Islam vs CPPCG

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

Article 1

The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

• (a) Killing members of the group;
• (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
• (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

• (a) Genocide;
• (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
• (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
• (d) Attempt to commit genocide;
• (e) Complicity in genocide.

8:37. In order that Allâh may distinguish the wicked (disbelievers, polytheists and doers of evil deeds) from the good (believers of Islâmic Monotheism and doers of righteous deeds), and put the wicked (disbelievers, polytheists and doers of evil deeds) one on another, heap them together and cast them into Hell. Those! it is they who are the losers.

17:16. And when We decide to destroy a town (population), We (first) send a definite order (to obey Allâh and be righteous) to those among them [or We (first) increase in number those of its population] who are given the good things of this life. Then, they transgress therein, and thus the word (of torment) is justified against it (them). Then We destroy it with complete destruction.

17:17. And how many generations have We destroyed after Nûh (Noah)! And Sufficient is your Lord as an All-Knower and All-Beholder of the sins of His slaves.

Allah speaks of heaping disbelievers together and casting them into Hell in 8:37. In 17:16, he brags about making complete destruction. In 17:17 he brags about destroying multiple generations. He is setting a pattern and precedent. Observe how he fleshes it out.

8:67. It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allâh desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.

In 8:67, Allah sets great slaughter as the prerequisite for releasing captives for ransom, telling Moe that he must put slaughter ahead of profit. That tells us that Allah favors genocide. This is confirmed in Surah Muhammad.

47:4. So, when you meet (in fight Jihâd in Allâh's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islâm), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allâh to continue in carrying out Jihâd against the disbelievers till they embrace Islâm (i.e. are saved from the punishment in the Hell-fire) or at least come under your protection], but if it had been Allâh's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allâh, He will never let their deeds be lost,

"Till when you have killed and wounded many of them" confirms Allah's quest for genocide. Moe besieged the Banu Qurayzah until they surrendered. What he did after they surrendered serves to confirm the message of 8:67 & 47:4.

Sahih Volume 4, Book 52, Number 280:

Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri:

When the tribe of Bani Quraiza was ready to accept Sad's judgment, Allah's Apostle sent for Sad who was near to him. Sad came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah's Apostle said (to the Ansar), "Stand up for your leader." Then Sad came and sat beside Allah's Apostle who said to him. "These people are ready to accept your judgment." Sad said, "I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners." The Prophet then remarked, "O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah." [For more complete detail, refer to 5.59.448]

Moe arbitrarily slaughtered about 700 prisoners of war. What he did next should make your blood boil with outrage.

Abu Dawud Book 38, Number 4390:
Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:
I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

First he decapitated the men, and cast them into a trench, then he did the same to their adolescent sons. Allah wants genocide and he gets it. Islam's practice of genocide, mandated by Allah, is obviously not in conformity with the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

The Banu Qurayzah, Armenian, Assyrian and Hindu genocides demonstrate a pattern of continuing crime against humanity. Islamic prophecy projects it far into the future: to the end of the world. The following hadith is one of the clearest among several with similar content.

Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4310:

Narrated AbuHurayrah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (peace_be_upon_him). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him.

This saying, distilled to its essence, means that Jesus will return to make genocidal war upon the remaining remnant of Jews & Christians, destroying both populations. Besides being blasphemous, it is a token of Islam's genocidal intent.

Confirmation of Islam's intention is found in Ibn Kathir's Tafsir of 7:167.

[...]In the future, the Jews will support the Dajjal (False Messiah); and the Muslims, along with `Isa, son of Mary, will kill the Jews. This will occur just before the end of this world.[...] Eternal Humiliation is Placed on the Jews

The violation of Article 1, 2.1 and 3.1 is obvious. Likewise, violation of 3.3 is easy to demonstrate by quoting one popular hadith.

Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6985:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

That hadith tells Muslims that they can not obtain admission to Paradise and enjoy their rivers of wine and 72 houris until they exterminate the Jews.

Islam vs ICCPR Article 26

ICCPR

Article 26

All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

2:282. O you who believe! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as Allâh has taught him, so let him write. Let him (the debtor) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear Allâh, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes. But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable himself to dictate, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her.

4:11. Allâh commands you as regards your children's (inheritance); to the male, a portion equal to that of two females; if (there are) only daughters, two or more, their share is two thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is half. [...]

Women are second class citizens under Islamic law. How do religious minorities fare?

Umdat as-Salik

O11.4: The Non-Muslim Poll Tax

The minimum non-Muslim poll tax is one dinar (n: 4.235 grams of gold) per person (A: per year). The maximum is whatever both sides agree upon.

It is collected with leniency and politeness, as are all debts, and is not levied on women, children, or the insane.

O11.5

Such non-Muslim subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. In addition, they:

-1- are penalized for committing adultery or theft, thought not for drunkenness;

-2- are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar);

-3- are not greeted with "as-Salamu 'alaykum";

-4- must keep to the side of the street;

-5- may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims' buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;

-6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;

-7- and are forbidden to build new churches.

The thing speaks for itself, no elaboration is required. Islam violates the concept of equality.

Islam vs ICCPR Article 20

ICCPR

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

20.1 proscribes propaganda for war; 20.2 proscribes advocacy of incitement to hostility. How does the Qur'an fare under those standards?

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.

9:123. O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the Al-Muttaqûn (the pious - see V.2:2).

Those are direct commands to conduct aggressive warfare. The oral traditions of Moe's companions give ample confirmation of that fact.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 196:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah 's Apostle said, " I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah, (either to punish him or to forgive him.)"

9:38. O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that when you are asked to march forth in the Cause of Allâh (i.e. Jihâd) you cling heavily to the earth? Are you pleased with the life of this world rather than the Hereafter? But little is the enjoyment of the life of this world as compared with the Hereafter.

9:39. If you march not forth, He will punish you with a painful torment and will replace you by another people, and you cannot harm Him at all, and Allâh is Able to do all things.

Allah told the Muslims that they could go to Jihad or go to Hell. Of course, there is another side to this: the "commerce" that will save Muslims from the fire.

61:10. O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment.

61:11. That you believe in Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know!

61:12. (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn ­ Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success.

9:39 tells Muslims of a painful torment to befall them if they do not join the Jihad. 61:10 tells them of a "commerce" that will save them from painful torment: joining the Jihad, which will be rewarded with admission to Paradise. This carrot & stick approach is obviously incentivising Jihad. It is obvious that the Qur'an is propaganda for war, which must be prohibited. The Hilali & Khan translation has numerous related references.

• fight: 369
• strive: 186

The Qur'an tells us that it can not be changed.

6:115. And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can change His Words. And He is the All­Hearer, the All­Knower.

30:30. So set you (O Muhammad ) your face towards the religion of pure Islâmic Monotheism Hanifa (worship none but Allâh Alone) Allâh's Fitrah (i.e. Allâh's Islâmic Monotheism), with which He has created mankind. No change let there be in Khalq­illâh (i.e. the Religion of Allâh Islâmic Monotheism), that is the straight religion, but most of men know not. [Tafsir At­Tabarî, Vol 21, Page 41]

The Qur'an is a violation of international law and it can't be edited. What shall we do about it?

Proving Islam incompatible with Article 18 of the ICCPR

ICCPR

Article 18

1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.
2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.
3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.

3:85. And whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:

Narrated 'Ikrima:

Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Umdat as-Salik

O8.1

When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.

O8.2

In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.

Shari'ah clearly reflects the congruent pattern of the Qur'an & hadith. Where Allah's writ runs, there is no freedom of religion. Where Allah's writ does not run, it eventually will. Take note of the terminal condition for Jihad against pagans in Al - Anfal 39.

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.

The war ends when all resistance ceases and Allah has a global monopoly of faith & practice. It is obvious that war of religious compulsion and executing apostates violate the provisions of Article 18.

Proving IslamIncompatible with Article 9 of the ICCPR

ICCPR

Article 9

1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall be deprived of his liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law.

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.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 80:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Verse:--"You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind." means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.

I added bold emphasis to one clause in the ayeh and one in the hadith. Each of them is sufficient to demonstrate how Islam contravenes Article 9.1. Islamic law requires that a minimum of one military expedition be mounted against Kuffar in every year and that captive women and children are enslaved.

I hope that Shari'ah is not the sort of law the authors of the ICCPR were contemplating when they wrote Article 9.

Islam vs ICCPR Article 8

ICCPR

Article 8

1. No one shall be held in slavery; slavery and the slave-trade in all their forms shall be prohibited.
2. No one shall be held in servitude.

4:3. And if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan­girls, then marry (other) women of your choice, two or three, or four but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one or (the captives and the slaves) that your right hands possess. That is nearer to prevent you from doing injustice.

4:24. Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allâh ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek (them in marriage) with Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage) from your property, desiring chastity, not committing illegal sexual intercourse, so with those of whom you have enjoyed sexual relations, give them their Mahr as prescribed; but if after a Mahr is prescribed, you agree mutually (to give more), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allâh is Ever All­Knowing, All­Wise.

Sahih Muslim book 008, Number 3373:

Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported: We took women captives, and we wanted to do 'azl with them. We then asked Allah's Messen- ger (may peace be upon him) about it, and he said to us: Verily you do it, verily you do it, verily you do it, but the soul which has to be born until the Day of judg- ment must be born.

Umdat as-Salik 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.

• that your right hands possess
• We took women captives, and we wanted to do 'azl with them.
• When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture

This evidence speaks for itself, requiring no elaboration. Allah sanctions conquering people and enslaving captives. That sanction is reflected in Islamic law. The reference to azl in the hadith relates to the withdrawal method. Several related ahadith are more explicit; click the link and scroll up to read them if you want the details.

While the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia officially outlawed slavery about 1964, it is still practiced with impunity. Daniel Pipes relates the details of a case of Saudis importing a slave to America in 2000.

Defamation of Religions Vote

Eye on the UN reports the results of the UNHRC vote on the "Revised Draft Resolution on Combating Defamation of Religions". The resolution is a 357KB Microsoft Word document. Its purpose is to forward the OIC agenda of imposing Islam's blasphemy laws upon the entire world.

Roy W. Brown, IHEU representative in Geneva, provides history and context to this issue in "The Slow Death of Freedom of expression" at Index of censorship.

Partial vote talley from a UN Watch press release;. list of member nations obtained from Wikipedia. I was only able to obtain the No votes and three abstentions. This table tells us who our friends are: the elleven in the middle column. We should reconsider alliance with and aid to the others listed.

For or Abstain	Against	Abstain
Angola	Canada	Bosnia
Argentina	Chile	Brazil
Azerbaijan	France	Mexico.
Bahrain	Germany
Bangladesh	Netherlands
Bolivia	Slovakia
Burkina Faso	Slovenia
Cameroon	Ukraine
China	Switzerland
Cuba	United Kingdom
Djibouti	Italy
Egypt
Gabon
Ghana
India
Indonesia
Japan
Jordan
Madagascar
Malaysia
Mauritius
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Pakistan
Philippines
Qatar
Republic of Korea
Russian Federation
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
South Africa
Uruguay
Zambia
23	11	13

Those UNHRC members listed in the first column failed to vote against the resolution which contains these and other egregious statements.

4. Expresses deep concern at the continued serious instances of deliberate stereotyping of religions, their adherents and sacred persons in the media, as well as programmes and agendas pursued by extremist organizations and groups aimed at creating and perpetuating stereotypes about certain religions, in particular when condoned by Governments;

5. Notes with deep concern the intensification of the overall campaign of defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general, including the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001;

6. Recognizes that, in the context of the fight against terrorism, defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general have become aggravating factors that contribute to the denial of fundamental rights and freedoms of members of target groups, as well as to their economic and social exclusion;

7. Expresses deep concern in this respect that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism and, in this regard, regrets the laws or administrative measures specifically designed to control and monitor Muslim minorities, thereby stigmatizing them and legitimizing the discrimination they experience;

13. Urges all States to provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general, and to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and beliefs;

14. Underscores the need to combat defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general by strategizing and harmonizing actions at the local, national, regional and international levels through education and awareness‑building;

15. Calls upon all States to make the utmost effort, in accordance with their national legislation and in conformity with international human rights and humanitarian law, to ensure that religious places, sites, shrines and symbols are fully respected and protected, and to take additional measures in cases where they are vulnerable to desecration or destruction;

Since Council members are elected on a regional basis, its membership will always be dominated by Islamic nations and those sympathetic to them. It is therefore impossible for justice, reason or common sense to prevail in the UNHRC. There is no nothing to be gained by seeking membership in that body. I will therefore urge President Obama and my Senators to abandon plans to seek election to the UNHRC and urge them to reject it and its resolutions.We should take no part it its deliberations or its financing.

Readers are urged to use the email form provided by http://www.congress.org/ to send emails to President Obama and their Senators and to include therein this html code which will create therein a link to this blog post.

Defamation of Religions Vote

Islam vs ICCPR Art. 6

This is the first in a series of posts comparing the doctrines of Islam to existing international conventions.
ICCPR:

Article 6

6. Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.

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."

• I have been ordered to fight the people till they say...
• then their blood and property will be sacred to us
• then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have
• and whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law
• When they do that, their life and property are unlawful for us except what is due to them.

Three hadith cited make it clear that our lives are not sacred to Muslims until we become Muslims; until then its open season and we are targets of opportunity.

Umdat as-Salik O1.2

• The following are not subject to retaliation:
• [...]a Muslim for killing a non-Muslim;[...]
• [...]a Jewish or Christian subject of the Islamic state for killing an apostate from Islam (O: because a subject of the state is under its protection, while killing an apostate from Islam is without consequences);[...]

The life of a non-Muslim is not sacred to Islam; it becomes sacred only by conversion or protected only by a treaty of dhimmitude. An apostate may be killed with impunity. It is clear that Shari'ah is incompatible with international law in regard to the right to life.

NGO Joint Statement on Defamation of Religions

UN Watch has posted a press release revealing the details of the Joint NGO Statement on Danger of U.N. “Defamation of Religions” Campaign and listing its 187 co-endorsers.

The joint statement urges nations to reject the "defamation of religions resolution", the proposed protocol to ICERD and the Durban II conference. The list of signatories includes a few surprises.

• Muslim Council of Canada
• The International Quranic Center (IQC)
• American Islamic Congress

As a lover of liberty, particularly freedom of expression, I visited http://congress.org/ and used their email form to send my personal endorsement of the joint statement and a link to the UN Watch press release to President Obama and my Senators.

The Censorship Protocol

This is what the IHEU is warning about in their press release, as the second of three listed threats to liberty.

Call upon all governments to resist the efforts of the “Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards” to alter the ICERD;.

This draft complementary international standards in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance has been prepared for the implementation of paragraph 199 of the Program of Action(A/CONF.189/12).

199. Recommends that the Commission on Human Rights prepare complementary
international standards to strengthen and update international instruments against racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in all their aspects;

Article 4 of the proposed protocol to ICERD is titled: Prohibition of Incitement to Racial Hatred.
This article contains several notable provisions.

1. States Parties condemn all propaganda, practice or organization to justify or encourage any form of hatred or discrimination against persons belonging to groups such as religious groups, refugees, asylum seekers, people displaced, stateless persons, migrants and migrant workers, descent-based communities such as people of African descent, indigenous peoples, minorities and people under foreign occupation.
2. States Parties undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to such hatred or discrimination, including:

1. to declare an offense punishable by law all dissemination of ideas to such discrimination or hatred, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts directed against persons belonging to particular groups;
2. to declare illegal and prohibit organizations and propaganda activities organized and any other type of propaganda which incites hatred or discrimination or who encourages, and to declare punishable by law the involvement in such organizations or activities;
3. not permit public authorities, national or local, to incite hatred or discrimination;
4. not to allow political parties to incite hatred or discrimination.
5. to strengthen their laws or take the legal provisions necessary to prohibit and punish racist and xenophobic platforms and discourage by a democratic debate vigilant the integration of political parties promoting these platforms in Government to legitimise their implementation alliances.

This protocol to ICERD would become International law, binding on signatories, and a provision in Article 17 prohibits reservations. We need a definition of terms:

• justify or encourage any form of hatred or discrimination
• incites hatred
• racist and xenophobic

Here is a clue from Article 6.

The fundamental characteristic of all the events to certain religions and descriditer to insult people or groups who share the religion, commonly called "defamation of religions" and all the fear and religious discrimination is inciting racial hatred For religious and address the issue of defamation of religions in a universal, it is essential to bring this discussion to the international instruments on human rights.

According to that, anyone who says or writes anything negative about Islam incites racial hatred. Is that clear yet? Examine what U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said about Geert Wilders' Fitna:.

"There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence," Ban said in a statement. "The right of free expression is not at stake here."[Reuters]

Geert Wilders quoted the Qur'an and displayed images of rabble rousing Imams and their followers, along with some of the results of their preaching. Ban Ki-moon says that constitutes hate speech and incitement to violence.

Masood Khan quoted Ban Ki-Moon's representative to the Alliance of Civilizations as declaring Fitna to be " a deliberate incitement to discrimination, violence and hatred on grounds of religion, aimed at provoking and promoting social unrest". [Masood Khan's statement of 04/01/08]

If we accurately describe Islam's doctrines & practices, quoting its canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence, we are automatically convicted of hate speech; inciting violence. This is part of an Orwellian campaign to dis-arm us, to render us incapable of warning against Islamic aggression.

This protocol would outlaw two American and two European political parties for their anti-Islam platforms. Muhammad, claimed to be the best and greatest of men, worthy of emulation as a role model was a murderer, pedophile & terrorist. For genuine hate speech and incitement to violence, read the Qur'an, don't stop there, read the next six verses. Is cursing Jews & Christians hateful enough for you? How about genocide? He killed all the men of a Jewish village after they surrendered, then he examined the boys for pubic hair and slaughtered those who had it.

Islam seeks to criminalize its critics because it has no defense against the facts contained in its own canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence. Moe had good reason for forbidding his followers to carry the Qur'an into Dar al-Harb: "That is out of fear that the enemy will get hold of it."

Don't just sit there waiting for the noose to be placed on your neck. Send an email to your Senators, and to President Obama. Tell them that the proposed protocol is unacceptable. Tell them that you consider support for it to be tantamount to treason. You can send your email through the Federal Officers link at http://www.congress.org/ . Include a link to this blog post in your email so that your Senators can become informed.

Urgent Appeal to NGOs

Dear Readers,

Reproducing blog posts written by others is not my usual habit, I usually do so only when the authors explicitly request it. I make an exception in this extremely important case because of the urgency of the issue and the short time line required for an effective response.

If you are an officer or member of any NGO which speaks out on issues of Liberty, I urge you to give careful and rapid attention to the following appeal from the International Humanist and Ethical Union. Please bring this matter to the immediate attention of the leaders of your organization and exhort them to endorse the appeal immediately.

The statement reproduced below brings two new attacks upon liberty to my attention. I intend to make contact with the author in hopes of receiving links to the documents involved so that I can make them the subject of future blog posts.

As a member of the United American Committee, Act! for America and Center for Vigilant Freedom, I exhort the leaders of those organization to add their official endorsement.

An urgent appeal to Humanist organizations: support freedom of expression, oppose "defamation of religions"

Submitted by admin on 22 March, 2009 - 14:19.

• UN Geneva

In conjunction with Freedom House, UN Watch and the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, IHEU is seeking Humanist orgnizations' support for the statement below, urging all states to reject UN resolutions "combating defamation of religion" - a concept which has no validity in international law. The statement is self explanatory. If your organization is in agreement with the statement, please endorse it on behalf of your organization by emailing me personally at . Please indicate in your reply the full name of your organization (which does not need to be accredited to the UN).

We plan to circulate the statement early next week to delegations at the Human Rights Council, prior to the Council vote on the "defamation of religion" resolution. The deadline for replies is 4pm CET (10am EST) on Tuesday 24 March.

Do not delay! Please add your organization's voice to this important statement in defence of human rights.

With kind regards

Roy W Brown
IHEU Main Representative, UN Geneva
Immediate Past President of IHEU

---

Joint NGO Statement on Danger of U.N. “Defamation of Religions” Campaign

We, the undersigned non-governmental organizations,

Deeply concerned by the pervasive and mounting campaign by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to produce U.N. resolutions, declarations, and world conferences that propagate the concept of “defamation of religions,” a concept having no basis in domestic or international law, and which would alter the very meaning of human rights, which protect individuals from harm, but not beliefs from critical inquiry;

Deeply concerned by the attempt to misuse the U.N. to legitimize anti-blasphemy laws, thereby restricting freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and freedom of the press;

Deeply concerned that “defamation of religions” resolutions may be used in certain countries to silence and intimidate human rights activists, religious dissenters, and other independent voices;

Alarmed by the resolution on “defamation of religions” recently tabled at the current 10th session of the UN Human Rights Council;

Alarmed by the draft resolution on freedom of expression circulated by Egypt, whose amendments seek to restrict, not promote, protections for free speech;

Alarmed by the recently-announced initiative of the U.N. “Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards” to amend the International Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) by adding a protocol on “defamation of religions”;

Alarmed by provisions in the latest draft outcome document of the Durban Review Conference that, through coded language and veiled references, endorse and encourage these subversive and anti-democratic initiatives;

1. Call upon all governments to oppose the “defamation of religions” resolution currently tabled at the UN Human Rights Council, and the objectionable provisions of the freedom of expression resolution;
   
2. Call upon all governments to resist the efforts of the “Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards” to alter the ICERD;
   
3. Call upon all governments not to accept or legitimize a Durban Review Conference outcome that directly or indirectly supports the “defamation of religions” campaign at the expense of basic freedoms and individual human rights.

Initial Signatories:

• UN Watch
• International Humanist and Ethical Union
• Freedom House
• The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty

Islam: Religion or ?

In a March 19, 2009 opinion piece Demoting Islam's Religion Status published by the New Media Journal, Martel Sobieskey reveals vital information which has been ignored by our elected leaders for too long.

Sobieskey wields a heavy bat and leads off with a powerful swing.

One thing is certain, Islam is not a religion by anything Americans believe one to be - not even close. In fact, Islam is the antithesis of what we deem to be religious.

Dictionary.com reveals the origin of "religion".

• 1150–1200; ME religioun (< class="ital-inline">religion) < class="ital-inline">religiōn- (s. of religiō) conscientiousness, piety, equiv. to relig(āre) to tie, fasten (re- re- + ligāre to bind, tie; cf. ligament ) + -iōn- -ion; cf. rely

Islam meets those tests: it prescribes a set of beliefs & practices and Muslims are bound to Allah in a master:slave relationship. They also provide a main definition of the term.

• a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

Islam meets those tests as well. What tests does Islam fail? Sobieskey does not explicitly name them. In my view, they include these concepts.

1. Benevolent mission.
2. Passive: propagation by persuasion.
3. Universality.

Islam's mission is mercenary: obtaining wealth, income & sex slaves for Moe and his Caliphs. Islam spreads by the sword, not by persuasion. Islamic love & charity are for Muslims only, they do not extend to Kuffar.

Sobieskey has a different way of revealing those truths.

Above all, Islam is a totalitarian political machine of blood thirsty conquest which zealously advocates the downfall of the U.S. government. Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world…” because he was 100% non-political. In extreme contrast, Mohammed and the Koran bellicosely command your kingdom is my kingdom, surrender or die!

Certainly that is good reason for excluding Islam from the umbrella of first amendment protection. Martel Sobieskey tells it as it is, clearly stating his conclusions.. He kept the length of his article within reason by stating the conclusions without laying out the full case of evidence upon which they are based. Supremacism, triumphalism, Jihad & terrorism are important factors in the decision. If you need to view their confirmation in Islamic law, turn to FOMIJihad.chm and read the Jihad in Fiqh chapter.

Do Something about Durban II

Those of us who oppose the Durban II process for demonizing Israel and censoring critics of Islam must organize and act quickly to have any hope of derailing the juggernaut.

Several groups have created on line petitions, most of them have few signatures. It may be possible to popularize them by spreading their urls on blogs and forums. You can also email them to your friends and family, urging them to forward the email to their contacts. If you use Digg, Redit or similar systems, promote the petitions there, too.


American citizens can send emails to President Obama, their Representative & Senators through a form at http://www.congress.org. Enter your Zip Code and click the Federal Officials link. Europeans should contact their Member of Parliament and MEP.

To email a link to my blog post about the latest revision of the Durban I Draft Resolution, copy and paste this html code into your email: Durban II Sham Revision: the Details


Please click these links and sign the petitions.

• http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/boycott-durban-ii.html
• http://www.ipetition.com/str-asp-PetitionID_6-end-SignPetition.htm
• http://www.petitiononline.com/siglb444/petition.html
• http://apps.facebook.com/causes/petitions/68?m=912eeaa7&recruiter_id=38454997
  
  

Durban II Sham Revision: the Details

Eye on the UN has published the Durban II revision of 03/17/09. Having read that document, I find that my earlier criticism remains valid.
A/CONF.211/PC/WG.2/CRP.2
[Font color & links added; background color in original, signifying text which has been voted on and approved.]

I find the following listed members of the enumerated list to be unacceptable for the reasons included in this list.

• 1, 2 : The DDPA is unacceptable due to its demonization of Israel and demand for Islamic blasphemy laws.
• 3, 4, 9, 10, 16: "racism" & "related intolerance" are code words for "Islamophobia" which is a code word for saying "or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam" [Umdat as-Salik O11.10-5]
• 8, 65, 100: thinly veiled attacks upon our attempts at promoting homeland security against Islamic terrorism.
• 11, 66, 67: "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law; these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression: Those are code phrases for criminalizing publications such as Fitna and delegitimizing the first amendment! Refer to You've Been Mooned, which details Secy. Genl. Ban Ki-moon's exemplary condemnation of that video.
• 17: "need to increase appropriate preventive measures to eliminate all forms of racial discrimination" : a veiled demand for legislation criminalizing criticism of Islam.
• 25: "competent, independent and impartial judiciary to determine in a fair and public procedure whether acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance are prohibited by international human rights law": a veiled reference to court shopping for biased jurists who will jail us for uttering & publishing the truth about Islam.
• E: "enhancement of the United Nations and other international mechanisms in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance": a veiled reference to exploitation of international conventions to criminalize criticism of Islam.
• 26: "call upon States to diligently apply all commitments resulting from international and regional conferences in which they participated, and to formulate national policies and action plans to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;": a veiled demand for legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam.
• 30: includes by reference Ad hoc Committee on the Elaboration of International Complementary Standards , which demands legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam.
• 50, 51, 53, 54: " comprehensive and universal approach to preventing, combating and eradicating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance": a veiled demand for legislation criminalizing criticism of Islam.
• 55: "positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can play in combating racism...":Orwellian inversion of language,
• 56: "the right to freedom of opinion and expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic, pluralistic society, since it ensures access to a multitude of ideas and views;": another egregious inversion of language!
• 97: "to declare illegal and to prohibit by law all organizations based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or promote national, racial and religious hatred": a thinly veiled attack on Flemish & Dutch Freedom Parties which object to Islamification of Europe.
• 119: "Commends media organizations that have elaborated voluntary ethical codes of conduct aimed at, inter alia, meeting the goals defined in paragraph 144 of the Durban Programme of Action": a clear reference to self-censorship; the media which did not re-publish the Danish cartoons.
• 130: shameless promotion of blasphemy laws.
• 133: continued co-operation with the O.I.C in demanding imposition of blasphemy laws.

Samples:

Review of progress and assessment of implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action by all stakeholders at the national, regional and international levels, including the assessment of contemporary manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

A. Sources, causes, forms, and contemporary manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance

1. Reaffirms the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA) as it was adopted at the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (WCAR) in 2001; [adopted ad ref. ISWG]

10. Recognizes with deep concern the negative stereotyping of religions and the global rise in the number of incidents of racial or religious intolerance and violence, including Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and anti-Arabism;
11. Reaffirms that any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law, as well as the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority and hatred and acts of violence and incitement to such acts, and that these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression;

1. Recognizes that prevention, combating and eradication of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance are of crucial importance and key elements for the promotion of cohesion and peaceful resolution of community tensions; [adopted ad ref. informals]
2. Stresses the need to increase appropriate preventive measures to eliminate all forms of racial discrimination, and emphasizes the important role Governments, international and regional organizations, national human rights institutions, the media, non-governmental organizations and civil society can play in developing such measures and in building confidence; [adopted ad ref. informals, revised by Chair]

50. Stresses the need for a comprehensive and universal approach to preventing, combating and eradicating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in all parts of the world; [adopted ad ref. ISWG]
51. Stresses the need for advocating and mobilizing the political will of relevant actors at all levels to eliminate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance; [adopted ad ref. ISWG, revised by Chair]
52. Calls on States to undertake effective media campaigns to enhance the struggle against all manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, inter alia, by disseminating and giving adequate visibility to the DDPA and its follow-up mechanisms; [adopted ad ref. ISWG, revised by Chair]
53. Calls on States to take effective, tangible and comprehensive measures to prevent, combat and eradicate all forms and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance as a matter of priority;
54. Calls on States to combat impunity for acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, to secure expeditious access to justice, and to provide fair and adequate redress for victims;

I call upon President Barack Hussein Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the United States Senate and the European Union to withdraw from, Boycott, discountenance and condemn the Durban II Conference. There is no ground for acceptance of any of the O.I.C.'s contumacious demands no matter how they are veiled or concealed by indirect references and Orwellian inversions of our language.

Durban II Sham Revision

Anne Bayefsky reports in Forbes: "Obama Should Denounce Durban II ".

She reports that a revised draft of the Durban II resolution drops certain offensive language, but commences with a reaffirmation of the DDPA of '01.
Inclusion of that reaffirmation brands the revision as an unacceptable sham. While she gives us some paraphrases and brief quotes, no link to the revision is provided in her report or any of the available news reports of the revision.

In the absence of authoritative text, I reject the revised draft on the basis of what it affirms. Bear in mind while reading the following quotes from the DDPA,, that wherever "racism" is printed, you must read "Islamophobia". The following quote is from Preliminary document of the African Regional Conference Preparatory to the Durban Review Conference [Emphasis added.]

4. Emphasizes the urgent need to address the scourges of anti-Semitism, Christianophobia, and Islamophobia as contemporary forms of racism as well as racial and violent movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas directed at African, Arab, Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other communities;

DDPA
pg 12

59. We recognize with deep concern religious intolerance against certain religious
communities, as well as the emergence of hostile acts and violence against such communities
because of their religious beliefs and their racial or ethnic origin in various parts of the world
which in particular limit their right to freely practise their belief;

60. We also recognize with deep concern the existence in various parts of the world
of religious intolerance against religious communities and their members, in particular limitation
of their right to practise their beliefs freely, as well as the emergence of increased negative
stereotyping, hostile acts and violence against such communities because of their religious
beliefs and their ethnic or so-called racial origin;

61. We recognize with deep concern the increase in anti-Semitism and Islamophobia
in various parts of the world, as well as the emergence of racial and violent movements based on
racism and discriminatory ideas against Jewish, Muslim and Arab communities;

62. We are conscious that humanity’s history is replete with terrible wrongs inflicted
through lack of respect for the equality of human beings and note with alarm the increase of such
practices in various parts of the world, and we urge people, particularly in conflict situations, to
desist from racist incitement, derogatory language and negative stereotyping;

pg. 15

79. We firmly believe that the obstacles to overcoming racial discrimination and
achieving racial equality mainly lie in the lack of political will, weak legislation and lack of
implementation strategies and concrete action by States, as well as the prevalence of racist
attitudes and negative stereotyping;

80. We firmly believe that education, development and the faithful implementation of
all international human rights norms and obligations, including enactment of laws and political,
social and economic policies, are crucial to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and
related intolerance;

81. We recognize that democracy, transparent, responsible, accountable and
participatory governance responsive to the needs and aspirations of the people, and respect for
human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law are essential for the effective prevention
and elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. We
reaffirm that any form of impunity for crimes motivated by racist and xenophobic attitudes plays
a role in weakening the rule of law and democracy and tends to encourage the recurrence of such
acts;

85. We condemn political platforms and organizations based on racism, xenophobia
or doctrines of racial superiority and related discrimination, as well as legislation and practices
based on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, as incompatible with
democracy and transparent and accountable governance. We reaffirm that racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance condoned by governmental policies violate
human rights and may endanger friendly relations among peoples, cooperation among nations
and international peace and security;

86. We recall that the dissemination of all ideas based upon racial superiority or
hatred shall be declared an offence punishable by law with due regard to the principles embodied
in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of the
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination;

pg. 48

150. Calls upon States, in opposing all forms of racism, to recognize the need to
counter anti-Semitism, anti-Arabism and Islamophobia world-wide, and urges all States to take
effective measures to prevent the emergence of movements based on racism and discriminatory
ideas concerning these communities;

Those expressions are absolutely unacceptable to lovers of liberty; they should never have been uttered, published & promulgated and must not be affirmed because they constitute a thinly veiled demand for the global imposition of Islam's blasphemy law.

Paragraph 150 calls for all states to criminalize Islamophobia through effective legislation. There is no such entity! Phobia implies irrational fear & loathing. Islam has earned fear & loathing; the former intentionally, as celebrated in 33:26 and 59:13. A war cult responsible for 270 million deaths over the last 1384 years is worthy of loating.

Shari'ah is unacceptable, whether it is imposed by force, legislated directly or sneaked in through the back door. It plainly states that we may be executed for saying anything "impermissible" about Islam.

Yes, indeed, President Barack Hussein Obama should denounce the sham revision of the Durban II draft. I doubt that he will, I expect him to accept the sham as an opportunity for "engagement". I will be pleasantly surprised if he does permanently denounce it.

We Can't Go to War With All 1.3 Billion

A new message was received from Citizen Warrior Friday. Unfortunately, I am not in complete agreement with the opinions he expressed. Since his article is long and detailed, I will insert subscripts, linking them to my comments which appear in a list below the horizontal line at the end of Citizen Warrior's message.

new from CitizenWarrior.com...

"We Can't Go to War With 1.3 Billion Muslims!"

Posted: 13 Mar 2009 11:30 AM PDT

HERE IS another addition to our series, Answers to Objections. This objection is not usually spoken out loud, but it's a central fear lurking behind much of the resistance you get when you talk about Islam.

When you're talking to people, you want them to accept the simple fact that Islamic teachings are very straightforward, and they call for intolerance and violence toward non-Muslims and an unrelenting effort to make us all submit to Shari'a law.

They will put up every objection they can think of because they don't want to accept this premise.

If they articulated their fear, it would sound something like this: "For God's sake, that CAN'T be true, because it would mean we would have to go to war with 1.3 billion Muslims, and we can't do that!" Some people actually say it out loud.

Like many of the objections, this one is a great opportunity to insert a little more information into a brain that is likely almost entirely empty of any facts about Islam. Here are some possible responses you can give:

1. Luckily, we don't have to go to war with all of them. Most of the people who are now Muslims never chose to be so. Their ancestors were almost all forced to be Muslims. The whole country was conquered and Shari'a law was imposed. Shari'a puts pressure on everyone to be Muslim, and not just in name only. It is against the law to skip the five prayers a day or skip fasting during Ramadan or skip paying zakat (alms to the mosque). In other words, the practice of Islam is enforced by law, so after a few generations, it would be hard to think outside of being a Muslim, especially when the penalty for leaving the faith is death.

But what this means is that many of them would choose to live their lives without the constant domination of Islam if they had the option. So even if it came to war, we wouldn't have to go to war with 1.3 billion. ¹

2. What would you go to war to do? I mean, why would you think a war would be necessary?

3. We don't need to go to war, we only need to change some of our own laws and some of our own foreign policies. And sometimes we wouldn't even have to change them, we would only need to start enforcing them. For example, it is against the law to try to overthrow the government or to even plot to do so. It is sedition. It's already against the law. And yet in three-fourths of the mosques in the U.S., jihad is being preached.

Jihad means "the struggle to make everyone on earth submit to Shari'a law." It is an essential element of Islam. It is a core tenet. This isn't some fringe teaching that nobody cares about. This is a central purpose of Islam. If we want the Muslims in our country to stop working to undermine and overthrow the government, we will have to make a distinction between the political aspects of Islam and the religious aspects of Islam, and we'll have to stop people from committing sedition. We do not need to go to war. We only need to educate enough non-Muslims so that no more politicians ignorant of Islam are voted into office. The one thing that needs to happen is education.²

4. The problem is not with Muslims, so we don't have to go to war with them. The problem is not even with Islamic doctrine. Our problem is the abject ignorance of the majority of non-Muslims. Because of this ignorance, the West is conceding its freedoms. Let me give you an illustration to clarify what I mean:³

On the comments on an article about sociopaths, most of the commenters are victims of sociopaths, and they tell their stories about what happened to them — they were conned out of their life savings or they were married to someone who abused their children or one of their parents deliberately drives them crazy, etc. But two of the people who comment are themselves sociopaths, and their comments illuminate an important principle.

The point of view of most of the victims is that they don't understand how sociopaths can be so mean or cruel or heartless. The point of view of the sociopaths is that they don't understand how normal people can be so naive as to trust everyone, so foolish as to never protect themselves from someone who has already proven to be dangerous, or so stupid as to sign over the deed to their house!

Same with non-Muslims dealing with Islam. Okay, so it is a Muslim's duty to strive for the political goal of establishing Shari'a law throughout the world by any means necessary. That's what they do. But we don't have to allow it! They are only making progress toward their goal because we let them. We trust them. We make treaties with them. We allow them to immigrate. We make assumptions about them (like they must be just like us, their religion must be similar to other religions we know of, etc.). We are conceding our freedoms. We are forgoing our own self-preservation. We are voluntarily giving away our ability to defend ourselves.⁴

The problem is not with them, it's with us. We don't need to go to war. We need to stop being stupid, and that can't happen until more people know about Islam.⁵

Most of the people commenting on that sociopath site said they were surprised to find out there was even such a thing as a sociopath. The phenomenon of "everyday sociopaths" is not very well known. People know about psychopathic serial killers, but most people don't know there is such a thing as people walking around in ordinary lives who have no empathy for others and cannot develop it, people whose only goal in life is to win and dominate, people who feel no pity or remorse and who have no emotional conflict when they are cruel.

Some people who tell their sad tales were married to a sociopath for years without ever realizing such a person could exist, so they were totally frustrated, anguished, and confused by their spouse's behavior, and of course, in their ignorance they made one stupid, self-defeating mistake after another.

The free world is doing the same thing with Islam's relentless, self-serving aggression — making one stupid, self-defeating mistake after another (read more about that here). The stupidity must stop. The only thing missing is enough people who have at least a passing familiarity with basic Islamic teachings.

Okay, that's four possible answers to the objection, "But we can't go to war with a billion Muslims!"

I would appreciate it (and so would future readers) if you could come up with an even better answer than these, and post it in the comments to this article. We can pool our resources, pool our intelligence, and help each other do the one thing that must be done: Educate our fellow non-Muslims.⁶

---

1. Islam is at war against us. Either we defend ourselves or we will be conquered; enslaved or killed. It is true that Muslims are the first victims of Islam. It is true that many of them would prefer some other choice. But, when we retaliate against Islamic attack, they are all involved, they unite in spite of national, tribal and sectarian differences and they fight. The old saying: "Me against my brother, my brother and I against our cousin, us against a stranger..." is still valid. We need to induce mass apostasy and send the recalcitrant remnant to collect their Houris.
2. Did changing domestic legislation win World Wars 1 & 2? Could we have won them without sending millions of men and dollars? Yeah, right. Little will be accomplished without educating our fellow citizens and applying great pressure to the politicians, but the war will not be won that way. Yes, we need to amend the Constitution, close the Mosques & Madrassas and send the Muslims home, but those measures alone won't win the war, they are only the home front battle.
3. The problem is human avarice & pride. Moe invented Islam as a source of wealth, income and fresh sex slaves. Warfare is central to Islam because Moe lived off the booty. He told his companions that their eternal destiny depended on going to war with him. Fight and collect spoils if you win or go to Paradise if you get killed; go to Hell if you don't go to war. If you believe, you join the Jihad.
4. This paragraph is true. Western Civilization is making those suicidal errors, but correcting those errors, while necessary, is not sufficient to win the war.
5. Would the Assyrians, Armenians or Hindus have been saved by knowledge? Neither will we. Widespread understanding of Islam is a necessity, but not a panacea. There is a physical war on, and blood is being shed. Bombs, bullets and knives kill; computer keyboards do not.
6. This conflict has several components.

• military
• ideological
• theological
• legal
• demographic
• economic
• psychological

Most people will not absorb, comprehend & believe the truth about Islam just because we tell them. They will not stand still to listen nor will they sit still to read. The facts do not comport with their prejudices & expectations. They will seek loopholes and exceptions. They have been instructed by authority figures whom they trust. They have been told, and they believe, that Islam is a great religion of peace. When we submit evidence that Islam is a war cult, they will not accept it because it does not fit the template of their prejudice.

Islamic scripture, tradition, jurisprudence & history form a congruent pattern which should be sufficient to convince any intelligent and open minded person.
The most egregious ayat, ahadith & fiqh have been compiled into an ebook, which takes up nearly 7MB on my hard disk. I use it nearly every day in researching blog posts. It is EgregiousAyat.chm. Are you willing to invest the time required to download and read it; to begin using quotes from it in your blog posts, emails and letters?

Most of the visits to my blog posts are brief: 0 seconds. It is not easy to captivate the reader's attention and interest them in the gritty details. Slap them in the face with final conclusions and they wipe the facts away with a laugh. Bury them in detail and they are bored to tears. Read this blog post for one example: Fat Jack's Erratic Rants: SOMEONE LISTENS TO RUSH LIMBAUGH TOO MUCH, and follow through to the original article and the reader's comments.