Thursday, November 19, 2009

Comparative vs Absolute Violence

Sheila Musaji responded to Condemning Religious Extremism with a new article containing two rhetorical questions in its title.
Is Islam more violent than other religions?: Is the Qur’an inherently violent?


Dajjal, the author, then lists verses in the Qur’an which he believes to mean that my condemnation would call for me to condemn God and/or the Qur’an, or Islam. He goes on to repeat that “Islam not only encourages but mandates violence”. He repeats this process for each of the condemnations in my article, giving his interpretation of particular Qur’anic verses to “prove” that his understanding of Islam is more accurate than that of the majority of Muslims (including Muslim scholars), and that any moderate interpretation is a lie.
Sheila Musaji follows up with a recapitulation of her earlier article before listing several verses which she finds inspirational, including: 2:190, 8:61, 5:28, 60:8, 2:193, 2:256, 18:29, 10:99, 24:54, 109:1-6, 3:134 and 3:186.

The list of inspirational verses is followed by this:
Some time ago I wrote an article entitled The Use and Abuse of Scriptures and I believe that it responds very clearly to the problem of “quote mining” the scriptures.
The cited article was reproduced after that introduction. It lists Qur'an & Bible verses which are supposedly abused by cherry pickers. This brings me back to the list of verses which inspire the author. Why does she find them inspirational? She uses the translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. You can find it, with the translator's commentary, at altafsir.com. Lets examine the first verse she cited, linked at the end of the preceding sentence
[2:190]
Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors.
* v.190 : War is only permissible in self-defence, and under well-defined limits. When undertaken, it must be pushed with vigour, but not relentlessly, but only to restore peace and freedom for the worship of God. In any case strict limits must not be transgressed: women, children, old and infirm men should not be molested, nor trees and crops cut down, nor peace withheld when the enemy comes to terms.
" War is only permissible in self-defense" goes far beyond the text of the verse, if we interpret it literally. Is it true? "Those who fight you" implies that this verse is about defensive warfare. But look closely, it says "who fight you", not "who attack you". Lets turn to Ibn Kathir's Tafsir.
Abu Al-`Aliyah said, "This was the first Ayah about fighting that was revealed in Al-Madinah. Ever since it was revealed, Allah's Messenger used to fight only those who fought him and avoid non-combatants.

Women & children should not be killed. Why not? Is that ruling based on moral premises? Examine Malik's Muwatta 21.3.10, which contains several prohibitions.
  • Do not kill women or children or an aged, infirm person
  • Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees
  • Do not destroy an inhabited place.
  • Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food.
  • Do not burn bees and do not scatter them.
  • Do not steal from the booty, and do not be cowardly
Notice that the first five prohibitions are all members of a set defined by the first clause in the last prohibition. Everything protected by the prohibition is booty! The economic foundation of the prohibition is confirmed in Shari'ah. We turn next to Reliance of the Traveller. [Emphasis added.]

O9.13

When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman's previous marriage is immediately annulled.

Ok, so non-combatants are not to be attacked, just enslaved or held for ransom. What about people passively minding their own business, in their own homeland, who were not attacking Muslims? [Emphasis added.]

O9.1: The Obligatory Character of Jihad

Jihad is a communal obligation (def: c3.2). When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others (O: the evidence for which is the Prophet's saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

"He who provides the equipment for a soldier in jihad has himself performed jihad,"

and Allah Most High having said:

"Those of the believers who are unhurt but sit behind are not equal to those who fight in Allah's path with their property and lives. Allah has preferred those who fight with their property and lives a whole degree above those who sit behind. And to each, Allah has promised great good" (Koran 4:95).

If none of those concerned perform jihad, and it does not happen at all, then everyone who is aware that it is obligatory is guilty of sin, if there was a possibility of having performed it. In the time of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) jihad was a communal obligation after his emigration (hijra) to Medina. As for subsequent times, there are two possible states in respect to non-Muslims.

The first is when they are in their own countries, in which case jihad (def: o9.8) is a communal obligation, and this is what our author is speaking of when he says, "Jihad is a communal obligation," meaning upon the Muslims each year.

The second state is when non-Muslims invade a Muslim country or near to one, in which case jihad is personally obligatory (def: c3.2) upon the inhabitants of that country, who must repel the non-Muslims with whatever they can).

Jihad against Kufar in their own countries is a communal obligation binding upon the Muslims each year. Let Al-Shafi'i clarify the issue.
The least that the imam must do is that he allow no year to pass without having organised a military expedition by himself, or by his raiding parties, according to the Muslims' interest, so that the jihad will only be stopped in a year for a (reasonable) excuse."

What must the imam do? [Emphasis added.]

O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad

The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9.29),

the time and place for which is before the final descent of Jesus (upon whom be peace). After his final coming, nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus' descent (upon him and our Prophet be peace), which is the divinely revealed law of Muhammad. The coming of Jesus does not entail a separate divinely revealed law, for he will rule by the law of Muhammad. As for the Prophet's saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

"I am the last, there will be no prophet after me,"

this does not contradict the final coming of Jesus (upon whom be peace), since he will not rule according to the Evangel, but as a follower of our Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) ).

The caliph invites people of the book to embrace Islam or submit to extortion. If they decline, he makes war on them. "Fight those who fight against you:" evidently means 'after you attack them'. Why would Muslims attack people who had not attacked them? Because Allah commanded it in 8:39 & 9:29. Moe dispatched armies, giving their commanders orders which were recorded in Sahih Muslim 19.4294.

[...]If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them.[...]

There is another source of verification which Muslims would prefer that we not be aware of. I learned of this resource by lurking in a Muslim chat room on Pal Talk a few years ago. Moe dictated extortion letters and dispatched them by couriers, later following up with his army. He sent one to the Byzantine Emperor before launching the ghazwat on Tabuk. He sent another to the Jews at the Khaibar Oasis prior to attacking them. But this exemplary gem of extortion letters is far more explicit than the others, leaving little to the imagination.

LETTER TO THE CHIEFS OF AQABA

In the name of ALLAH the compassionate, the Merciful
From Muhammad, Prophet of Allah
To the People of Aqaba

May peace be on you. I praise Allah who is one and except whom there is nobody else to be worshipped.

I do not intend to wage war against you till you receive my written reason for it. It is better for you, either to accept Islam or agree to pay Jiziya and consent to remain obedient to Allah, His prophet and his messengers. My messengers deserve honour. Treat them with respect. Whatever pleases my messengers, will also please me.

These people have been informed of the orders about Jiziya. If you desire that there should be peace and security in the world, obey Allah and His Prophet. Thereafter none in Arabia and Ajam (Iran) shall dare cast an evil eye on you. But the rights of Allah and His Prophet can at no time be waived.

If you do not accept these terms and set them aside, I do not need your presents and gifts. In that case, I shall have to wage war (to establish peace and security). Its result would be that the big ones shall be killed in war and the commoners shall be taken prisoners.

I assure you that I am a true Prophet of Allah. I believe in Allah, and His Books, and His Prophets and am of the faith that Maseeh (Messiah) son of Mariam (Mary), is a Prophet of Allah and His word.

Hurmala (Raziallah AnhoA.) who brought to me 3 wasaq (about 6 quintals) of barley, recommended your case. Had it not been in compliance of the command of Allah and the good opinion of Hurmala for you, it would not have been necessary for me to correspond with you and instead of it, there would have been a war. If you will obey my messengers, you shall immediately have my support and the help and support of everyone who is attached to me.

My messengers are Shuraih-beel, Obaiy, Hurmala and Hurais (Raziallah AnhoA.) and whatever decision they take in respect of you, shall be acceptable to me.

Your people are under the protection and responsibility of Allah and His Prophet.

Supply provisions to the Jews of Maqna, for their journey to their country.

If you accept obedience, may peace be on you.'

Seal: Allah's Prophet Muhammad .

Citing 8:39 & 9:29 might be cherry picking if their meanings were not so obvious, but they are clear verses, the foundations of the book. Furthermore, they are confirmed by Islamic oral tradition as well as by Shari'ah. [Emphasis added.]

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."

Classical Arabic of the time of the revelation of the Qur'an lacked vowels and diacritical marks. It was not much more than a memory aid. One man was an expert in the meaning of the Qur'an, the one who received and recited the revelation. He told his companions what it meant and demonstrated its meaning. His companions passed that information down from mouth to ear for generations before it was codified. Because Islamic traditions were codified and translated, we have access to them and can see what the Qur'an meant to Moe, the real expert.

Many Muslims will answer by denying the authenticity of hadith, asserting that the Qur'an is the only revelation of divine will, protected by Allah from all contamination. Of course, there are some problems with that assertion. Only Moe received the revelations, sometimes in the form of a bell ringing in his head.
Moe could say anything, asserting that it was from Allah, and he did. His child bride was wise to him. [Emphasis added.]

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 311:

Narrated Aisha:

I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah's Apostle and I used to say, "Can a lady give herself (to a man)?" But when Allah revealed: "You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).' (33.51) I said (to the Prophet), "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires."

The Qur'an was largely transmitted from mouth to ear, just like the hadith. Fragments were written on various materials, but when the Qur'an was codified, parts of it were only available from hafiz. If the hadith are not reliable, neither is the Qur'an. How is a Muslim to obey Muhammad and emulate his conduct without knowing what he commanded and exemplified? Does the Qur'an tell you how to perform Wudu? Does it tell you what to do if water is not available? So, how do you know?

What is Shari'ah based upon? It has two primary sources: Qur'an & hadith, extended by analogy. If you disclaim hadith, then how can you claim that Shari'ah has any validity?

Muslims assert that 2:256 & 10:99, quoted by Sheila Musaji, forbid compelling anyone to revert to Islam. There is a reason for that: Jizya was only collected from people of the book who had been conquered or intimidated. If they were reverted, they would cease to pay Jizya. Dhimmis were a source of Income for Moe.
2:256. There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.

10:99. And had your Lord willed, those on earth would have believed, all of them together. So, will you (O Muhammad ) then compel mankind, until they become believers.

10:100. It is not for any person to believe, except by the Leave of Allâh, and He will put the wrath on those who are heedless.
It says you can't force us to revert, it does not say you can't attack us. Where is the conflict between those verses and the Jihad imperatives?
8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.

9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
"Religion will all be for Allah alone", a terminal condition for warfare in 8:39, is obviously in conflict. But there is an out: abrogation.
2:106. Whatever a Verse (revelation) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allâh is able to do all things?
Later revelations abrogate earlier revelations with which they conflict. Which came first? Surah Al-Baqarah was #87 in sequence of revelation; Surah Al-Anfal was #88. 2:256 is abrogated.

Of course I don't know a character of Arabic, so I am not qualified to interpret the Qur'an, as if Allah's commandments required interpretation. Will you take the word of one who was qualified? Here is a fragment from the Wikipedia entry about Ibn Kathir.

Ibn Kathir wrote a famous commentary on the Qur'an named Tafsir ibn Kathir which linked certain Hadith, or sayings of Muhammad, and sayings of the sahaba to verses of the Qur'an, in explanation. Tafsir Ibn Kathir is famous all over the Muslim world and among Muslims in the Western world, is one of the most widely used explanations of the Qu'ran today.

Ibn Kathir was renowned for his great memory regarding the sayings of Muhammad and the entire Qur'an. Ibn Kathir is known as a qadi, a master scholar of history, and a mufassir (Qur'an commentator). Ibn Kathir saw himself as a Shafi'i scholar. This is indicated by two of his books, one of which was Tabaqaat ah-Shafai'ah, or The Categories of the Followers of Imam Shafi.

. The titles of the following tafsir topics should be sufficient to convince any sane person. If they don't convince you, click them and read the tafsir.
Did Jesus Christ preach or practice conquest, genocide & terrorism? In what New Testament book, chapter & verse is such preaching or practice recorded? The Qur'an hadith show us that Moe preached & practiced those evils. Islamic tradition & exegeses also depict Jesus as a genocidal warmonger. If you doubt those facts, follow these links and see for yourself.
Posted by Ben at 4:11 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: , ,

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Condemning Religious Extremism

On November 15, 09, The American Muslim published Muslims Must Condemn Religious Extremists by Sheila Musaji. She expressed a desire to "go on record as condemning all religious extremism, bigotry, violence, hatred, and terrorism by both Muslims and non-Muslims." [Bold face in original.] She follows up by citing several "false claims" about Islam and sets out to disprove them by listing evil acts and obnoxious statements performed or made by Jews or Christians.

In the process of listing the relatively small number of evil acts & statements, Sheila Musaji tacks around the unpleasant & incontrovertible fact that terrorism is an intrinsic sacrament of Islam. Extraordinary claims require proof, don"t they? I submit as proof, the ample testimony of Allah and his messenger.
The testimony of Allah as recorded in the Qur'an. [Emphasis added.]
  • 3:151. We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they joined others in worship with Allâh, for which He had sent no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong­doers).
  • 8:12. (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes."
  • 8:57. So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson.
  • 8:60. Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of God and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom God doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of God, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly. [Abdullah Yusuf Ali; compare with
    Arberry, Rodwell & Sale.]
  • 33:26. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.
  • 59:2.He it is Who drove out the disbelievers among the people of the Scripture (i.e. the Jews of the tribe of Bani An-Nadir) from their homes at the first gathering. You did not think that they would get out. And they thought that their fortresses would defend them from Allah! But Allah's (Torment) reached them from a place whereof they expected it not, and He cast terror into their hearts, so that they destroyed their own dwellings with their own hands and the hands of the believers. Then take admonition, O you with eyes (to see).
  • 59:13. Verily, you (believers in the Oneness of Allah - Islamic Monotheism) are more awful as a fear in their (Jews of Bani An-Nadir) breasts than Allah. That is because they are a people who comprehend not (the Majesty and Power of Allah).
The testimony of Moe as recorded in hadith. [Emphasis added.]
  • Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. [...]
  • Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220 [...]I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy) [...]

A counter at Religion of Peace indicates that Muslims have perpetrated 14,392 terror attacks since 09/11/'01. How many have Jews & Christians perpetrated in the last eight years? Besides lists of recent and prior year attacks, that web site lists these facts which help to put things in perspective..
  • More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined. (source)
  • Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years. (source)
  • More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland. (source)
  • 19 Muslim hijackers killed more innocents in two hours on September 11th than the number of American criminals executed in the last 65 years. (source)
Sheila Musaji lists several ayat which guide her understanding of the Qur'an. Her list includes Al-Ma'idah 32 and skips directly to Surah Ghafir 40-43.
“If anyone slays a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew all people. And if anyone saves a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all people.” Qur’an 5:32.
“The recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree), but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from God, for God loves not those who do wrong. But indeed, if any do help and defend themselves after a wrong done to them, against such there is no cause of blame. The blame is only against those who oppress men with wrongdoing and insolently transgress beyond bounds through the land, defying right and justice. For such there will be a penalty grievous (in the Hereafter). But indeed, if any show patience and forgive, that would truly be an affair of great resolution.” Qur’an 42:40-43.
Why did she skip the context of 5:33 and turn so far away to complete the concept? For the same reason that other Muslims skip over that ayeh

: kitman. They don't want you to know its contents or its meaning. Lets take a close look at what they conceal from you. [Emphasis added.]
  • 5:33. The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.
What is the meaning of "wage war against Allah", which subjects one to the listed hudud? Ibn Kathir answers the question in his tafsir of 5:33.
If you do not believe in Allah, you are waging war against him and are subject to the listed hudud.

Sheila Musaji lists some actions and attitudes which she condemns. I will sample them out of context.
I condemn any individual who encourages others to commit violence, murder, or terrorism.
Does she condemn Allah & Moe? Qur'anic incitement to terrorism is listed above. Quranic incitement to violence include: 2:216, 8:39, 9:29 & 9:123.
I condemn any organization which encourages extremism, bigotry, or violence
Does she condemn Islam, which not only encourages but mandates violence?
I condemn anyone who attempts to degrade or insult the religion of others!
Does she condemn Allah? 1:7 says that Jews earned Allah's wrath and Christians went astray, 3:85 expresses intolerance, 8:22 expresses contempt for Jews & Christians and 9:33 curses us.
I condemn anyone who thinks that collective punishment, group responsibility, ethnic cleansing, or genocide is the solution to anything!
Does she condemn Allah? 9:14 & 3:12 involve collective punishment, 8:67 & 47:4 sanctify genocide.
I condemn anyone who thinks that membership in their faith group makes them superior to other human beings
Does she condemn Allah, who said that Muslims are the best of peoples in 3:110 and Moe who explained in Sahih Bukhari 6.60.80 that it means "the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam."?
Posted by Ben at 3:11 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: , , , ,

Petition of Ignorance

Muslim Thought Re-published Dr. Hasan Yahya's "Petition of Ignorance: Banning of Islam" dated 02/18/09.

Dr. Yahya's critique derisively focuses on form, but his original post was mis formated, and several cross posts which I have seen, including the present case, copy that mis format, making them difficult to read. To make matters worse, the article has no indentations or double spacing, it is one large block of text. These brilliant, wise, all knowing scholars don't know how to use html or make their writing readable.

The article criticized the Ban Islam Petition, which has, at the time of this writing, 889 signatures. Since the petition does not supply evidence to support the charges it makes, its appeal is to people who are already familiar with the evil doctrines and practices of Islam.

I have extracted selected statements from Dr.Yahya's article, placing them in the outer level of an unordered list, with my own comments and evidence in deeper levels of the list. .
  • [H]e brings the honorable Prophet of Islam, which Bernard Shaw, the Irish philosopher described as the top of 100 historical personalities in history, found on earth as a great leader.
  • The petition wanted to bring Muhammad (SAAS) the Prophet of Islam like Omar al-Bashir of Sudan, and Hitler for the Holocoust, and the Butcher of Bosnian Muslims of Checkoslovakia. Which I believe is a completely ignorant and unfounded claim.[...]
    • Moe died in 632, he is beyond the reach of the World Court. His 'crimes' were cited in the petition because they are sunna, exemplary acts to be emulated by Muslims in all places, at all times. It is Islam, not Moe in the dock, Dr.Yahya resorts to reductio ad absurdum, suggesting that petitions against David and Solomon would be parallels to the petition against Islam. He ignores the fact that Judaism & Christianity underwent reformations while Islam remains and will always remain fixated in the 7th century.
  • In this petition there is comment number: 16, which shows Sir Winston Churchill stated in 1899, that Muslims utilize cruel rules and practices early in his life when he was ignorant in politics and of Islam as a great religion. By generalizing his view for all Muslims. [...]
    • Churchill served as a British Army officer & war correspondent in Somalia & India where he had ample opportunity for exposure to Islam.
    • Not withstanding the incomplete sentence, Churchill wrote about Islam, not Muslims. The cited comment does not appear at the specified location in the petition signatures, but may be seen in a blog comment.
  • Then you have comment number: 184, for William S. Arnott, Ph.D who strongly encourages such petitions.
    My comment: He has a Ph.D, to say the man is an authority, in fact the carrier of this Ph.D wrote: “Their [the Muslims] deterministic religion is not for the freedom of anyone but is for control of everyone.” I think the use of “anyone,” and “everyone” over generalizes in a situation when specificality is needed rendering his opinion out of the scientific circle by any quantitative or qualitative measurement.
    • With a little research, I discovered that Dr. Arnott is a retired psychologist, with degrees appropriate to his occupation. His critic has degrees in Educational Psychology & Sociology. How does Dr. Yahya have any more credibility than Dr. Arnott?
  • In support of this position the petitioner cites comments from a range of contributors listed by numbers as follows: 16, 184, 536, 518, 82, 653, 655, 654, and 659. Comment number 536, which he breached as an innocent adolescent shool boy that “the muslims are a victim of islam. make no mistake about that.” And calls to rescue “the helpless victims of islam” and help them to be “a free people” He then proceeds to call on Saudi Arabia to change its ways. This stikes me as somewhat odd. Someone as learned as the petioner would claim to be would undoubtly understand that Saudi Arabia is a small portion of the Muslim world, which includes over 1.5 Billion followers. Its population according to almanac 2007, was 27 million. That is less than 2% of the overall Muslim population worldwide. Thanks for the advice, I am sure Saudi Arabia appreciates it.
    • The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contains the focal point of Islam: the Kaaba, in the Grand Mosque in Mecca. The K.S.A. finances the spread of fundamentalist Islam all over the globe.
  • Comment 518, the comment is written in French. Unfortunately, I do not speak French. I did, however, recognize some catalystic words. Words such as; Islam, Cathiliques, genocide, massacre, religions, Bouddiste, hindu, religion impose, and psychologiques, and sects, among others. My ethical resolve does not allow me to comment on something that I do not fully understand. I only wish the petitioner had such ethical standards.
    • Without reading the comment, Dr. Yahya concludes that the commenter has low ethical standards, writing about a subject he does not comprehend. Dr. Yahya's hypocrisy is obvious.
      • L'Islam appelle à l'esclavage des musulmanes envers les musulmans, des Juifs et des Catholiques. Cette religion appelle au génocide par le massacre en masse des athés et des autres religions qui ne sont pas "du livre" (bouddiste, hindou, etc). cette religion impose une loi (la charia) qui est épouvantable pour l'humanité (ex la lapidation des femmes, l'esclavage sexuel des non musulmanes, etc). Cette religion utilise des outils de manipulations psychologiques que l'on retrouve dans les sectes.
      • Google Translation:
        • Islam calls for the enslavement of Muslims against Muslims, Jews and Catholics. This religion calls for genocide by the mass slaughter of atheists and other religions are not "book" (Buddhists, Hindu, etc.). that religion imposes a law (Sharia), which is terrible for humanity (eg stoning of women, sexual slavery of non-Muslim, etc.). This religion uses psychological manipulation tools found in sects.
    • Upon examination of the translated comment, I find therein nothing contrary to the truth; it is an accurate description of Islam.
  • Comment 655. a comment from someone; s/he says: “The use of religion to torture, kill, malign, coerce and condone maltreatment of any living creature is heinous.” I agree so far. But on this statement I disagree. s/he said: “Islam does all of these things.” According to whom? This is your basic stereotypical mentality and wreaks of ignorance. Many of the comments are like this, one persons account or opinion but completely unsubstantiated and lacking in real value in understanding.
  • Comment 654. says:”In the interest of world peace ban islam.” S/he agrees on false claim or petition to ban Islam. I wonder to myself as I am reading this comment: what level of bigotry and racist view are these? I am appalled as a sociologist to see such free acceptance of illogical statements in a petition that is to be taken seriously. This comment is written by a blind follower. You could say anything and the “yes, count me in” mentality kicks in. I could probably go around and gets quotes from random people saying that they hate football. That doesn’t mean I will go forward with a petition to ban football.
  • Finally, the sponsor of the petition, his name is Lorenzo Bouchard, and his email, is labouchard@shaw.ca
    A final comment is what about the other numbers of comments which may be redicule the petition or call for peace and harmony in America in logical sense From the 659 or may be more comments? Just a question. Americans are not fools to accept such a racist and discriminative petition. Forty years ago, blacks compared with whites were less intillegent and some racist scientist like the one with Ph.D, the petitioner brought, claimed that in the 1980s, Today, Obama proved that blacks are not less than any person on earth if they have the chance and opportunity. For this I proudly say, long live America. And I feel sorry for this ill-guided petition to incite hatred in a healthy society like the USA.
    • What is the relevance of the name and contact information of the author of the petition? Let the petition stand or fall on its intrinsic merit.
    • Dr. Yahya arbitrarily dismissis comments in support of the petition. Why should we blindly accept criticism of it?
    • The petition is not racist; Islam is a war cult, not a race. Islam is not limited to Arabia, Arabs conquered North Africa, nearly half of Asia and much of Southern & Eastern Europe. It has enslaved people of several races. Rejecting a pseudo religion which commands its votaries to conquer the world, performing acts of terrorism & genocide in the process is not evil, it is a wise decision based on verifiable facts and sound judgment.
A newer petition, urges the World Court to grant injunctive relief against Islam.It presents evidence of Islam's static violation of international human rights conventions. It is carefully formatted and its evidence is linked to source documents for easy verification & contextual exploration. The International Qur'an Petition, published August 18, has 116 signatures at present.

Muslims, seeking to impose their blasphemy laws onto the entire world, assert that all criticism of islam is racism and hate speech, intended to incite violence against Muslims. Those assertions are intended to shut off debate, precluding all questioning of Islam's bona fides. That is the purpose of the Defamation of Religions resolution being debated by the Third Committee and a proposal to add a protocol to ICERD, being written by the Ad Hoc Committee for the Elaboration of Complementary Standards.

The resolution and the protocol seek to use international human rights law against us, rendering us defenseless in the ideological war which Islam is waging against our liberties. The International Qur'an Petition is our way of turning the tables on Islam, using their tactic against them. Islam's canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence contravenes ICERD, ICCPR & CPPCG. The petition offers proof of that fact. If the international human rights covenants are to have any meaning and effect, Islam must be proscribed by law.

I am asking you to read the International Qur'an Petition and evaluate the evidence for yourself. If you agree that Islam must be proscribed, sign the petition and send it to everyone you can hope to influence with an exhortation to sign and forward it. You can copy the petition's text and paste it into an email or download it in the form of a 14kb pdf file for use as an email attachment.

Proscribe Islam Petition Rough Draft is a71kb pdf file containing the full quotes of the the evidence of Islam's guilt. .Islam vs Human Rights 64kb chm file compiled from 7 blog posts exposing Islam's static violations of ICCPR.

The fact, revealed by the codified oral traditions of Moe's companions, is that Islam's mission is mercenary, its method is martial and its founder was a lecher, pedophile and suborner of murder. That is truth, not hate speech. That is condemnation of Islam, not an exhortation to assault or murder Muslims.

The Danish Cartoons depict Moe as a terrorist. They exaggerate; Moe never possessed a bomb because he died before the invention of explosives. But he was, by his own admission, a terrorist. The cartoons do not suggest attacks against Muslims. The violence was spawned by the preaching of radical clerics, not by the cartoons. Fitna, the short video documentary by Geert Wilders, illustrates that fact most effectively. It shows Allah's commands and the cleric's raving along with the resultant rioting. Fitna is neither hate speech nor incitement, it is an expose of Islam's hate speech and incitement to violence.
Posted by Ben at 3:08 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: , , , ,

Friday, November 13, 2009

Defamation of Religions: Preliminary Vote

WND reports that the Third Committee held a preliminary vote Nov. 12 on the Defamation of Religions resolution: 81:55:43. Support declined by 5 votes, opposition increased by 2 and abstentions increased by 1. The present level of support indicates that the General Assembly will pass the resolution.

The good news is that, while the resolution will pass, it will not become enforcible law. The bad news is that it will give the UN stamp of approval to blasphemy laws used by Pakistan and other nations to suppress and persecute Christians and other minorities. The resolution calls on member states to enact and enforce legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam.

The Department of State expresses opposition to inclusion of references to defamation of religions, but it supports inclusion of negative stereotypes, as included in the recent Freedom of Belief and Expression resolution. Examine the relevant text from that document. [Emphasis added.]
Also expresses its concern that incidents of racial and religious intolerance, discrimination and related violence, as well as of negative racial and religious stereotyping continue to rise around the world, and condemns, in this context, any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, and urges States to take effective measures, consistent with their obligations under international human rights law, to address and combat such incidents;


This sample is from last year's draft resolution.
Expresses deep concern at the negative stereotyping of religions and manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religion or belief still evident in the world;

The following sample is from Pakistan's submission to the Ad Hoc Committee for Elaboration of Complementary Standards.
legal prohibition of publication of material that negatively stereotypes, insults, or uses offensive language in matters regarded by followers of any religion or belief as sacred or inherent to their dignity as human beings, with the aim or protecting their fundamental human rights,
What are they really complaining about? We can get a hint from their latest Islamophobia report, which contains a list of "Islamophobic incidents".
Political and Social Campaigns against Islam and Muslims

Campaign Warns Americans about Looming Shariah Code – Detroit billboard said religious law imposed by Islam threatened rights. Members of the United American Committee (UAC) stated that Shariah might be spreading around the world, but it was not going to be established in the United States without opposition. Officials had reportedly erected a 48-foot-long billboard just outside of Detroit, home to one of the largest groups of Muslims in the U.S.


Danish Muhammad Cartoonist Returns with New Work – Kurt Westergaard, the Danish caricaturist forced into hiding after the publication of his depiction of the Prophet Muhammad in the newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2005, was set to return with a new set of potentially controversial drawings. According to a Report in the Copenhagen Post, Westergaard was expected to have 26 illustrations in a new book that compiled the
sardonic columns by Danish writer Lars Hedegaard for the Berlingske Tidende newspaper.

Wilders plans second anti-Islam film – Rightwing MP Geert Wilders has told De Telegraaf newspaper that he was planning to make a follow-up to his controversial anti-Islam film, Fitna. The new piece, expected to be released in 2010, will deal with the negative effects of what Wilders called the advance of Islam in Western countries.
If those examples do not make it clear to you, examine this quote from a letter sent by the OIC to the Chairman of the Ad Hoc Cmte. in October.
For instance, the British National Putty leader Nick Grffin has referred to Islam as a "a vicious and wicked religion"; some in Switzerland are strongly opposed to the construction of minarets on mosques as symbols of Islam; while in Denmark and the Netherlands the personality of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) has been deliberately ridiculed with the intention to violate the sentiments of Muslims. These are only some of the clear examples not just of discrimination against Muslims as individuals but of Islam as a religion as well as well as its revered personalities and sacred symbols. Accordingly, the contention that human rights standards should apply only to individuals is not credible. Therefore, the OIC ls advocating the need to address these concepts in a holistic and legal manner: to avoid their negative impact on the fundamental rights and freedoms to be enjoyed by the individuals, groups of individuals and communities. [Emphasis added. ]
It becomes clear that Islam will not tolerate any criticism whatsoever. Islam seeks to criminalize all criticism, regardless of the truth thereof. The obvious references to Fitna and the Danish cartoons leave no doubt. Fitna displayed the hate speech & violence which fill the Qur'an along with their effects in the Arab street. The Cartoons depict Moe as a terrorist, which he was even though he never possessed a bomb. He said that he was "made victorious with terror."

What can we do about this situation? Nothing directly, but we can sign and promote two on line petitions opposing the resolution and one that counter attacks.
Sign those petitions and solicit the support of everyone you can hope to influence. Urge your Congressman to sign onto H. Res. 763 as a co-sponsor and work to get it to the floor for a vote. If you know your Zip Code, you can use the email form at http://www.congress.org/ .

Posted by Ben at 5:07 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: , , , , ,

Veto the Goldstone Report!

Honest Reporting is sending emails to the five permanent members of the UN Security Council urging them to veto the Goldstone Report. For further information about the travesty of justice, click here.

For the love of justice and the right of self defense against Islamic aggression, click this link, watch the promotional video and sign the petition. The biased and polemical report falsely accuses Israel of war crimes, flying in the face of the facts. The enemy of all mankind must not be allowed to put Israel in the dock for defending herself against terrorism by rockets & mortars.
Posted by Ben at 5:03 AM 0 comments Links to this post

Letter from OIC to Ad Hoc Committee.

Religion Clause, the blog of Professor Howard M. Friedman, published an article revealing the existence of a letter from the OIC to the Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee for the Elaboration of Complementary Standards. The letter was issued coincident with the introduction of the current draft of the Defamation of Religions resolution in the Third Committee. It is an attempt to reinforce the supposed necessity of protecting Islam from criticism.

The blog post also reported the existence of a U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom publication: The Dangerous Idea of Protecting Religions from "Defamation": A Threat to Universal Human Rights Standards.


There is a clear contrast between the OIC's letter and the USCIRF's report. Reading both of them will help you to understand the necessity of defeating the Defamation resolution in the General Assembly.
Posted by Ben at 4:58 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Dr. Nidal Hasan's Outline of Islam and Andrew Bolt's Questions

The Herald Sun published an article by Andrew Bolt in which he stated critical facts which had been ignored by some journalists and propounded certain rhetorical of a most critical nature. The article included a link to his blog, where I discovered a link to Dr. Hasan's slide show at the Washington Post.

It has been reported that Dr. Hasan's assignment was to deliver a lecture on a medical topic. Instead, he lectured about Islam and its potential effect on servicemen and the Army. In retrospect, the advice given in the last slide should have been applied in his case.

The slide show presents a basic outline of Islam, hitting the most essential highlights. Most of the slides display Qur'an verses or hadith. I have no doubt that the lecture elaborated upon the military application of those slides.

The information presented in the slide show is basically accurate, with the exception of two areas where error has crept in. Slide #36, pertaining to peace & forgiveness, overlooks the fact that those verses have been abrogated by Surah At-Taubah. #38 & 39 misrepresent 9:38 & 9:39 as relating to defense though they are contained in a Surah dedicated to excoriating Muslims who refused to join the ghazwat against Tabuk. Ibn Kathir's Tafsir confirms the obvious.

I hope that you will click the link to the slide show, view it and consider its contents carefully. Its implications for military recruitment & retention policy are clear. Neither the Muslim who shrinks from conflict with fellow Muslims nor one who anticipates an opportunity to turn against friendly forces should be recruited or retained. I doubt the possibility of accurately identifying all members of those two classes of Muslims.

The critical questions propounded by Mr. Bolt are listed below, followed by my answers.
  • How much of a threat is Islam to a secular, multi-ethnic society like America's - and ours?
  • How sure can we be of the loyalty of Muslim troops in a war against a Muslim country?
  • Have we become so fearful of asking such questions that even a Hasan, with his record for hate-preaching, is not just allowed to serve in the US military, but is promoted to the rank of major by people apparently too scared to seem racist to object?
  • And can you trust journalists to even tell you the facts you need to reach the right answers?
Islam is an existential threat, immediately to random individuals as in the massacre of '02 in Metropolitan Washington D.C. and to the nation in the long term if we don't wise up and defend ourselves adequately and effectively by eliminating it. We can no more tolerate Islam in our midst than rattlesnakes and copper heads in our homes. All three are venomous, aggressive and predatory.

We can be sure of the past loyalty of Muslim troops after the war is ended without treacherous behavior on their part. We can never be sure of their future loyalty. We now know that Dr. Hasan is extremely disloyal.

The question about fearing accusations of hate/racism answered itself, it does not require amplification.

Journalists can only report what they know. In the early hours of any incident, that knowledge base will be small, growing over time as new information comes to light . But many journalists have agendas, as do the publications that employ them. We can not trust all of them all of the time; we must not become dependent on a single source of information about current events.
Posted by Ben at 9:28 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: , , ,

Major Hasan's act of Worship

In an article at NewsMax cites an FBI estimate saying that 10% of American Mosques teach jihad, Ron Kessler made the following statement.

On the other hand, those who condemn Muslims in general because of the actions of Hasan and others like him are engaging in prejudice that has no place in America. Indeed, such stereotyping sets back the war on terror, because we need moderate Muslims on our side.

The problem is not the Quran, which is no more incendiary than some passages in the Bible. (Deuteronomy, for example, prescribes stoning to death for those who “served other gods and worshipped them.”) The problem is the radical element that uses the Quran as an excuse to engage in terrorism and the failure of many moderate Muslims to condemn the extremists.

It is Islam we condemn in general, not Muslims. Most Muslims are victims of Islam. There are Muslims in name only, who do not practice Islam, but there are no moderate Muslims because there is no moderate Islam. Those who assert otherwise are suffering from extreme cognitive dissonance.

Islam has a standard set by Moe's preaching and practice. Islam is what he said and did in Allah's name. The Qur'an's Surah Al-Anfal contains an imperative to fight disbelievers, specifically the Pagan Meccans, until all resistance ceases and only Allah is worshiped. Hilali & Khan offer this bracketed clarification: "[in the whole of the world ]". Abdullah Yusuf Ali uses a different expression: "faith in God altogether and everywhere".

Surah At-Taubah has an imperative to fight people with scriptural religions until they are subjugated and extorted. Those imperatives are outcome oriented, with neither chronological nor geographic limits.

The Old Testament enjunctions to fight were limited to particular people and places, they were not unlimited. Jesus Christ neither preached nor practiced warfare. Jews and Christians are not engaged in wars of conquest. While Judaism and Christianity have reformed and become passive, Islam is not reformed nor can it. Islam is aggressively attempting to conquer or reconquer on several battlefronts.

The Qur'an is given as Allah's word, transmitted to Moe by Jibril. Allah's religion is perfected for Muslims; perfection can only be defiled, not improved. Allah's word can not be changed. When Allah abrogated a verse, he replaced it with something better; Surah At-Taubah was revealed next to last, it abrogates earlier, more tolerant and passive verses. Since Moe was Allah's final and greatest 'Prophet', Allah has no messenger, his word is immutable, fixated in the 7th century.

Moe testified that he was "ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.'", confirming the imperatives cited above. Muhammad fought in 19 battles. Muslims assert that those battles were defensive, not offensive but only two of them were. Moe dictated and dispatched extortion letters, which he followed up with his army if the recipients did not comply with his demands. His letter to the Chiefs of Aqaba is the most explicit, it leaves no doubt about his intentions.

Allah described his relationship with Muslims as that of master: slave, the slave's mission being to fight in his cause, killing and being killed. Jihad is mandatory, "ordained" for Muslims. The penalty for refusing to fight is "painful torment", a hint of Hellfire. The "commerce that will save you from a painful torment" is "that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with your wealth and your lives". According to Allah, any step the believers take to anger or injure disbelievers will be "written to their credit as a deed of righteousness.".

Islam's canon of jurisprudence is the ultimate confirmation. Reliance of the Traveller, is the handbook of fiqh. Its Book O is the book of Justice. Its ninth chapter lays down the law of Jihad, defining it, describing its obligatory nature and explaining the obligation: "Jihad is a communal obligation, meaning upon the Muslims each year. ". Al-Shafi'i clarified the issue with this ruling.
"The least that the imam must do is that he allow no year to pass without having organised a military expedition by himself, or by his raiding parties, according to the Muslims' interest, so that the jihad will only be stopped in a year for a (reasonable) excuse."
I will quote the first sentence from each of the two sections which confirm the obvious.

O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad

The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9:29).

O9.9

The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim (O: because they are not a people with a Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax (jizya) ) .
Islamic law clearly confirms Allah's Jihad imperatives and Moe's testimony that he was ordered to fight. The caliph has a duty to make war on Kuffar in every year, if possible, until the entire world is conquered. Of course, the caliph's order or permission is required to mount an attack, unless there is no caliph. (O9.6).

Contrary to Mr. Kessler's assertion, condemnation of Islam is not prejudicial and the Qur'an is the root of the problem. Muslims whose personal morality conflicts with orthodox Islamic doctrine should remove Allah's yoke of slavery from their necks and become freemen. If you do not want to kill Kuffar, rape their widows and enslave their orphans, why are you Allah's slave? Emancipate yourself and rejoin humanity.

In remarks uttered at a memorial service for the servicemen slain at Fort Hood, President Obama said this.
It may be hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy. But this much we do know -- no faith justifies these murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favor. For what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice -- in this world, and the next.
A Muslim is not permitted to fight and kill another Muslim except in the authorized enforcement of Islamic law. Major Hasan was reluctant to go into battle against his brethren, but not to go into battle against his comrades. Muslims chant Allah-hu Akbar when slaughtering sacrificial animals and attacking Kuffar. Major Hasan shouted takbir because he was engaging upon the slaughter of his enemies, transferring his fear from himself to them and praising Allah

Murder can not be justified, it is unjust, but Islam rationalizes it. We learn from Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387 that the blood of Kuffar is not sacred to Muslims. Kuffar are considered rebels against Allah, and therefore not innocent. They are fair prey, targets of opportunity. . Islam divides the world into Dar ul-Islam where Allah's writ runs, and Dar ul-Harb, where Kuffar rule. Dar al-Harb is the land of war. It must be attacked until the entire world is Dar al-Islam.

Allah is sovereign over the world, its divine ruler because, as its creator, he owns it all. Where men are governed by man made law, they are in rebellion against Allah, depriving him of his divine right to rule. Allah has commanded Muslims to overthrow the rebels and extend Allah's rule over the entire world. Allah has promised them success in that mission. You can verify these facts by reading 13:41, 14:15, 40:51 and 61:9.
We're a nation that guarantees the freedom to worship as one chooses.
Major Hasan chose to worship Allah by sacrificing 13 Kuffar soldiers. That is his right because Jihad is a mandatory sacrament, being ordained by Allah. Allah said "Slay them wherever you find them'". Is that cherry picking? Is that out of context? If it is, tell it to the Shafi'ite jurists who wrote Reliance of the Traveller; that quote is part of the scriptural basis of jihad given in O9.0.
Posted by Ben at 12:20 AM 3 comments Links to this post
Labels: , ,

Ground Broken for Terrorist Memorial Mosque

With the media, politicians and bureaucrats thoroughly in thrall of the enemy, this seems to be a lost cause, but Alec has not given up yet. I admire his persistence and perseverance. The heroes are about to be rolled over again. What a travesty!
Blogburst logo, petition The desecration has begun. A ground-breaking ceremony was held at the Shanksville crash site on Saturday. Bulldozers will start reshaping the land this week. Never mind that the only rule for the Flight 93 memorial's design competition was that the landscape had to be left as it was. In order to complete the full arc of the Crescent of Embrace (now called a broken circle, but still a giant Islamic-shaped crescent), an earthen causeway will have to be built across the wetlands that lie about 50 vertical feet below the crash site.

A contractor posted recently about his decision to turn down work on the memorial, despite economic hard times. Our friend Jeff just could not stomach the idea of helping to build a tribute to the enemy, a sentiment that is easy to understand and much appreciated. To anyone else who might find themselves in this situation, just be aware that there are other options. Someone is going to do the work, and if the pay is lucrative, it could be better for our cause to have that money go to someone who is on our side.

Blogburst author Alec Rawls has succeeded in driving driving quite a bit of Western Pennsylvania news coverage through the purchase of a half-dozen half-page full-color ads in the local Somerset paper. If anybody wants to fund another, Alec will gladly put the ad together. Call it anti-dhimmi jiu-jitsu. We can use the Park Service's own money against them. If we don't succeed, then you have to live with knowing that you helped to build an abomination. There is no simple answer.

On the subject of worthy causes, long-time blogburst participant Curt at the excellent Flopping Aces blog is helping to orchestrate fundraising for Project Valour-IT, which helps provide voice-controlled computers and other technology to Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines recovering from hand wounds and other severe injuries. Soldiers Angels, which hosts Valour-IT, is also fundraising for the victims of the jihad attack on Fort Hood. To join our blogbursts, just send your blog's url.
Posted by Ben at 12:18 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: ,

Monday, November 09, 2009

DHS and Friends: Blog Views

One computer in the DHS office at Laredo, #153, performed 54 page loads from 6th November 2009 13:05:01 to 9th November 2009 18:48:00.
besides visiting the article about al-Nafisi, they visited snooper.wordpress.com/2009/11/, gaining direct access to the following posts:
They also viewed:
A second computer in the same office, #152, performed 51 page loads from 6th November 2009 12:48:05 to 9th November 2009 15:55:01. They also viewed snooper.wordpress.com/no-amnesty/.

One computer in the DHS office at La Pryor, # 151, performed 72 page loads from 6th November 2009 12:37:48 to 9th November 2009 18:36:36.
They also viewed:
One computer in a DHS office in Washington D.C., #160, logged on at 9th November 2009 09:32:49 and remained connected for 8 hours, 39 minutes. They confined their viewing to snooper.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/al-nafisi-incites-terrorism/.

Another computer in that office, #161, performed one pageload 6th November 2009 14:05:10.

One computer in another DHS office in Washington D.C., #155, performed 34 page loads from 6th November 2009 13:08:53 to 9th November 2009 17:47:12.
They also viewed snooper.wordpress.com/hell-no/.

A second computer in that office, #152, performed 42 page loads from 6th November 2009 12:54:54 to 9th November 2009 20:29:58. There is no indication that their interest extended beyond the post about al-Nafisi.

One computer in the Springfield office of DHS, # 81, performed 1 page load 6th November 2009 18:21:15.



It appears that the DHS shared their curiosity with a few friends. Someone at the office of the City Of Harlingen viewed snooper.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/al-nafisi-incites-terrorism/., joined by someone at the Texas Department Of Information Resources.

The FBI office in Mcallen read snooper.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/al-nafisi-incites-terrorism/, logging in 9th November 200914:46:02.

There may be a connection, however tenuous, most likely coincident nomenclature. I found this near the top of a results page for a compound search.

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

File Format: Microsoft Word - View as HTML
Dr. Abdelrazak Al-Nafisi. Permanent Delegate, Ambassador .... Dr. Abdul Azeez Al Babtain (Saudi Arabia). Dr. Nidal Hassan (Syrian Arab Republic) ...
portal.comnat.free.fr/Repkuwait08.d
But that was a meeting of UNESCO national councils, the Dr. Hasan was a Syrian bureaucrat and the al-Nafisi from Kuwait had a different first name. In any case, the article they've been viewing is relatively short, requiring much less than eight hours to read.
Posted by Ben at 11:45 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: ,

Sunday, November 08, 2009

Homeland Security or Insecurity?

Freedom Ain't Free welcomes the Department of Homeland Security, who began reading snooper.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/al-nafisi-incites-terrorism/ shortly after noon Nov. 6, '09 and hung around through 3am Nov. 8.

The Washington D.C. office loaded that single post 33 times while the Laredo TX. office made 45 page loads, reading a few other posts in addition to the post about Sheikh Nafisi.

In April, when the post was fresh, it was viewed 62 times. It had 9 hits in August, 7 in September and 9 in October, with 124 hits in November. Why did a post which averaged less than one hit per day in recent months suddenly spike to 77, 41,2 three days in November? What accounts for the multiple page loads? Did multiple staffers load the page in succession?

A search for the Sheikh's name did not turn up any relevant news using Google and Bing. Searches for recent crop duster and anthrax related stories also came up empty. There were two search engine referrals involving al-Nafisi. There was one page load for that post that was not directly attributable to the DHS. I assume that DHS had some reason for searching for that name. What I do not understand is why they did not click through to MEMRI to view the source of the material I posted.

Is there some indication of a renewed potential for an anthrax attack? That is just what we need with a flu epidemic under way; if every cough and sneeze raised fears of anthrax inhalation, the emergency rooms would be swamped with panicked patients.

Our government needs to come clean with us, drop the pretenses and admit the fact that Islam is our enemy, having declared and prosecuted war against us. The Bush / Obama blather about a "great religion of peace, hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists" is counterproductive, as is their policy of leaving our southern border wide open to a flood of illegal immigrants, including a substantial number of "other than Mexicans". .

If I recall correctly, several GIs were killed in Iraq by a grenade tossed by a Muslim colleague. The Fort Hood Massacre was perpetrated by a Muslim whose conduct and expressions had raised red flags. Two cases do not form a clear pattern, but they do present a warning sign. Our servicemen must not be placed at risk by mixing enemy forces into their ranks.

The time has come to purge our armed forces of Muslims. The time has come to weed them out of clerical, administrative and decision making positions in the federal bureaucracy. A Muslim is one who submits to and obeys Allah. What did he command them to do? What did Muhammad exemplify for them to emulate? Expressions such as "fight them", "fight those who" and "cast terror" come to mind immediately. Regular readers of my posts are familiar with them and their sources. The shooter was praising Allah while murdering his comrades. Once is enough.

Did the army enlist American Nazis in WW2? Why not? Weren't they harmless moderates, patriotic Americans? Would ANP members have experience conflict if sent to Europe to fight the Germans? Who would they have aimed at? Maj. Hasan was conflicted about fighting his Muslim brethren. Who did he aim at?

The time has come to drop the pretense & fantasy and observe the facts in the cold clear light of reason. If the Congress & President we elected won't do what is right, then we need to replace them in the next election cycle.
Posted by Ben at 4:39 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, November 05, 2009

Defamation || Negative Stereotyping

Examine these definitions of defamation & stereotyping:

Definitions of defamation on the Web:

  • a false accusation of an offense or a malicious misrepresentation of someone's words or actions
  • aspersion: an abusive attack on a person's character or good name
    wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
  • In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel (for written words), slander (for spoken words), and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a ...
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
Definitions of stereotyping on the Web:
  • A stereotype is a phrase relating to all the members of class or set. The term is often used with a negative connotation when referring to an ...
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotyping
  • stereotype - pigeonhole: treat or classify according to a mental stereotype; "I was stereotyped as a lazy Southern European"
Defamation involves factual falsity. Stereotyping involves broad generalization. What is the big deal; what is the significance of these concepts? Both are included in the latest edition of the UN's Defamation of Religions [Islam] resolution tabled in the Third Committee by Syria for the OIC on October 29, 2010.

The Department of State of the United States of America opposes the defamation clause and supports the negative stereotyping clause.
Statement by the Delegation of the United States of America
Delivered by Sarah Cleveland
Geneva, 30 September 2009

While we do not support the concept of “defamation of religions” for reasons well known to this Council, my government is strongly committed to religious freedom and has condemned the use of negative and derogatory stereotypes and discrimination and/or discriminatory policies. We recognize that such stereotyping and discrimination affects individuals of all faiths and races, and express our strong condemnation of the types of such intolerance provided in the report.

What's the big deal? When accused of defamation, we have a defense: truth. When accused of stereotyping, what defense do we have? Consider the example of Danish Cartoons. Moe was depicted with a bomb in his bonnet, implying that he was a terrorist and, by inferrence, that all Muslims are terrorists Moe died long before the invention of gun powder, so he never possessed a bomb. Does that preclude him from being a terrorist?

Speaking for Allah, Moe said: "We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they joined others in worship with Allâh, for which He had sent no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong­doers)[3:151] He was speaking for Allah when he said: (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.” [8:12]

So Moe talked tough. Did he carry out those threats? Yes, he did; the evidence is found in the Qur'an.
  • 33:26 And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.
    • And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches, and a land which you had not trodden (before). And Allâh is Able to do all things.
Is there any confirmation? Of course there is, in the hadith.
  • Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).

Terror made Moe victorious. What more proof do you need? Moe was a terrorist. What of the Ummah? Are they all terrorists? They are if they emulate Moe.
  • 33:21. Indeed in the Messenger of Allâh (Muhammad ) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allâh and the Last Day and remembers Allâh much.
To understand these issues, one needs to read the Qur'an & hadith and observe the context as a whole. Our misleaders want us to accept a false description of Islam as a "religion of peace". They want us to believe that Islamic aggression is a deviation from the standard, performed by a tiny minority who have hijacked a great religion.

Only those who will expend the time and effort needed to read Islam's canon of scripture, tradition, exegeses & jurisprudence will fully comprehend this issue. Aggression is foundational to Islam. Read Surah Al-Anfal & At-Taubah. Turn back and read 9:111 again.

  • 9:111. Verily, Allâh has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allâh's Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. It is a promise in truth which is binding on Him in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur'ân. And who is truer to his covenant than Allâh? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is the supreme success .

What is the relationship between Allah and the Muslims? What do the Muslims do for Allah? They are his slaves who fight in his cause, kill and are killed. Return to Al-Anfal and read from ayeh 2 to 42. What is the meaning of "spend out of that We have provided them"? What is the meaning of ":to go out from your home with the truth,"?

  • 9:88. But the Messenger (Muhammad ) and those who believed with him (in Islâmic Monotheism) strove hard and fought with their wealth and their lives (in Allâh's Cause). Such are they for whom are the good things, and it is they who will be successful.

  • 9:89. For them Allâh has got ready Gardens (Paradise) under which rivers flow, to dwell therein forever. That is the supreme success.

  • 9:90. And those who made excuses from the bedouins came (to you, O Prophet ) asking your permission to exempt them (from the battle), and those who had lied to Allâh and His Messenger sat at home (without asking the permission for it); a painful torment will seize those of them who disbelieve.
  • 9:91. There is no blame on those who are weak or ill or who find no resources to spend [in holy fighting (Jihâd)], if they are sincere and true (in duty) to Allâh and His Messenger. No ground (of complaint) can there be against the Muhsinûn (good-doers - see the footnote of V.9:120). And Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
Spending, in the context of 8:3, is a reference to Jihad.
  • 9:83. If Allâh brings you back to a party of them (the hypocrites), and they ask your permission to go out (to fight), say: "Never shall you go out with me, nor fight an enemy with me; you agreed to sit inactive on the first occasion, then you sit (now) with those who lag behind."

Go out, in the context of 8:5, is a reference to Jihad.
  • 8:2. The believers are only those who, when Allâh is mentioned, feel a fear in their hearts and when His Verses (this Qur'ân) are recited unto them, they (i.e. the Verses) increase their Faith; and they put their trust in their Lord (Alone);
  • 8:3. Who perform As-Salât (Iqâmat­as­Salât) and spend out of that We have provided them.
  • 8:4. It is they who are the believers in truth. For them are grades of dignity with their Lord, and Forgiveness and a generous provision (Paradise).
  • 8:5. As your Lord caused you (O Muhammad ) to go out from your home with the truth, and verily, a party among the believers disliked it;

It is clear from the context, that those who do not participate in Jihad when called are not believers. Believers are only those who participate in Jihad. If they do not emulate Moe, they are not believers. Those who neither participate directly in genocidal Jihad nor finance it, support the families of men at the battlefront, pray for victory nor engage in propaganda to support the Jihad are hypocrites, not believers. Hypocrites are to be fought and killed along with Kufar. [4:89]

What does this boil down to in the context of the '10 version of the Defamation of Religions resolution?
17. Welcomes the recent steps taken by Member States to protect freedom of religion through the enactment or strengthening of domestic frameworks and legislations to prevent the defamation of religions and the negative stereotyping of religious groups;
The context is one of a demand for national and international legislation to criminalize all criticism of Islam. When we counter "religion of peace" with exposure of Allah's imperatives and Moe's razia & ghazwat, we are accused of "defamation of Islam" and "negative stereotyping", the very acts the resolution seeks to outlaw.

11. Reaffirms that general recommendation XV (42) of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination,15 in which the Committee stipulated that the prohibition of the dissemination of all ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred is compatible with freedom of opinion and expression, is equally applicable to the question of incitement to religious hatred;

12. Strongly condemns all manifestations and acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance against national or ethnic,
religious and linguistic minorities and migrants and the stereotypes often applied to them, including on the basis of religion or belief, and urges all States to apply and, where applicable, reinforce existing laws when such xenophobic or intolerant acts, manifestations or expressions occur, in order to eradicate impunity for those who commit xenophobic and racist acts;

13. Reaffirms the obligation of all States to enact the necessary legislation to prohibit the advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, and encourages States, in their Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,7 to include aspects relating to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities in their national plans of action and, in this context, to take forms of multiple discrimination against minorities fully into account;

15. Urges all States to provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from the defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general;
They are demanding that member states enact and enforce legislation prohibiting all criticism of Islam. In his introduction to the OIC Observatory on Islamophobia, March 31 '08, Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Conference, had this to say about Islamophobia.
The Muslim Ummah has noticed with utmost concern the continued attacks by a section of marginal groups and individuals in the West on the most sacred symbols of Islam including the Holy Quran and Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in an offensive and denigrating manner, the most recent being the reprints of the blasphemous cartoons by 17 Danish newspapers on February 13, 2008 and the release of the film Fitna by a Dutch Parliamentarian on March 27, 2008. This apart, Muslims continue to be stereotyped, discriminated and profiled in many Western countries that have contributed to the issue. [Emphasis added.]
The Danish Cartoons & Fitna are the targets of their scorn because the cartoons accurately describe Moe as a terrorist and Fitna exposes the true source of Islamic violence.

Big deal? Blessed right it is!!! Under the proposed legislation, the next Hitler need only disguise his war machine as a religion, and nobody can question or criticize it without being persecuted. That is precisely what Moe did 1399 years ago. The OIC, their factotums in the UN and the Obama administration seek to shield Islam from all questioning and criticism.

We can counter attack.
Sign the petitions and urge your family, friends and associates to sign and promote them. Visit http://www.congress.org/ , enter your Zip Code and send your Congressman an email demanding that H.Res.763 be brought to the floor and passed before the final vote on the Defamation of Religions resolution.

The resolution will not become binding, enforcible international law, but it adds an aura of moral authority to local blasphemy laws which are used to persecute indigenous Christians. The proposed protocol to ICERD, being written by the Ad Hoc Committee for the Elaboration of Complementary Standards, will become binding international law, enforcible in court. Eternal vigilancemeta is the price of liberty. Sign the petitions and exhort Congress to pass H.Res.763. Remain alert and keep the pressure on.
Posted by Ben at 2:17 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)