Arabic language daily said.

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Apartheid? ApartLied

FROM ATLASSHRUGS:

Another powerful post at Atlas Shrugs.

Apartheid? ApartLied

You will see no such "tolerance" and "reciprocity" for non-Muslims in Muslim countries living under Islamic law. Posters thanks to Elder of Ziyon.

GO. See it now.

Voices of Palestine: Ahlam Tamimi

In their own words. In this case, from Ahlam Tamimi:

"Of course, I do not regret what happened. Absolutely not. This is the path. I dedicated myself to Jihad for the sake of Allah, and Allah granted me success. You know how many casualties there were [in the 2001 attack on the Sbarro pizzeria]? This was made possible by Allah. Do you want me to denounce what I did? That’s out of the question. I would do it again today, and in the same manner."

It is important to understand that her sentiments are shared by Islamists throughout the Muslim world and are approved of by a majority of Muslims, wherever they may live.

FROM FRONTPAGEMAG.COM:


Voices of Palestine: Ahlam Tamimi

Posted By Frank Crimi On November 18, 2011 @ 12:10 am In Daily Mailer,FrontPage

Editor’s note: Below is the latest profile of Frontpage’s new series, “Voices of Palestine,” which will illuminate the core beliefs, in their own words, of leading figures in the Palestinian death cult. Click the following to view the profiles of Ahmad Bahr, Mahmoud al-Zahar, Ibrahim Mudayris, Yasser Ghalban, Haj Amin al-Husseini, Wafa al-Bis and Mahmoud Abbas.

In October 2011, Ahlam Tamimi, a female Jordanian who helped plan and assist in a horrific 2001 suicide bombing in Israel, was released from an Israeli jail as part of the Palestinian prisoner exchange for Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

Tamimi had been serving 16 life sentences for her role in the August 9, 2001 suicide bombing of Sbarro’s pizzeria in Jerusalem, a suicide bombing that killed 15 Israelis and wounded over 130 others. Among the murdered victims were eight children, a pregnant woman and another woman who was left in a permanent coma.

Article continues HERE.

Friday, November 18, 2011

The Dhimmi is Forbidden to Read the Koran

File this under Enemy Within. Better still, file it under Treason at The Highest Levels. Again and again, this administration uses every opportunity to stop any and all honest assessment of the Islamic threat that is rapidly gaining strength under our very noses.

One must ask just why all inquiry into the violent passages of the Quran are not to be discussed or studied by our law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The answer is quite simple: Any honest assessment must conclude that Islam is by design and intent mandated to conquer all other peoples and subjugate them to Islam. This may take place by peaceful means, deceitful means or violent means but is mandatory by any means.

FROM POLITICALISLAM.COM:

17 Novermber
Posted in HomePage, Newsletter

By Bill Warner

The Dhimmi is Forbidden to Read the Koran

If you are a student of Islam, then you might have gathered that Islam has a doctrine of eternal hatred of Kafirs and their civilization. A student of Islam might also gather that after a 1400 year history of hostilities, murder, rape and enslavement that Islam was at war with us. But, the White House, the Department of Justice, Homeland Security, FBI and CIA have informed us that this is not the case.

It started when Steve Emerson and Steve Coughlin were going to give talks about political Islam to the FBI and Homeland Security. Then the White House informed them that not only were they not going to talk about the Islamic doctrine and history of jihad, but that henceforth, no Kafir could talk to any Federal agencies, unless they were vetted by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Now, Eric Holder, the Attorney General, has ordered a purge of all Department of Justice manuals and training of all material that will “offend” Muslims. "I recently directed all components of the Department of Justice to re-evaluate their training efforts,"

Deputy Attorney General James Cole announced during the Washington conference. U.S. Attorney Dwight Holton explained that FBI training materials that even remotely link Islam to violence will be banned.

"I want to be perfectly clear about this: Training materials that portray Islam as a religion of violence or with a tendency towards violence are wrong, they are offensive and they are contrary to everything this president, this attorney general and Department of Justice stands for," he told Muslim activists gathered at the George Washington University law school. "They will not be tolerated."

The president and the Department of Justice do not stand for critical thought, an examination of all sides of a problem. The White House wants to see that Muslims are never offended. Notice that the White House does not say that the Kafir analysts are wrong in their facts and data. Instead, they say that facts have no place at the table. Our government no longer stands for logical thought, but only wants to insure that Muslims are not offended by Kafirs. The way for Muslims to not be offended is for the Kafirs to keep silent. This is pure Islamic doctrine, Sharia law.

Let’s go back to the time of Umar II, a caliph of Islam. Under Sharia law, the Kafir is to be made completely harmless to Islam and there are two parts to this mental castration. Here are two of the many oppressive terms of the dhimmi (a dhimmi is a Kafir who agrees to obey Sharia law) treaty that deal with Kafir knowledge:

The Pact of Umar, 9th Century CE, includes:

We [Christians] will not teach our children the Koran.

We will not make a show of the Christian religion nor invite any one to embrace it.

Kafirs must not have knowledge of Islamic doctrine. Kafirs must not make their civilization attractive to Muslims. Kafirs must submit to Islam, not the other way around. This is why we are changing how our textbooks explain America because Muslims will read them. Islam must be praised and the West denigrated.

You might wonder why they would not want Kafirs to read the Koran. After all wouldn’t they want the Kafir to read the wonderful Koran and become a Muslim? No, Islam wants for you to listen to a Muslim explain the Koran. A Koran reading Kafir might apply critical thought to the text and that would be a disaster. Only Muslims are allowed to know Mohammed and Allah under Sharia law.

So, as good Kafirs, we must remain ignorant and submit to Islam. We can become Islamic, but we should never try to convert the Muslim to our civilization and Western religions. Submission only runs one direction.

The Obama administration has invoked an ancient treaty, the Pact of Umar, and applied it to our nation. Our law enforcement agencies have now been made full dhimmis under Sharia law. Critical thought and knowledge of Islam have entered the first step of making any knowledge about Islam a hate crime that will be prosecuted to the full extent of a Fascist state. Now they deny truth. Next they will criminalize truth that offends Islam.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Dutch state taken to UN court of human rights over Wilders

This would be another case of Islamic law fare, except that the UN Court of Human Rights has no legal authority. Three nameless Dutch Moroccans have their panties in a twist because a court in the Netherlands found Geert Wilders not guilty of incitement to hatred. So of course these ungrateful immigrants to one of the most benign and politically correct countries in the world do what Muslims everywhere do, which is to whine and complain endlessly. Nothing is ever good enough for these scum so perhaps they should just exercise their freedom of travel and return to the pest hole of Morocco.

FROM DUTCHNEWS.NL:

Dutch state taken to UN court of human rights over Wilders

Thursday 17 November 2011

Three Dutch Moroccans have made a complaint against the Netherlands to the UN court of human rights, claiming the Dutch state has not protected them from incitement to hatred instigated by Geert Wilders, Nos television reports.

The three, who are not named in the court filing, say the ‘systematic incitement to hatred and discrimination against Muslims and other migrants’ committed by Wilders has left them feeling ‘discriminated against, humiliated and threatened’.

‘They are of the opinion that Wilders by his continued hate speech has poisoned the social climate in the Netherlands that has become more and more anti-migrant and anti-Muslim,’ the statement says.

Wilders was taken to court for discrimination and inciting hatred last year but found not guilty this spring after the public prosecution department called for all charges to be dropped.

One-sided

The reluctance of the public prosecutor to take action against Wilders meant the ‘judge [at that trial] was only provided with one-side of the legal argument due to the almost perfect harmony between the prosecution and defence,’ the UN court filing states.

The three say international human rights treaties should protect them against discrimination and the UN committee should ensure those treaties are upheld.

A UN human rights commission ruling, which can take years, is not legally binding, Nos says.

The full text of the filing (in English) can be read here http://nos.nl/artikel/314234-drietal-klaagt-bij-vncomite-om-wilders.html

Saudi Religious Police to Crack Down on Women with Alluring Eyes

It's hard to believe that Saudi Arabia could be any more repressive to women, but they've just found another way to isolate them. It's not enough that women must be covered from head to foot, including their faces, but now the "religious police" want women to cover their eyes lest they lure men into some barbaric sex act. This is of course completing the living sack into a burqua as imposed by the Afghani Taliban.

Way to go, Saudi, actually stepping further back into the dark, barbaric past of Islam.


FROM TRANSLATINGJIHAD.COM:

Saudi Religious Police to Crack Down on Women with Alluring Eyes
Posted by Translating Jihad

The below translation comes from an article published today in Gaza-based Dunya al-Watan, and is also being reported in other major media outlets throughout the Arab world:

Saudi Religious Police Pledge to Pursue Women with Eyes that Provoke Fitna

Dunya al-Watan, 17 Nov 2011

The Council for Commanding the Good and Forbidding the Evil (the religious police) in Saudi Arabia confirmed Wednesday that it will force women cover up their eyes, especially those which "provoke fitna."

The media spokesman for the Council for Commanding the Good and Forbidding the Evil, Shaykh Mutliq al-Nabit, said in Ha'il (north) that "The men of the council will intervene to compel women to cover up their eyes, especially those which provoke fitna."

Arab media outlets picked up a short video clip on YouTube, which states that, "The Council for Commanding the Good and Forbidding the Evil in Saudi Arabia pledges to take the necessary actions against any girl or woman who has eyes which provoke fitna."

Shaykh Mutliq al-Nabit said, "The Council will compel the owner of those eyes to cover them up," pointing out that the Council "has the right to do that." A Saudi citizen entered the hospital at the end of last year after suffering stab wounds in his hand and back after a fight with one of the members of the Council in the Barzan market of Ha'il, after a demand from one of the members of the Council that he cover up the eyes of his wife who was with him at the time.

The District Court in Ha'il issued a ruling which justified the member of the Council and condemned the husband and a man who was with him for assault (behaving arrogantly towards another). The first was condemned to 8 months in prison and 300 lashes dispersed over 6 sessions. The second was condemned to 18 months in prison and 700 lashes dispersed over 10 sessions.

Muslim Persecution of Christians October, 2011

Here's Raymond Ibrahim's monthly account of Muslim persecution of Christians for October, 2011.

FROM HUDSON-NY.ORG:

Muslim Persecution of Christians October, 2011

"The World Remains Silent; It Is As If We Had Been Swallowed Up by The Night."

by Raymond Ibrahim
November 17, 2011 at 4:45 am

Egypt's Maspero massacre—where the military killed dozens of Christians protesting the destruction of their churches—dominates October's persecution headlines. Facts and details concerning the military's "crimes against humanity" are documented in this report, and include videos of armored-vehicles running over civilians, a catalog of lies and deceitful tactics employed by Egypt's rulers and state media, and other matters overlooked by the West.

More damning evidence continues to emerge: not only did Egypt's military plan to massacre Christians to teach them a "lesson" never to protest again, but "death squads" were deployed up buildings the night before to snipe at protesters. Instead of trying the soldiers who intentionally ran-over demonstrators, the military has been randomly arresting Copts simply "for being Christian." Finally, the fact-finding commission of Egypt's National Council for Human Rights just submitted its report which, as expected, "white washes" the military's role, "asserting that no live ammunition was fired on the protesters by the military, as the army only fired blanks in the air to disperse the protesters," a claim eyewitnesses reject out of hand.

Meanwhile, not only are Western governments apathetic, but it was revealed that "Obama's top Muslim advisor blocks Middle Eastern Christians' access to White House." Newt Gingrich asserted that Obama's "strategy in the Middle East is such a total grotesque failure" and likened the "Arab spring" to an "anti-Christian spring." Ann Widdecombe accused the British government of "double standards in its threats to cut aid to countries which persecute gay people while turning a blind eye to persecution against Christians." Even Christian pastors in the West, apparently more concerned about promoting interfaith dialogue with Muslims, are reluctant to mention persecution to their flock

Categorized by theme, the rest of October's batch of Muslim persecution of Christians around the world includes (but is hardly limited to) the following accounts, listed according to theme and in alphabetical order by country, not necessarily severity.

Report continues HERE.

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Rice report on home grown jihadi

This is just staggering, but not unexpected if one had followed the progression of the Islamization of America over the past 10 years. This report pretty well puts to rest the myth that there are no Muslim jihadists in America, or that there are no "home grown" Muslim terrorists.

If nothing else this report should be a wake up call for the American people and our leaders to stop denying the existence of Muslim terrorists among us. Denial is the fast track to our destruction as a civilization.


Rice report on home grown jihadi

Public release date: 15-Nov-2011
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-11/ru-rmt111511.php#

Contact: David Ruth
druth@rice.edu
713-348-6327
Rice University

Report: More than half of people arrested for Islamic terrorist activities were American citizens

Sixty percent of people arrested for Islamic terrorist activities between January 2009 and April 2011 were American citizens, according to a new report from Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy. The study of 104 people who were arrested included U.S. and non-U.S. citizens living in America or abroad.

The report, "Analyzing the Islamic Extremist Phenomenon in the United States: A Study of Recent Activity," was authored by Joan Neuhaus Schaan, fellow in homeland security at the Baker Institute. Jessica Phillips, an intern with the Baker Institute's homeland security and terrorism program, provided research support for the study.

Using data from international and U.S. news reports, general Internet media, public records and official court documents, the researchers set out in November 2010 to analyze information on the status of Islamic extremism in the United States. They also looked at some of the unanswered questions raised by U.S. Rep. Peter King's Committee on Homeland Security hearing, "The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and That Community's Response." King, R-N.Y., and chair of the committee, held the hearing March 10, 2011.

"Providing policymakers this data can allow for a factual discussion and diminish rhetoric," Neuhaus Schaan said. "Consequently, policy can be crafted to address current and future needs in the face of change and adaptation by those determined to bring harm to the United States."

Other key findings from the report include:

* Of the 104 people arrested for Islamic extremist activities between January 2009 and April 2011, half were born in the U.S., 22 percent were naturalized citizens and 7 percent were dual citizens.
* Of the 104, 5 percent entered the U.S. on a visa.
* Sixty-three percent of converts had a known prior criminal record.
* Of the 14 American converts with a prior criminal history, at least 55 percent had converted to Islam in prison.
* Ninety-two 92 percent were male.
* Sixty-four percent were 30 years old or younger.
* Sixty-six percent had traveled or were in the process of traveling to the Middle East, Somalia, South Asia or the Balkans.
* Of the 104, 70 percent had an association or were attempting an association with an internationally recognized terrorist organization; al-Qaida and its associated branches were cited most.
* Of the 29 persons with no known association to a group, 11 had been active on terrorist-related chat rooms and websites.
* Overall, 38 percent had been involved in this Internet activity.
* Only 10 of the 104 are what the authors would consider "lone wolves"; most in the cohort had ties to others in the group or to an organization.

Information on birthplaces and conversion to Islam was available for 77 of the 104 people arrested. The data revealed that 60 percent of the group was born outside the U.S. Of the 31 U.S.-born persons where religion of origin could be determined , 14 were born into Muslim families and 17 converted to Islam.

"The Internet and prison conversion are the two biggest new trends that policymakers need to look at more closely," Neuhaus Schaan said. "We've seen a major change in how people become associated with extremist groups in the past 20 years, and we need to adapt."

The report concludes that approximately two-thirds of those involved in extremist activity are men under the age of 34, and no single, all-encompassing profile can be made of the analysis group of 104. Neuhaus Schaan said that the Baker Institute will continue to compile data and issue an updated report annually.

###

To interview Neuhaus Schaan, contact David Ruth, director of national media relations, at druth@rice.edu or 713-348-6327.

Related materials:

To view the complete report, visit http://bakerinstitute.org/publications/SEC-pub-USIslamicExtremist110411.pdf.

A transcript of King's hearing is available at http://homeland.house.gov/hearing/hearing-%E2%80%9C-extent-radicalization-american-muslim-community-and-communitys-response%E2%80%9D.

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Columbia Association to hold woman-only swim times

"Need grew from county's Muslim community". The useful idiots have once again been used to further Islamic colonization of America. Despite all the wonderful multi-culti blathering about religious sensitivities and the sisterhood of women, the bottom line is that Muslims have gotten special treatment based on their "religion" at the expense of our secular society.

CAIR, the American mouthpiece for the Muslim Brotherhood of course is praising the women only hours at the swim pool as a wonderful breakthrough. And the useful dhimmies glow and simper at his praise.

And so we continue to aid and abet our mortal enemy.


FROM BALTIMORESUN.COM:

Columbia Association to hold woman-only swim times
Need grew from county's Muslim community

By Jessica Anderson, The Baltimore Sun

9:09 p.m. EST, November 14, 2011
When Shehlla Khan's husband became ill, it fell on her to take their three children to the pool. But for Khan, who is Muslim, the task was difficult.

The Columbia resident said she was concerned about people watching her swim in the conservative, cover-all dress required by Islamic dress codes, and thinking: "What's wrong? Why can't you take it off?"

So Khan, 39, brought the issue up with members of her Dar Al-Taqwa mosque in Ellicott City. The mosque, along with members of a faith-based county group, People Acting Together in Howard, met with the Columbia Association to create a twice-weekly, women-only swim time, a trial that is scheduled to be announced Tuesday.

"Like" The Sun's Howard County Desk Facebook page

The Columbia Association, which operates 23 pools in Howard, will join other communities that have made similar accommodations to create a more welcoming atmosphere for Muslims and other female swimmers.

New York City's recreation and parks department offers a women-only swim time at the Metropolitan Recreation Center. Pools around Toronto and other cities have also offered similar options, according to news reports. And at a swimming pool in Seattle, Muslim woman have used brown paper to cover glass windows, providing privacy from the lobby.

Several private universities, including Harvard and George Washington, also have provided female-only swim times, with several hours a week set aside. But occasionally, such programs have run into opponents who suggest they unfairly cater to one group. At George Washington some complained, citing concerns over the program infringing on American liberties.

Article continues HERE.

Texas man convicted of attempting to aid Al Qaeda

Another American citizen has chosen to embrace Islam and wage jihad against his country and the West. While it's a good thing that a conviction for terroristic activity was obtained, the sentence of 15 years is not adequate. The only fitting sentence, aside from the death penalty, is life without parole.

The reason for life without parole for Islamic terrorism of any sort is that the perpetrators will return, sooner or later and try again. Failing to permanently remove terrorists is seen as weakness and encourages more to take their place.



FROM NEWS.YAHOO.COM:


Texas man convicted of attempting to aid Al Qaeda
ReutersBy Jim Forsyth | Reuters – 17 hrs ago

SAN ANTONIO (Reuters) - A Muslim convert from Texas who once e-mailed a radical Muslim cleric saying he wanted "to do my part for jihad" was convicted on Monday of attempting to provide material support to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

Barry Walter Bujol, 30, faces 15 years in prison on a terrorism charge as well as five additional years for aggravated identity theft, of which he was also convicted on Monday.

Bujol's conviction follows a more than two-year investigation during which the man from the east Texas town of Hempstead repeatedly pledged his commitment to "violent jihad," according to U.S. Attorney Kenneth Magidson.

Article continues HERE.

The Dangers of Legitimizing Muslim Grievances

Here's another of Daniel Greenfield's profoundly insightful assessments of Islam.

FROM SULTANKNISH:

Sunday, November 13, 2011

The Dangers of Legitimizing Muslim Grievances

There is no surer path to Muslim violence than through the legitimization of Muslim grievance. And once you accept the legitimacy of the grievance, then you are also bound to accept the legitimacy of the violence that follows.

Violence begins with grievance. Grievance is the pretext for violence and the narrative for the violence. Liberals make a fetish of separating the grievance from the violence, emphasizing constructive means of resolving the grievance. But what do you do when the grievance and the violence are inseparable?

Grievance is the stories that Muslims tell themselves to justify their violence. To explain why they kill children and why they murder the innocent. The list of grievances is an endless as the violence. Every act of violence carries its own narrative. The endless Muslim conflicts throughout the world all carry their burden of history. But it isn't a history that can be resolved with a tolerance session.

Muslim grievances are the frustration of conquerors, the broken teeth of predators who weren't allowed to feed on the world until their stomachs burst. All the lands they couldn't conqueror, the peoples who rebelled against their rule, the inferior civilizations that pushed them back and drove them off. The swine who build skyscrapers and enjoy the fine things in life.

The civil rights model of social conflict resolution accepts grievances as legitimate and then tries to 'heal' through them through social justice. And when that model is applied to Muslims, it turns into empty appeasement because the conflicts at the heart of Muslim violence cannot be resolved through integration or representation. Applying the word "justice" in any form to a conflict involving Muslims is wasted ink.

The problem begins with a clash of definitions. To a citizen of a secular Western state, "injustice" means a lack of representation. To a Muslim, "injustice" means a lack of Islamic jurisprudence. A Non-Muslim state is always unjust simply because it is not ruled by Islamic law.

The fundamental Muslim grievance is that they are not in power, not just in Israel where the world has accepted their demand to be in power as a wholly moral and legitimate demand, or throughout the Muslim world where Western governments have helped bring the Islamists to power with bombs and political pressure. The fundamental grievance is that they are not in power... everywhere.

If you believe that Islam is the fundamental law of mankind, that all mankind at one time were Muslims and that there is no true justice except through Islamic law-- then it follows naturally that Muslims have been cheated of their rightful power, that they are forced to live under "atheistic" regimes and that "justice" demands that the world "revert" to Islamic rule.

It's why the rhetoric of democracy falls notoriously flat when it comes to Islam. Muslims are not out for representation except as a preliminary stage to absolute power. They may route the guardianship of that absolute power power in various ways, through a dictator or some form of popular democracy, but these are only vehicles for the imposition of Islamic law.

The absolute power of Islamic law is justified by its origin in Allah and the unjust nature of non-Muslim law is equally proven by its lack of divine origin. If you take Islamic assumptions at face value, then this makes perfect sense. Therefore a devout Muslim cannot view a non-Muslim society as just. Equating an infidel code with Sharia is blasphemy. And so the logic of Islam dictates that Western Muslims must view themselves as oppressed.

Like the struggle with the left, this is a clash between the ideal and the real. Totalitarian idealists are always outraged because compared to their ideal every system is rotten, corrupt and unjust. Whether it's the ideal of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat or the Guardianship of the Jurists, it all comes down to the tyranny of the ideal against the immorality of the real. The representational compromises that make the modern Republic work are anathema to people who believe that they have the perfect system which will be absolutely just... because it is perfect.

Muslim grievances justify endless war against the real, in the name of the ideal, without ever having to deal with the shortcomings of the ideal. The collectivism of the ideal disdains the individual except as a foot soldier, a martyr in bringing about the ideal. The infidels are unworthy of life because they are immersed in the grossness of the real. And the suicide bomber rejects the real for the ideal by disdaining his own life, much as he disdains the despised earthly women, but the demon virgins of paradise who represent another ideal.

The common denominator of the cartoon controversies, Muslim wars around the world and just about every other grievance, from their claim to Spain to their demand for more mosques, is an insistence on power at the expense of others. Everyone has to keep paying a price for Muslim grievance-- either in rights and freedoms, or in blood.

Muslim violence is already a self-perpetuating grievance engine. If Muslims win a war, then they're heroes. If they lose a war, then they were betrayed, undermined from within and had what was theirs stolen from them. The grudges will fester for a thousand years and touch off endless wars until they get what they want or they lose the ability to fight those wars.

The purpose of war is conquest. Islam treats Muslim conquest as a form of justice. A failed conquest is an injustice. Try applying social justice to a mindset like that and what you're left with is Europe today.

Since no Muslim should ever have to live under the unjust rule of infidels, there is always a cause for war and a fifth column waiting to rise up and demand their right to rule over everyone else. And the war is endless-- its origins written in blood on the pages of Islamic scripture.

Innocence is the root of grievance, the "I was minding my own business until he came up and hit me and then I had to burn his village, rape his daughters and spend a thousand years enslaving his descendants" narrative of Islam. First comes the innocence and then comes the genocide.

Legitimizing Muslim grievance means accepting their narrative of innocence. Their "I was minding my own business until this cartoon offended me, until I was hauled off to Gitmo for absolutely no reason, until people give me dirty looks on the street for absolutely no reason and then I just had to kill as many of them as I could" narrative.


That narrative of innocence is a lie. People are not innocent, and the conquerors and oppressors of much of the world are certainly a long way from innocent. Historical Islam was a brutal conquering ideology that fed off blood and human misery. No amount of revisionist history will make that go away and the revisionist history is a disgusting insult to the millions killed and the cultures wiped out for the greater glory of Islam.

A religion that has never stopped practicing genocide, slavery and repression as religious mandates is the worst positioned to act out the charade of innocence, to pretend that everything was fine until the Ottoman Empire fell and the British and French colonialists replaced the Muslim colonialists and gave the local minorities civil rights instead of a spiked boot in the face.

Legitimizing Islamic grievance is dangerous not only because it feeds the self-righteous violence of Muslims, but because it convinces well-meaning Westerners that maybe they have a point. Once we accept the grievance, then it becomes hard to resist the violence, except by calling for more peaceful means of resolution. And if those peaceful means of resolution fail... then the violence is justified.

The Israeli peace process is a case study of how this process operates, how the legitimization of Muslim grievance comes to justify its violence, and how its own obstruction of negotiations disproves the peaceful means of resolution, which then doubly justifies the violence.

Rejecting the grievance also rejects the violence, it prevents the narrative from getting its foot in the door, the mosquito whine that pitifully pleads even as it's sinking its stinger into your neck. Fighting that narrative requires pulling back to see the sweep of history, the conquering armies of the Caliphs bringing slavery, destroying cultures, burning books and oppressing millions. And it requires that we see history repeating itself again.

Grievance was at the root of Mohammed's conquests. His "I was minding my own business, preaching a totalitarian ideology that said non-Muslims are inferior dogs when someone made fun of me, so of course I had them killed and fought a war and enslaved their descendants for all time" narrative. Poor innocent me.
Muslims must believe themselves to be moral, or accept that they are mass murderers fighting wars and destroying civilizations. And they need us to accept their narrative, to view them as moral actors resisting oppression and injustice-- rather than monsters spreading pain, hate and fear in formerly peaceful places. While we may not be able to prevent them from believing their lies, accepting their lies deludes us and them... and directly feeds violence.

When Americans keep repeating that Islamophobia is a major problem, Muslims treat this as an admission of guilt and a justification for violence. When Europeans accept that freedom of speech should take a back seat to Muslim sensitivities, then Muslims hold it up as proof that they don't really believe in freedom of speech and that those who insist on it are not following principles, but are deliberately agitating against Muslims.

Everyone who shouts "Blood for Oil", denounces Gitmo, rants about Israeli occupation and all the rest of it is legitimizing Muslim violence, whether or not they mean to do so. And when they perpetuate a myth of Islamic innocence, they are denying Muslims the opportunity to make a moral reckoning without which they cannot improve or change.

Wars begin as stories and end as stories. The Muslims have been telling their story for a long time. And these days we're telling their story too.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Allah's Teachings Are the Fire with Which "We Harvest the Skulls of the Jews"

This hatred, this inflammatory rhetoric is just a small sample of the Islamic mindset. This rant is against the Jews and Israel, but it applies to all of the West in the long run.

Straight from the horse's mouth.


FROM MEMRITV.ORG:

Islamic Militants in Gaza: Allah's Teachings Are the Fire with Which "We Harvest the Skulls of the Jews"; "We Move Closer to Allah through Blood, Body Parts, and Martyrs"

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Why Islam is Not a Religion

A definitive examination of why Islam is NOT a religion, but rather a socio-political system of total control of it's members and those they can dominate.

FROM NEWENGLISHREVIEW.ORG:

Why Islam is Not a Religion

by Rebecca Bynum (Nov. 2011)

Speech delivered October 18th to ACT! for America Chapter in Memphis Tennessee

Good Evening. I’m here to talk about a subject no one wants to discuss – religion. Many people in our post-Christian society (especially journalists) are afraid of it, misinformed about it and ignorant of the most basic theological concepts. And our theologians are often too specialized in their work to be able to discuss religion in its broadest outlines or our Churchmen are often soo concerned with finding common ground that they gloss over and ignore the theology of Islam.

Our greatest Islam critics confine their attack to the non-religious aspects of Islam, either its political side or its judicial side. But when we discuss political Islam or Sharia law alone, we imply that there is a religious Islam that is perfectly fine, that we don’t have to worry about. And we leave the major problems of Islamization – Muslim immigration, mosque building, the proselytizing in our prisons and military and the infiltration of our governmental institutions completely untouched and indeed untouchable.

So I think we need to take a few steps back to examine Islam as a whole and to broadly define the outlines of Islam – what it is and what it isn’t.

One thing we can definitely say about Islam is that is it not solely confined to a belief system. If it is a religion it is not a religion only. Islam is a total system of life and contains within itself a particular social system, judicial system, and political system which includes geo-political aspirations - the conquest and administration of territory.

Article continues HERE.

1ST AMENDMENT UNDER FIRE

A victory in the fight against the Islamic invasion of America. Good news in the face of many successful political, legal and societal encroachments by colonizing Muslims.

In this case our most important Amendment has been upheld in the face of blatant discrimination against Christian groups exercising their First Amendments right to free speech.


FROM WND.COM:

WND Exclusive 1ST AMENDMENT UNDER FIRE

Judge says people can't be jailed over intended speech
Pastor who wanted to condemn Shariah behind bars over 'peace bond'

Posted: November 12, 2011
1:00 am Eastern

© 2011 WND

The Florida pastor who wanted to protest jihad and Islamic Shariah law in Dearborn – but was jailed by a judge who worried about what he "intended" to say – has been cleared.

According to officials with the Thomas More Law Center, a circuit judge in Wayne County, Mich., has overturned the decision by Dearborn District Judge Mark W. Somers.

According to the ruling from Wayne County Circuit Judge Robert Ziolowski, Somers violated the constitutional rights of Pastor Terry Jones and his associate, Wayne Sapp, when he held a "peace bond" proceeding last spring and ordered them to pay a $1 peace bond and ordered them not to go into the vicinity of a Muslim mosque, including on the surrounding public property, for three years.

Because the "bond" violated their constitutional free speech rights, they refused to pay, and the judge locked them up overnight.

Somers had required the bond because of what he thought the men intended to say.

But the Thomas More Law Center appealed the verdict, and the decision was overturned.

"Pastor Jones had committed no crime and was not charged with a crime. Yet, he was forced into court and ultimately jailed because he intended to speak out against jihad and Shariah law," said Richard Thompson, chief counsel for the center.

"Regardless of how one feels about Pastor Jones, he has a constitutionally protected free speech right to express his message. The heavy-handed actions of the city of Dearborn and the Wayne County prosecutor's office give us a glimpse of how imposition of Shariah law, which forbids any criticism of Islam, will destroy that fundamental constitutional right."

It was in April when Jones, of the Dove World Outreach Center of Gainesville, Fla., announced plans to protest jihad, Shariah and the radicalization of Muslims in America on public property in front of the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn. It's the largest mosque in North America.

Dearborn officials, who have a history of anti-Christian policies, denied Jones a permit to exercise his free speech rights because of opposition and threats of violence from Dearborn's Muslims, the law center reported.

When Jones indicated that he intended to hold the free speech event anyway, the Wayne County prosecutor, in cooperation with the city of Dearborn, filed a complaint in the Dearborn district court. Under threat of arrest, police authorities forced Jones and Sapp into court where they had to stand trial to determine whether they intended to break the law.

The Thomas More Law Center said those actions violated the First Amendment and due process rights of Jones and Sapp.

The Law Center also argued that the three-year speech restriction violated the First Amendment.

In yesterday’s ruling, in addition to finding a violation of due process, Ziolowski overturned on First Amendment grounds the district court's three-year injunction limiting Jones' free speech rights by keeping him away from the mosque.

Young women face forced marriage in Germany

Country by country, Islam is taking over in many ways, large and small. Importing Muslims brings all the negative aspects of their culture, with no positive aspects apparent. The Islamic colonization of the West must be stopped.

FROM THESTARPHOENIX.COM:

Young women face forced marriage in Germany

Agence France-Presse November 12, 2011

More than 3,000 women and girls in Germany, most from Muslim families and many of them minors, faced forced marriage in the course of a year, official research released this week indicates.

The first federal study of its kind found 3,443 recorded cases in 2008 - the most recent year with sufficient data - in which people living in Germany were forced to wed or threatened with a forced marriage.

Most were between the ages of 18 and 21, although nearly a third of them were under the age of 17.

Almost all were female and the children of staunchly religious immigrant families, most frequently from countries including Turkey, Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Those who force their own children to marry someone they don't love, or a perfect stranger, against their will are committing a brutal act of violence against them," Family Minister Kristina Schroeder said, presenting the study funded by her ministry.

More than half were beaten or otherwise physically abused to convince them to marry, while more than one in four were threatened with weapons or told they would be killed if they did not go through with the marriage.

Forty-four per cent of the people at threat or subjected to forced marriages held German passports.

The study was carried out by a private foundation and a women's rights organization based on data provided by victims help centres, schools and immigrant associations.

Germany last year passed legislation against forced marriages, making it a criminal act punishable by up to five years in prison and providing means for victims taken abroad to return to Germany.

Friday, November 11, 2011

Islamophobia: A License to Kill

Repopsted from Front Page Magazine.

FROM FRONTPAGEMAG.COM:

Islamophobia: A License to Kill

Posted By Daniel Greenfield On November 11, 2011 @ 12:30 am In Daily Mailer,FrontPage

Once upon a time when newspaper and magazine offices were torched for offending a powerful group, the rest of the press would rally behind them. But when Charlie Hedbo, a French satirical magazine decided to put out an issue dedicated to Islam with a cover of Mohammed declaring, “100 lashes if you don’t die laughing,” and received a very special burning “Letter to the Editor” from the country’s “Religion of Peace,” the American press lined up behind the firebombers.

Christopher Dickey, the Paris Bureau editor at Newsweek suggested that the far right was probably behind it because it had the most to gain from the attack. Dickey was unable to accuse Hedbo, a left-wing magazine, of being a member of the far-right, so he did the next best thing by diverting attention from the perpetrators and transforming Muslims into the victims of a far-right conspiracy.

Newsweek’s response showed that the second most pernicious thing about the Islamophobia myth is that even when Muslims are the perpetrators, they are still the victims. Moments after an attack takes place, the press rushes out editions worrying that the murder or attempted murder of innocent people by Muslims will cause Islamophobia.

Whether it’s the mass murder of 3,000 people or another in a long series of assaults on freedom of speech in Europe, the villains are always critics of Islam and the victims are always Muslims.

However Dickey was a moderate compared to Time’s Paris Bureau chief, Bruce Crumley, who charged that Charlie Hedbo was a victim of its own “obnoxious Islamophobia” and accused it of wanting to be burned down. Crumley’s article tossed aside freedom of speech in the name of France’s five million Muslims who feel stigmatized by Islamophobia.

Islamophobia is one charge that the editors of Charlie Hedbo are immune from. If they had been afraid of Islam, the way that Time and Newsweek editors are, they would have never run an issue dedicated to mocking Islam. But then Crumley isn’t really saying that Islamophobia is a bad thing. The thrust of his reasoning is that it’s a good thing. It’s good to be afraid of Islamic violence because it makes us more sensitive to Muslim concerns.

If the French had taken a few lessons from CNN and Comedy Central and American newspapers who didn’t dare print the Mohammed cartoons, if they had accepted the “Gift of Fear” that is Islamophobia, they would be a more peaceful and tolerant society.

Crumley’s piece demonstrated that the most pernicious thing about the Islamophobia myth is that once it is used to legitimize Muslim grievances, it is then used to legitimize the violent Muslim response to those grievances. Once you accept that Islamophobia is a serious problem, you have taken the first step to justifying violence as a response to that problem.

That is how it began in Israel, once the narrative of Muslim suffering under the “occupation” was accepted; Muslim terrorism became legitimized as a resistance to the occupation. Once you accept that Muslims in France have been marginalized by an Islamophobic society, then criticizing their religion marginalizes them further and justifies their violent response.

The charge of Islamophobia turns Charlie Hedbo into the new Israel, occupying Muslim sensitivities with tanks made of cartoons and barbed wire fences made of words. Once the occupation is defined, then resistance is justified– and the charge of Islamophobia becomes a license to kill.

Even organizations dedicated to freedom of the press make their ritual obeisances to the Islamophobia myth.

Pen International, an organization of writers dedicated to freedom of expression, issued a press release condemning the attack with the coda that “Despite concerns that the magazine may have aimed to incite provocation, this worrying incident nonetheless represent an alarming attack on freedom of expression.”

Since when has Pen differentiated between provocative and non-provocative forms of expression to the extent of treating provocative speech as less deserving of protection so that it must be differentiated with a “despite” and a “nevertheless”?

“Despite the fact that such depictions of the Prophet Mohammad are strictly prohibited in Islam, the magazine’s editor claimed that they were simply doing our job as usual,” the Pen release adds. And there’s another “despite.” Is the “despite” of Islamic law really meant to govern French publications? It almost seems as if Pen thinks so. And while Pen quotes Charlie Hedbo’s editor that he was doing his job, it does not endorse that statement.

Is Pen being Islamophobic or concerned about Islamophobia? Is it afraid of Islam or afraid that people might be afraid of Islam? If fear of Islam is wrong, then Charlie Hedbo was far less Islamophobic than Pen, Time and Newsweek. But Islamophobia isn’t the problem, it’s the goal.

It’s not fearlessness that the fearful defenders of the timid press are asking from us, it’s fear– a fear that may not be directly acknowledged. Instead we are to be afraid of hurting Muslim feelings for fear that they might think that we are afraid of them… in which case they will give us more reasons to be afraid of them.

That’s the Orwellian Doublespeak of Islamophobia: we are to be afraid of being afraid and if we are afraid enough, then perhaps we won’t need to be afraid anymore. The left’s twisted politics endorse militant terror and then warn us not to be terrorized by them. Only the guilty condemn the violence, the innocent cheer it on or pretend that it isn’t there. From the French Revolution to the USSR’s Great Terror to the Black Panthers to Islam, nothing has changed.

The true Islamophobes huddle behind their bureau desks and spit poison at those who aren’t afraid of Islam. Or aren’t afraid enough to fall into line and keep their mouths shut. Islamophobia becomes an instrument of Muslim grievance translated into violence. And since Muslim grievances are endless, so is the violence.

The devilish trick of Islamophobia is that it turns the very recognition of Muslim violence into a justification for more of that violence. Call out a Muslim suicide bomber, and you marginalize millions of peaceful Muslims who will now don explosive underpants because of your Islamophobia. Criticize Islam as a violent religion and the violent response that is in no way associated with Islam will be on your own head.

Islamophobia justifies Muslim violence and atrocities by equating offensiveness with repression. Only Islamophobes don’t censor and if they end up in the burn ward, it’s because they brought it on themselves. The bloody machine of Muslim grievance grinds on and the bodies coming out the other end include the corpse of Madam Liberty.

The pretense that crying Islamophobia protects Muslims from bigotry is a lie. It’s time to recognize the charge of Islamophobia for what it is– a license for Muslims to kill.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Name the Poison

Name the Poison

By Pat Condell



The roots of slavery can be found in the Muslim slave trade

Here's a short history of the Islamic slave trade from the days of Mohammed to the present. Daniel Greenfield explores the mindset and reasoning behind slavery being an integral part of Islam.

FROM CANADAFREEPRESS.COM:

The roots of slavery can be found in the Muslim slave trade
Islam, the Religion of Slavery

Author: Daniel Greenfield
Thursday, November 10, 2011

The slow collapse of Dubai, a desert mirage built on oil money, human misery and the greed of Western businesses, reminds us once again of the fate of all slave economies in the end. But for all the skyscrapers in Dubai, the glittering avenues built by slave labor and the abundance of luxury American and European automobiles—the story of Dubai and Saudi Arabia is very much an old story in a Muslim Middle East, of fat prosperous sheiks clutching their ill gotten gains to themselves and ruling over harems and companies of slaves, until the end comes.

Like Muslim Brotherhood derived terrorists using the latest Web 2.0 social media as part of a quest to drive humanity back into the dark ages, the Gulf States are a very old story with the external gilt and glitz of modernity. While the Muslim world may employ the tools and utilities of the 21st century, even mimic its terminology, it has never left its own dark ages… and its dominant religious and social movements are all geared toward making sure that it never does.

And while above the skyscrapers gleam in Dubai’s night sky, below are the armies of foreign workers, some prosperous Western Dhimmis driving luxury cars who come to do all the higher labor that the native Emiratis lack the ability or will to do, and outnumbering them are the labor gangs of Asian, Indian and Middle Eastern workers who erect the edifices designed by Western architects to fool Western investors into believing that the backward totalitarian sheikdom is actually a modern free republic.

As with any fairy tale, behind the glamour lies an ugly truth. A truth that dates back to Mohammed. That stretches from slave caravans to slave ships. From England to America and through Turkey to Russia, the roots of slavery can be found in the Muslim slave trade.

Article continues HERE.