Obamination: Treachery at the U.N.; Unilateral Disarmament

Quotes are taken from a transcript of President Obama's remarks to the General Assembly, published by the New York Times. [Emphasis added.]

I have outlined a comprehensive agenda to seek the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. In Moscow, the United States and Russia announced that we would pursue substantial reductions in our strategic warheads and launchers. At the Conference on Disarmament, we agreed on a work plan to negotiate an end to the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons. And this week, my Secretary of State will become the first senior American representative to the annual Members Conference of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

At first glance, the stated objective appears to be a desirable condition. Consider what it would have cost us if Harry Truman shared that objective. How many GIs would have been killed in a land invasion of Japan? How many of us would not be here because of those unnecessary deaths? How much time, money and material did Little Boy and Fat Man save us?

First, we must stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and seek the goal of a world without them.

North Korea and Iran want nukes. Give them nukes! No, not on a silver platter, on a mushroom cloud as they were given to Japan 64 years ago. Nothing short of that will prevent them from building and using nukes.

This institution was founded at the dawn of the atomic age, in part because man's capacity to kill had to be contained.

The problem is will, not capacity. Nukes can kill more people and destroy more infrastructure more quickly and efficiently than conventional explosives. Nuke, MOAB, Daisy Cutter, Block Buster, grenade, machine gun or rifle, the difference is one of scope, scale and efficiency. The narcissistic tyrants and Islamic ideologues who seek to maintain and expand totalitarian power will use any weapon, but they seek the best. Common sense dictates doing it to them first.

For decades, we averted disaster, even under the shadow of a superpower stand-off. But today, the threat of proliferation is growing in scope and complexity. If we fail to act, we will invite nuclear arms races in every region, and the prospect of wars and acts of terror on a scale that we can hardly imagine.

A fragile consensus stands in the way of this frightening outcome, and that is the basic bargain that shapes the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It says that all nations have the right to peaceful nuclear energy; that nations with nuclear weapons have a responsibility to move toward disarmament; and those without them have the responsibility to forsake them. The next 12 months could be pivotal in determining whether this compact will be strengthened or will slowly dissolve.

Enriched Uranium is a dual use material. It can power electric generators and it can destroy cities. The difference is in the degree of enrichment. The efficiency and number of centrifuges available makes the difference. You could not stop Pakistan, you could not stop N. Korea, and you won't stop Iran. No will; no power.

If they can have nuclear power plants, they can produce plutonium for fission devices and other toxic isotopes for dirty bombs. You can't stop them from doing either or both. While China and Russia have veto power, the U.N. won't stop anyone, including Iran.

America intends to keep our end of the bargain. We will pursue a new agreement with Russia to substantially reduce our strategic warheads and launchers. We will move forward with ratification of the Test Ban Treaty, and work with others to bring the treaty into force so that nuclear testing is permanently prohibited. We will complete a Nuclear Posture Review that opens the door to deeper cuts and reduces the role of nuclear weapons. And we will call upon countries to begin negotiations in January on a treaty to end the production of fissile material for weapons.

Have you forgotten China? China is engaged in a rapid military build up. Why? China has been making threats. Why? The same weapons that deterred Russia also deter China. The same missiles that would be used to retaliate against Russia would be used to retaliate against China. Without them, we can not effectively retaliate against either or both.

I will also host a summit next April that reaffirms each nation's responsibility to secure nuclear material on its territory, and to help those who can't -- because we must never allow a single nuclear device to fall into the hands of a violent extremist.

It happened while you weren't looking. Pakistan is governed by Muslims. Islam is 'violent extremism'. Evidently President Obama has not read General S.K. Malik's Quranic Concept of War, which has a forward by Zia-ul-Haq. It was published in 1979. Turn to Chapter VII, The Strategy for War, and page 59.

Terror struck into the hearts of the enemies is not only a means, it is the end in itself. Once a condition of terror into the opponent's heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be achieved. It is the point where the means and the end meet and merge. Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose upon him.

That was written by a Pakistani General and endorsed by the President of Pakistan close to the time when Pakistan developed their bomb That doctrine is not Taliban, it is official Pakistan doctrine. Pakistan is Islamic, therefore aggressively violent.

All of this must support efforts to strengthen the NPT. Those nations that refuse to live up to their obligations must face consequences. Let me be clear, this is not about singling out individual nations -- it is about standing up for the rights of all nations that do live up to their responsibilities. Because a world in which IAEA inspections are avoided and the United Nation's demands are ignored will leave all people less safe, and all nations less secure.

What has Iran done consistently from the beginning? What did Iraq do when the U.N. was seeking to inspect their WMD programs? Does the term "cheat and retreat" have meaning for you? Have you forgotten trucks leaving the loading dock as inspectors arrived at the front door? Muslims Hellbent on igniting Armageddon are not going to comply with inspection regimens in any case.

In their actions to date, the governments of North Korea and Iran threaten to take us down this dangerous slope. We respect their rights as members of the community of nations. I've said before and I will repeat, I am committed to diplomacy that opens a path to greater prosperity and more secure peace for both nations if they live up to their obligations.

But if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards; if they put the pursuit of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability and the security and opportunity of their own people; if they are oblivious to the dangers of escalating nuclear arms races in both East Asia and the Middle East -- then they must be held accountable. The world must stand together to demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise, and that treaties will be enforced. We must insist that the future does not belong to fear.

After Israel goes up in a flash of fire you will hold Iran accountable. How, exactly? How do you restore millions of lives after they are vaporized. What justice can there be for Iran's victims? If you won't stop Iran from acquiring the bomb, what will you do after they use it, with a second in reserve?

And we will work to strengthen the institutions and initiatives that combat nuclear smuggling and theft.

What institutions and initiatives stopped Pakistan from proliferating nukes through Dr. Khan and his network of fronts?
Reconsider the cold war. Would the outcome be the same if we did not have nuclear weapons? What if Russia had them and we did not? Would we still be alive and free?

The Jinn is out of the bottle, it can not be captured and re-confined. Knowledge of the physics and mathematics of fission is widespread and can not be erased. If every nuke were disassembled and rendered safe today, someone would build another beginning tomorrow and subsequently threaten us with it.

Are you really stupid and gullible enough to believe that Russia, China, Pakistan, Israel and India would all dismantle all their nukes and never produce another? How about Iran? What damned fool wants to live in a world where demented ideologues Hellbent on world domination and seeking 'martyrdom' possess the only nuclear warheads? Obama: one of them, not one of us.

If we are fortunate, we will have another chance in '12. Be careful when voting and make no mistakes!

Obamination: Treachery at the UN; National Interest,common interests, faith and technology

Quotes are taken from a transcript of President Obama's remarks to the General Assembly, published by the New York Times. [Emphasis added.]

I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust.

When have skepticism and distrust of America not been rampant? From Rome to Moscow and from Istanbul to London, the world is full of ex-colonial powers stewing in resentment over lost empire and glory. Envy of American prosperity and power are natural, regardless of our policies and actions.

Part of this was due to misperceptions and misinformation about my country. Part of this was due to opposition to specific policies, and a belief that on certain critical issues, America has acted unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others. And this has fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism, which too often has served as an excuse for collective inaction.

It is obvious that the reference to unilateral action is about the invasion of Iraq. Several important nations had economic interests in Iraq, with caused them to oppose taking effective action to stop Iraq's aggression and quest for weapons of mass destruction. The U.N. can't accomplish anything when stake holders veto necessary action against their client states. They are protecting Iran's quest for nukes just as they stalled action against Iraq. .

Now, like all of you, my responsibility is to act in the interest of my nation and my people, and I will never apologize for defending those interests.

Never? Not in Cairo? Not in Berlin? Of course not!

But it is my deeply held belief that in the year 2009 -- more than at any point in human history -- the interests of nations and peoples are shared. The religious convictions that we hold in our hearts can forge new bonds among people, or they can tear us apart.

This is old ground, which should be familiar to regular readers of my blog posts. Russia seeks to regain lost hegemony. China seeks increased power and influence. The Islamic nations seek to restore the Caliphate and conquer the world. We seek peace and prosperity, others seek empire. There are no common interests not superceeded by ambitious greed, envy and pride.

Christians believe that Jesus Christ was the only begotten son of God, sent to implement a divine plan of salvation. Muslims believe that Jesus was Allah's slave who will return as a genocidal warlord to complete their conquest of the world and final genocide of the Jews. How in Hell can those diametrically opposed beliefs forge new bonds of unity? Because of their beliefs, Muslims have been engaged in genocidal conquest for the last 1386 years. President Obama would have us believe that he can make that stop by wagging his tongue and waving his magic wand.

The technology we harness can light the path to peace, or forever darken it.

Years before I was born, Germany began researching the possibility of using nuclear fission to create a devastating explosive device. Physicists and mathematicians who pioneered the bomb development brought their knowledge to America, enabling us to be the first to develop the bombs which ended the Second World War. How would the outcome have differed if our enemies had developed the bomb first? Fat Man & Little Boy made peace, saving countless lives that would have been lost in an invasion of Japan.

The energy we use can sustain our planet, or destroy it.

President Obama is playing domestic politics with this slogan, trying to build support for idiotic policies that will devastate our economy, deepen and prolong the depression and ruin our standard of living. Anthropogenic global warming is a fallacy based on incomplete data and limited models which do not reflect reality. Bluff & bluster supplemented by a crisis atmosphere ginned up by Obama and his Socialist allies have replaced scientific inquiry and debate.

What happens to the hope of a single child -- anywhere -- can enrich our world, or impoverish it.

President Obama did not complete that thought in the next paragraph. He left it hanging as an ambiguous framework on which the needy & greedy can plant and cultivate their hopes of tapping our treasury. That is an obvious appeal to the International Socialist impulse which is popular in certain parts of Europe. Keep that slogan fresh in your mind, it is important to comprehending the depraved depths of Obama's hypocrisy.

Obamination: Treachery at the UN; False Promises and Narcissism

My quest for a transcript of President Obama's remarks to the General Assembly led me to the New York Times. The transcript was divided into seven pages. When I finished the preliminary round of highlighting, my working file was 34kb.

In order to keep my reaction to Obama's UN treachery readable, I will divide it into several posts. This first post in the series will concentrate on the issue of President Obama's narcissism. [Emphasis added.]

I come before you humbled by the responsibility that the American people have placed upon me

Yeah, right. He holds the office of President on his own initiative, having spent hundreds of millions of dollars in an effort to deceive enough people long enough to win election. We shall see just how humble Barack Hussein Obama is, through his own words.

I am well aware of the expectations that accompany my presidency around the world. These expectations are not about me. Rather, they are rooted, I believe, in a discontent with a status quo that has allowed us to be increasingly defined by our differences, and outpaced by our problems. But they are also rooted in hope -- the hope that real change is possible, and the hope that America will be a leader in bringing about such change.

As ignorant, simple minded, gullible Americans expected that President Obama would wave a magic wand to solve all their problems once and for all, the greedy & gullible idiots of the world expect Uncle Sam, in the person of President Obama, to come bearing a magic toy bag, always full for their pleasure. In promising to make them healthy, wealthy & educated by grossly expanding our national debt, President Obama lifts the world's tail aside, displaces the flies and plants his lips for a wet kiss.

Is President Obama running for a new post: Global Dictator ? Why else would he continue with his "hope and change" mantra which mesmerized so many American voters? Of course, as Sean Hannity pointed out in his radio broadcast Tuesday, "its all about I and me". There are 36 occurrences of "I" in the speech. [Repetitions omitted from lists.]

• I
• come
• have been in office
• am aware
• believe
• took office
• will never
• have carried this message
• will speak about
• ask
• prohibited
• ordered
• appointed
• I have said
• will repeat
• am committed
• will continue
• had
• will not waver
• thank
• know
• will never forget
• would not
• pledge
• admit

There are 13 occurrences of "my".

• my
• country
• belief
• Secretary of State
• Presidency
• first day
• nation
• people
• responsibility
• honor

Web Cast: "Radical Islam’s Threat to America."

American Congress For Truth will present a web cast for legislators, other elected officials and their staff members from 10 am to 5 pm on Saturday, November 7, 2009. The subject of the web cast is “Radical Islam’s Threat to America.”. Topics to be discussed include:

• A Basic History of Islam.
• Shariah Islamic law.
• The Muslim Brotherhood’s plan to subvert America.
• Islamist organizations operating in the U.S.
• Shariah finance.
• Strategies and tactics for resisting the advance of radical Islam.

Presenters include Brigitte Gabriel, Walid Phares, Nonie Darwish, John Guandolo, Frank Gaffney, Joy Brighton and ACT! for America Executive Director Guy Rodgers.

The web cast can do a great deal to increase the awareness level of our elected officials if they will view it. Our role is to inform them of the opportunity and urge them to take advantage of it.

As soon as I read the email from Brigitte Gabriel, I visited http://www.congress.org/ and sent emails to my state and federal representatives. The process is easy, just enter your Zip Code, select the recipients and fill in the simple form. I included the url of ACT''s web page about the web cast so that the recipients can easily obtain detailed information about the web cast: http://www.actforamerica.org/index.php/radical-islam .

Zakat,Islamic law

On September 11, '09, the eighth anniversary of the accursed abomination, President Obama spoke at a wreath laying ceremony. I have extracted the most important part of the remarks and added my comments.

Let us renew our resolve against those who perpetrated this barbaric act and who plot against us still. In defense of our nation we will never waver; in pursuit of al Qaeda and its extremist allies, we will never falter.

What resolve? If President Bush had resolve, he would have nuked bin Laden at Tora Bora. The perpetrators are dead, we can do nothing to them. The planners, supporters and sponsors live. We know who planned the abomination. We know who sponsored and supported it. Yet we allow the continued existence of training camps and staging areas in Iran, Pakistan and Syria. There should be resolve, but there is none. Instead, there is weakness and indecision.

Let us renew our commitment to all those who serve in our defense -- our courageous men and women in uniform and their families and all those who protect us here at home. Mindful that the work of protecting America is never finished, we will do everything in our power to keep America safe.

Commitment? God help me, I need to curse. President Obama issued new rules of engagement which are costing our soldiers their lives, refusing air and artillery support in a critical situation out of unreasoning fear of civilian casualties. The president compounds hypocrisy on top of treason.

Let us renew the true spirit of that day. Not the human capacity for evil, but the human capacity for good. Not the desire to destroy, but the impulse to save, and to serve, and to build. On this first National Day of Service and Remembrance, we can summon once more that ordinary goodness of America -- to serve our communities, to strengthen our country, and to better our world.

By displaying weakness, indecision & lack of resolve to the enemy, you renew, reinforce and strengthen their capacity for evil; you give them aid and comfort, which is treason. If you will not destroy the enemy, they will continue to attack us. With your "day of service" slogan, you politicize the anniversary of the Abomination, the exact same sin your party accused Shrub of committing. That is shameful hypocrisy at its worst!

Most of all, on a day when others sought to sap our confidence, let us renew our common purpose. Let us remember how we came together as one nation, as one people, as Americans, united not only in our grief, but in our resolve to stand with one another, to stand up for the country we all love.

Resolve? Resolve to see the fight to the end? Resolve to terminate the existence of the war cult which sponsored and supported the accursed Abomination? No! There was and is no such resolve. There should be, but there is not. The idiotic and treasonous policies of you as well as your predecessor in office see to that. The enemy must be clearly identified and accurately characterized. The memory of the loss, grief and destruction must be kept hot and fresh, not allowed to erode. The enemies intentions and his will & ability to execute them must be kept at the forefront of public awareness.

Resolve is not demonstrated by withdrawing from Iraq while it remains Islamic& unstable. Resolve is not demonstrated by bleeding our men to death in Afghanistan because you are afraid of killing the enemy's human shields.

This may be the greatest lesson of this day, the strongest rebuke to those who attacked us, the highest tribute to those taken from us -- that such sense of purpose need not be a fleeting moment. It can be a lasting virtue.

It could be; it should be, but it ain't. Shrub's and your gluteal osculation saw to that. Instead of demonstrating resolve you apologize for living and attempt to appease the enemy. By doing so, you weaken us and strengthen them. Instead of being truthful, Shrub proclaimed the enemy "a great religion of peace". You pander to them, proclaiming America an "Islamic nation". If our leaders will not declare the truth: Islam's perpetual and absolutely existential enmity to free men and resolve firmly to remove it from the face of the earth, either ideologically or militarily, then we shall never have peace or security; we will be attacked again and again until we are bled to death. Shrub declared the ideological war, but could not steel himself to list the ideas involved. Shrub failed to compare and contrast our ideas with those of the enemy; he failed to prove the superiority of our ideology and culture over that of Islam. You continue on the same slippery slope to defeat.

Obamination: Eid-Mubarak

President Barack Hussein Obama issued this statement September 19 '09.

"As Muslims in the United States and around the world complete the month of Ramadan and celebrate Eid-ul-Fitr, Michelle and I would like to extend our personal greetings on this joyous occasion. Eid is a time to celebrate the completion of 30 days and nights of devotion. But even on this festive occasion, Muslims remember those less fortunate, including those impacted by poverty, hunger, conflict, and disease. Throughout the month, Muslim communities collect and distribute zakat-ul-fitr so that all Muslims are able to participate in this day of celebration. As I said in Cairo, my Administration is working to ensure that Muslims are able to fulfill their charitable obligations not just during Ramadan, but throughout the year. On behalf of the American people, we congratulate Muslims in the United States and around the world on this blessed day. Eid Mubarak."

One sentence stands out from the rest.

As I said in Cairo, my Administration is working to ensure that Muslims are able to fulfill their charitable obligations not just during Ramadan, but throughout the year.

What are their 'charitable obligations'? Book H, Chapter 8 of Reliance of the Traveller lists eight categories of Zakat recipients. H8.17 lists the seventh category.

H8.17: Those Fighting for Allah

The seventh category is those fighting for Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster (O: but who are volunteers for jihad without remuneration). They are given enough to suffice them for the operation, even if affluent; of weapons, mounts, clothing, and expenses (O: for the duration of the journey, round trip, and the time they spend there, even if prolonged. Though nothing has been mentioned here of the expense involved in supporting such people's families during this period, it seems clear that they should also be given it).

How is the Zakat allocated?

H8.7: The Eight Categories of Recipients

It is obligatory to distribute one's zakat among eight categories of recipients (O: meaning that zakat goes to none besides them), one-eighth of the zakat to each category. (n: In the Hanafi school, it is valid for the giver to distribute his zakat to all of the categories, some of them, or to confine himself to just one of them (al-Lubab fi sharh al-Kitab(y88), 1.155). )

So the terrorists and their dependents would receive a one eighth share of the total Zakat.

What is due? Zakat is a complex subject, I will confine this to one issue: earned income.

H4.2

The zakat-payable minimum for gold is 84.7 grams, on which 2.1175 grams (2.5 percent) is due. The zakat-payable minimum for silver is 592-9 grams, on which 1408225 grams (2.5 percent) is due. There is no zakat on less that this.

(N: One must pay zakat (n: 2.5 percent) on all money that has been saved for a year if it equals at least the market value of 592.9 grams of silver (n:that is current during the year). While there is a considerable difference between the value of the gold zakat minimum and the silver zakat minimum, the minimum for monetary currency should correspond to that of silver, since it is better for the poor.)

• Assume a silver price of $17.00 per ounce.
• 1oz = 28.3495231 gm.
• 592.9 gm = 20.91 ounces [Rounded for display, not for calculation.]
• 20.91*17 = $355.54

A Muslim who saved more than $355.54 would pay 2.5% of the savings exceeding that minimum.

Here is the report of one organization.

2008 Annual Report (PDF)

Zakat Foundation raised $2,052,038 in 2008 and dedicated 87% to our programs, 5% to management, and 2% towards fund raising.

That represents a potential provision of $51,300.95 for terrorism from one organization in one year. Why; what did Allah's Messenger say about this subject?

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 14, Number 2497:

Narrated AbuUmamah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: He who does not join the warlike expedition (jihad), or equip, or looks well after a warrior's family when he is away, will be smitten by Allah with a sudden calamity. Yazid ibn Abdu Rabbihi said in his tradition: 'before the Day of Resurrection.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 14, Number 2520:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: The warrior gets his reward, and the one who equips him gets his own reward and that of the warrior.

Sahih Muslim Book 020, Number 4668:

It has been narrated on the authority of Zaid b. Kbalid al-Juhani that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Anybody who equips a warrior (going to fight) in the way of Allah (is like one who actually) fights. And anybody who looks well after his family in his absence (is also like one who actually) fights.

Islamic Deception: Cherry Picking

Omar Sley, of Egypt posted a lengthy comment on the International Qur'an Petition. I have dissected the comment into its main points for the sake of legibility and to facilitate my responses.

• Islam = Peace and hormony [sic]

The literal meaning of Islam is submission. Submit to Allah and to us or we will attack you. This fact becomes clear when we read the extortion letters which Moe dictated to scribes and dispatched by private courier. Read his letter to the Chiefs of Aqaba, from which the following quote is taken.

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..

• ".....if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people"

The quote is from 5:32, which Muslims love to quote. Why don't they continue the context by quoting 5:33, which prescribes hudud for "waging war against Allah" ?

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. ...

What is the meaning of "wage war against Allah"? Ibn Kathir's Tafsir answers this question " ...`Wage war' mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways...". If you don't believe in Allah, Muslims are free to kill or mutilate you because you are waging war against Allah.

• Nor can goodness and Evil be equal. Repel (Evil) with what is better: Then will he between whom and thee was hatred become as it were thy friend and intimate! "

The quote is from 41:34. Omar wants us to assume that Islam operates by gentle persuasion, like Christianity. Nothing could be further from the truth, as proved by the extortion letter quoted above.

• Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) said : “Kindness is a mark of faith, and whoever is not kind has no faith.”

This diversion from Islamic violence is likely to succeed because most non-Muslims are unaware of Islamic duality. Islamic mercy, kindness & charity are for Muslims only.

• The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said : "One who kills a non-Muslim person under protection (Arabic: dhimmi) will not even smell the fragrance of Paradise."

Those "under protection" were either conquered or intimidated by Moe's extortion letters. They lived a sub-human existence of humiliation and extortionate taxation, deprived of civil rights. If you are not living under Muslim rule, you are not protected, you are subject to open season.

• " Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just." 60:8

Keep reading, five more ayat to the contradiction..

60:13. O you who believe! Take not as friends the people who incurred the Wrath of Allâh (i.e. the Jews). Surely, they have been in despair to receive any good in the Hereafter, just as the disbelievers have been in despair about those (buried) in graves (that they will not be resurrected on the Day of Resurrection).

• Even during war he was teaching us to be civilized and merciful to the innocents : Muhammad, pbuh, has set a very well defined path for warriors to follow. During the sending off the Muslim army to a battle, the prophet issued the following ‘battle field code of conduct’: “You shall not break a promise you make, you shall not mutilate the dead”, and “You shall not kill an elder, a child or a woman”. He gave clear instructions not to kill the injured and unarmed enemy members (equivalent to army civilians, and non-combat support troops in modern times).

The rules of warfare were laid out in Sahih Muslim 19.4294. Omar wants us to assume that the proscription on killing women and children is moral. In fact, the proscription is economic, because the women and children are enslaved, they are property for Muslims; part of the booty. Ibn Kathir's Tafsir of 33:27 hints at this. "...(a group you killed, and a group you made captives.) Those who were killed were their warriors, and the prisoners were their children and women...."

Two provisions of Islamic law are crucial to comprehending the deception involved in Omar's cherry picking. These are from Reliance of The Traveller.[Emphasis added.]

O9.12

Whoever enters Islam before being captured may not be killed or his property confiscated, or his young children taken captive.

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.

It was asserted that Moe was civilized and merciful to the innocents. Give a close and careful examination to the following hadith to discover the falsity of that assertion.

Sunan 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.

Ad Hoc Cmte.: Interesting Readers

Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards was viewed 174 times on Bloggersbase, but only 10 times at Freedom Ain't Free. I do not have a means of tracing readers at Bloggersbase, but Stat Counter's Visitor Activity Report revealed two interesting visitors.

Croatia's Ministry Of Foreign Affairs viewed the post September 15. The United Nations Office At Geneva spent 24 minutes on the post September 16. No referral information was available for either visit.

The committee is scheduled to meet from October 19 to October 30 to work on their proposed protocol to ICERD. The purpose of the protocol is to criminalize criticism of Islam.

Now the UN is aware of the fact that Eye On the UN's reporting about their activities did not go entirely unnoticed. They probably don't know yet that their own favorite weapon is being turned against them. Islam's canon of scripture, tradition, exegeses & jurisprudence contravenes vital provisions of ICERD, ICCPR & ICPPG. While Islam makes false accusations against its critics, we can make accurate accusations against them. We can prove the fact that Islamic doctrines subject the war cult to being banned under the provisions of those same covenants.

Some of that proof has been published in the International Qur'an Petition, also posted at Bloggersbase, where it drew only 96 readers. Seven previous blog posts detailing Islam's contravention of international law were compiled into an e-book: Islam vs Human Rights which serves as an exhibit of evidence for the petition.

Now is the time for lovers of truth and liberty to stand up for those values by endorsing, publicizing and promoting the petition, just as Islam is ramping up its annual attack on our freedom of speech.

On September 14, Pakistan's Ambassador to the UN, speaking on behalf of the OIC, made remarks about this issue.

The OIC would also like to point out that some of the worst forms of discrimination that lie at the heart of the contemporary human rights discourse such as defamation of religious, increased racial and religious discrimination, incitement to hatred, violence and related intolerance against specific individuals and communities have not found place in the High Commissioners statement. Respect for religious and cultural diversity is fundamental towards achieving die objective of discrimination free societies and a world of equal treatment for all. Calls for restrictions on religious symbols, dress codes or construction of religious sites run contrary to the fundamentals of human rights and must be addressed. We do hope that these important issues will be duly addressed by the High Commissioner in future.

Note their priorities: defamation of Islam is one of the worst forms of discrimination at the heart of human rights discourse. Deaths and displacements caused by their Jihad don't concern them. Slavery is not an issue. Assaults, rapes and impositions against religious minorities in Asia, Africa and Egypt don't rank in their list of human rights issues. Religious discrimination: Jizya imposed upon Christians. Incitement to hatred: read the Qur'an. Violence: its called Jihad and is being waged in Asia & Africa against Christians and Hindus. Dress codes: have you read the Pact of Umar? Construction of religious sites: try to build a church in Egypt or Saudi Arabia! The arrogance and hypocrisy of Islam know no bounds. Lets throw these issues back in their face.

If you value peace, truth and justice, now is the time to demonstrate their importance to you by endorsing, publicizing and promoting the International Qur'an Petition.

Finding Clarity in Afghan Strategy

Can we find clarity in the Afghan strategy debate?
By Col. Tom Snodgrass

After describing and linking to the Obama administration's idiotic maundering Col. Snodgrass provides links to diverse sources of opinion before setting forth a list of critical issues.

1) Taliban re-conquest must be prevented so that Afghanistan will be denied to al Qaeda as a base of future operations;

2) to achieve such denial, tribally ruled Afghanistan must be built into a modern state with a democratically elected representative government;

3) this "nation building" will entail robust US counterinsurgency to protect the population from Taliban intimidation and control until the Afghan government can independently maintain civil law and order;

4) while conducting counterinsurgency guaranteeing representative government, US forces must also train and equip Afghani military and police to enforce law and order; and

5) simultaneously with pacifying Afghanistan, US forces must also assist the Pakistanis in subduing the Taliban and al Qaeda who are threatening both the Pak and Afghan governments from regions on the Pak border adjacent to Afghanistan.

Col. Snodgrass follows up with a list of doubts.

1) the religiously motivated Taliban can be effectively and indefinitely denied power in this 7^th century Islamic culture;

2) that Afghanistan can be lifted from tribal warlordism to a representative democracy;

3) that corrupt Afghani warlords can honestly and successfully administer a regime of law and order that will ensure the loyalty of a very ethnically diverse population;

4) that any Afghani military and police forces we can develop will be sufficient to maintain law and order in a forbidding land consisting of 251,772 square miles of mountains and deserts (about the size of Texas) with a population of 33 million; and

5) that the geographically adjacent corrupt Pak government can prevail over the primal Islamic forces embodied in the Taliban and al Qaeda that are demanding Shariah "justice" for Pakistan.

The tactical objectives are obviously impossibilities. Those things which are necessary can not be accomplished. Col. Snodgrass adds that a successful counterinsurgency would require seven to ten years, which, in the current political climate, are not available.

Having opened that can of worms, Col. Snodgrass dives into the issue of our relationships with Islamic regimes. What he finds at the bottom is unpleasant indeed.

So how does this reality factor into the military strategic equation? Primarily it means that no Islamic government can ever be truly counted on to affirmatively eradicate Jihadist violence against US interests. This in and of itself suggests at the very least that the objective of nation-building in Afghanistan is a fool's errand simply or so remote as to make it foolish. It also means that the likelihood that any Islamic government would be prepared to reject Shariah and embrace Western values is suspect at best.

It distills down to this.

Our emphasis must be on kinetic operations to destroy this generation of Jihadists and on psycho-social operations that intensify kinetic results.

Unfortunately, HellFire launches from drones are becoming increasingly unpopular in the region. "Civilians" are being hurt and killed because the Mujahideen do not separate themselves from them, preferring to use them as human shields. Add th that the lack of will to confront Islam ideologically & psychologically.

The bottom line:

We are just going to have to "shoot the closest bear" one at a time and reconcile our thinking that Jihad will reappear periodically like Haley's Comet.

Col. Snodgrass may be able to accept that, but I can't. One WTC attack was enough. Two were a million too many. One Beslan was enough. One London attack was enough. One Madrid attack was enough. One Mumbai attack was enough. Enough already! Lets put a permanent end to the Jihad. One year before I was born, the "greatest generation" showed Japan what we could do. Can we still do that? Do we have the SISU, the stuffing to tell the lilly livered misfits of the world who disapprove of a single, permanent solution that they can have a piece of the action if they don't like it?

Is there a divine right to wage war against us, rape our widows, enslave our orphans and seize our real and personal property ? Or do we have a divine right to live unmolested, free from the threat and actuality of attack, secure in our lives & property? The two can not coexist. Why the Hell do we maintain the Declaration of Independence if we are not willing to actualize it ? Do we really hold those truths to be self evident, or have we forgotten them? Did we waste the blood of thousands fighting Hitler & Tojo only to submit and surrender to Usama? Is there any desecration more terrible than wasting the blood of those heroes who fought and died to preserve our liberty?

Everything that Col. Snodgrass outlined for us in his excellent essay was entirely predictable eight years ago. We could have and should have nuked Afghanistan off the face of the earth. The invasion is a fool's errand. Allowing reversion to status quo anti is unacceptable.

If we are going to shoot the target of the moment, why are there still terrorist training camps and staging areas in Iran, Syria & Pakistan? Why does any sanctuary for terrorists exist? Why are the Iranian factories that manufacture EFPs still standing? The answer is that this nation has been and is governed by cowards & traitors, not statesman for too many decades.

It should be obvious to anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear that either Islam will become extinct or liberty will. If we will not make Islam extinct, we will not maintain our liberty. The Kemalist experiment proves that no compromise is possible, Islam must be eliminated.

If we are not willing to nuke the enemy, then we must use our second best weapon: the fact bomb. We must bombard the Muslims with facts, beginning with the truth about their Prophet, who was a pederast, lecher, pirate and murderer. What God would select such a man as his ultimate messenger? What God promises victory and delivers five successive defeats from an outnumbered and out gunned adversary? Islam's canon of scripture & tradition contains the ammunition we need to shake the faith of any rational Muslim who retains even a scintilla of morality.

If we were led by statesmen instead of traitors, we would begin by creating and distributing a full length feature film documenting the doctrines & misadventures of Muhammad. If we were led by statesmen instead of traitors, we would hear the truth about Islam, that it is a vicious predatory war cult, not a "great religion of peace".

What's that, you say? Islam is a religion; Muslims have a right to believe and practice as they choose? Yeah, right. Muslims have a right to believe that we are rebels against their god who must be killed or enslaved at any cost, that we may be killed, our widows raped and our children sold on the slave market with full impunity. If you believe that, then you might as well commit suicide now rather than wait for them to come for you. We don't need your kind, we need rational people who can think straight.

It is time for the few remaining intelligent, clear thinking people to unite and rise up as one, demanding rational & effective action from the government we ordained to protect us. Begin by signing these petitions and sending them to your family, friends and associates with an exhortation to endorse and forward them. Then send them to your Representative & Senators.

• International Qur'an Petition
• Congress Debate Qur'an Petition
• Outlaw Islam!

Those petitions contain the minimal information required to understand the truth about Islam, with links to the source documents for further exploration. They offer a quick and easy means to spread accurate information about the enemy which attacked us eight years ago. If you need more, such as fliers you can print and distribute and Powerpoint presentations you can attach to emails, you can find them at http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/ .

Interview With the Parents of Tom Burnett Jr.

Burnett radio interview about 9/11 and the Flight 93 memorial Tom Burnett Sr. and his wife Beverly did some 9/11 interviews the last couple of days, remembering their son Tom Jr., who was murdered by Islamic terrorists aboard Flight 93. Mr. Burnett has been trying for several years to stop the Park Service from planting a giant Islamic-shaped crescent on the Flight 93 crash site. In their interview with WSAU radio in Wisconsin, the Burnetts were joined half-way through the hour by Alec Rawls (the author of this blogburst post), who has written a book about the terrorist memorializing Crescent of Embrace design. Mr. Burnett's words are always heartfelt, yet marked by a constant scrupulousness. Emotion never carries him to utter a word beyond what he actually has grounds to assert. Highly recommended listening, perhaps especially for those who are better at judging people than facts. Let's face it, show some people the Mecca-orientation of the giant crescent, and they just aren't sure what they are looking at. Point out that the central feature of every mosque is a Mecca-direction indicator, and somehow the pieces don't fall together in their brains: What is that? Just a mysterious diagram to some. Yet these folks can still be good judges of character. So judge the Burnetts. The WSAU interview begins with host Pat Snyder asking Mr. Burnett if America is doing enough as a nation to remember 9/11. Most of us, on being asked any question, will try to answer it, but Mr. Burnett immediately defers, and in the most polite way:

Well, I'm not a very good judge of that. We are tucked away here in the southeast corner of Minnesota...

But if he isn't interested in passing judgment on how much America should do to remember 9/11, he is very concerned that we don't honor the wrong people, and starts right in on the Flight 93 memorial (which Mr. Snyder puts off to later). Both the Burnetts have a sophisticated understanding of American liberty. Talking about the generosity of Americans towards each other and the world, Beverly notes the change that has taken place in her lifetime, where assistance used to be all private, but now the government has gotten involved. She passes no explicit judgment on this development, but just notes what should remain constant (at 17:22):

I think about all the programs we have in the government. I come from a different generation, and my mother and father, and Tom's, that we never really looked to the government all the time. We looked to our neighbors and churches and friends for things. But our government should be there to make sure we're SAFE.

Instead, as Tom and Bev both note, our elites don't even want to acknowledge that it was Muslim terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. It is these same elites who don't want to acknowledge the Islamic symbol-shapes in the Flight 93 memorial. To witness this symbolism would be to tie Islam to 9/11, which to these people is some unconscionable bigotry, regardless of the truth. There is the rub. As Mr. Burnett put it (at 25:16):

All we want--Alec, and the thousands of Americans who back us--we want the truth. What happened? [How did we end up with an Islamist design?] And we want to honor the 40 people. I don't want anything to do with the Islamic fanatics, anything at all.

Mr. and Mrs. Burnett are very thoughtful, careful, rational people. So who is it who is "too far out"? People like the Burnetts, who are skeptical that the architect of a memorial to Flight 93 could plant a giant crescent and star flag on the crash site by mistake? Or is it the people who somehow convince themselves that a crescent and star flag is just fine, so long as we can't prove that it is intentional? Actually, we CAN prove that the Islamic symbolism is intentional. Architect Paul Murdoch does not want history to be able to deny his achievement, so he included extensive redundant proofs of intent, such as the following. Murdoch says the crescent comes from the terror attacks breaking the circle (leaving only the giant Islamic-shaped crescent still standing, hmmm). Remove the parts of the crescent that stick out past the point where the flight path (coming down from the upper left) symbolically breaks the circle, and what symbolically remains standing is a giant Islamic-shaped crescent pointing EXACTLY at Mecca. The full Crescent of Embrace points 1.8° north of Mecca ± 0.1°. Remove the parts of the Entry Portal walls that extend past the flight path at the upper crescent tip and the remaining “true” or thematic crescent points exactly at Mecca, ± 0.1°. All the supposed redesign did was add an extra arc of trees that explicitly represents a broken off part of the circle, leaving Murdoch’s circle-breaking crescent-creating theme completely intact. The unbroken part of the circle, what symbolically remains standing in the wake of 9/11, is still a precisely Mecca-oriented crescent, the centerpiece for the world’s largest mosque. To join our blogbursts, just send your blog's url.
A few sentences need more emphasis.

...our elites don't even want to acknowledge that it was Muslim terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. It is these same elites who don't want to acknowledge the Islamic symbol-shapes in the Flight 93 memorial. To witness this symbolism would be to tie Islam to 9/11, which to these people is some unconscionable bigotry, regardless of the truth.

So who is it who is "too far out"? People like the Burnetts, who are skeptical that the architect of a memorial to Flight 93 could plant a giant crescent and star flag on the crash site by mistake? Or is it the people who somehow convince themselves that a crescent and star flag is just fine, so long as we can't prove that it is intentional?

Why should a memorial to the innocent victims of terrorism celebrate the war cult in whose service they were murdered? The faces of the terrorists should be printed on dart boards and toilet paper, along with the book which commands them to make war on us. Their names, their faces and the symbols of their war cult should have no place in any memorial to their victims.

Tawfik Hamid: Reform Islam

Tawfik Hamid, writing at NEWSMAX, wants to reform Islam. Here are a few vital points from his article.

• Suspend the traditional teaching that Muslims must wage wars on non-Muslims to offer them one of three options: convert to Islam, pay jizia (humiliating tax paid by non-Muslims to Muslims), or be killed.
• Publish new theologically-based books of Islamic jurisprudence that stand against beating women, slavery, killing apostates, and other violent edicts of Shariah.
• As long as the Muslim world insists on teaching violent principles as mentioned earlier, the gap between it and the West will only increase, and the efforts to bridge the gap of civilizations will be inefficient.
• Once the Muslim world puts an end to the destructive points, the voices that emphasize the “common values” will be able to succeed in their great mission to make our world better.

The aforementioned "traditional teaching" is found in the Qur'an: 8:39, 9:29 & Sahih Muslim 19.4294. There is a problem with attempting to suspend teaching of Qur'anic doctrine. Allah's word describes itself as perfected in 5:3 "This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islâm as your religion".

Allah's perfect and final words can not be changed, Allah strictly forbids it. Allah said: "And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can change His Words." 6:115 & 18:27. Allah said "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." 30:30. Allah's messenger confirmed it with a curse: "'Far removed, far removed (from mercy), those who changed (their religion) after me." Sahih Bukhari 8.76.585.

The clear and absolute prohibitions are confirmed by Shari'ah. Reliance of the Traveller contains a list of acts which entail apostasy, which carries a death sentence. These items are included in that list. O8.7.

-7- to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;

-14- to deny the obligatory character of something which by the consensus of Muslims (ijma`, def: B7) is part of Islam, when it is well known as such, like the prayer (salat) or even one rak'a from one of the five obligatory prayers, if there is no excuse (def: u2.4);

Allah's imperatives can't be re-interpreted because they are clear, 3:7, requiring no interpretation. Moe's Sunna shows us what they mean; read the book of Jihad or Expedition in any of the canonical hadith collections.

Jihad can not be abandoned because it is central to Islam; its very core. Too much of the Qur'an must be ripped out, the Sira & Sunnna truncated radically, likewise Shari'ah. Then there is Moe's execration.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 23, Number 3455:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar:

I heard the Apostle of Allah, (peace_be_upon_him) say: When you enter into the inah transaction, hold the tails of oxen, are pleased with agriculture, and give up conducting jihad (struggle in the way of Allah). Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion.

Islam will no more be reformed than lions will become herbivores and graze with the sheep..

Uncommon Sense Applied to Islamic Insurgency

I was reminded of this excellent article by the current issue of the Gathering Storm newsletter. The link in the newsletter led me to Right Side News. Below you will find several excerpts from that article.[My comments are between the quotes.] You will also find links to more of the author's works.

How to Defeat Shari'a-driven Islam's Army for Jihad

By Colonel Thomas Snodgrass (USAF, ret.)

Aug 15, 2007

Today a debate rages. Part of the debate - certainly the most immediate component of the debate - is what to do with Iraq. To cut-and-run seems unthinkable when one considers the consequences. To stay and pursue existing strategies seems almost as unthinkable given the corrosive effects domestically and the lack of American will for another long drawn out war with no real end in sight.

How can anyone disagree with that analysis? A pullout will be followed by an internecine blood bath. No matter who comes out on top, it will be one of our enemies. In any case, Iraq will revert to status quo ante: a state sponsor of terrorism. Terrorists the world over will be empowered and emboldened to launch new attacks against us and our allies.

I have demonstrated, as have many other war analysts, that there is no such thing as a war against terror. The Global War on Terror does not exist. "Terror" is a tactic (see, e.g., What are the military options in Iraq? and Iraq and the War: A Military Reader's Digest). The war we are fighting is against men, cells, networks, regimes and peoples who embrace a hegemonic political ideology driven by traditional and authoritative Islamic law, or what is termed Shari'a. In our war against the Sharia-faithful, the strategic level encompasses all theaters of conflict and the interactions between them - Middle East, Africa, Europe, Pacific, Homeland, etc. Within the Middle East Theater, Iraq and Afghanistan constitute operational levels of war, while Baghdad, Fallujah, Kabul, and Kandahar are examples of areas of operation (AO) at the tactical level.

Why not come right out and write the truth: the enemy making war against us is Islam? To learn what Shari'a rules about Jihad, read Book O, Chapter 9 of Reliance of the Traveller.

It almost goes without saying that, if a belligerent is on the strategic defensive not attacking his enemy's center of gravity to end the war, but is nevertheless on the operational/tactical offensive actively seeking combat within a limited AO, a high number of friendly casualties are going to result. But friendly casualties in a drawn out limited war environment brings us back to the fundamental formula of war and the MOTIVATION factor. If a belligerent's domestic support base, especially in representative polities, will not tolerate significant, continuing casualties inherent in strategic defensive limited war, that belligerent cannot afford to undertake a drawn out limited war. Vietnam, and now Iraq, leaves no doubt about the veracity of that statement.

Got a clue yet? They are bleeding us to death, at least in our own perception and that of our media and politicians. Withdrawing from active defensive action, allowing Islam to inflict more casualties at home, without effective resistance is not the answer.

In Vietnam, the enemy's center of gravity was North Vietnam, and in Iraq it is in Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. U.S. counterinsurgent operations in Vietnam were no more effective in their day than the surge will prove to be in Iraq. The lesson of Vietnam, and now Iraq, is that the strategic defensive or limited war, even when waged on the operational and tactical offensive, will only end if and when the enemy's motivation is impaired because its strategic CAPABILITY is unimpaired.

Trimming around the trees won't produce satisfaction, we must mow the lawn. Cut off their supply lines and interdict their reinforcements. No sanctuaries!!!

After 9/11, the U.S. went to war in the same wrongheaded way we have gone to war in every instance since World War II. In spite of the president's ringing rhetoric about permitting our enemy no sanctuary, even to the point of engaging the enemy preemptively, the U.S. again donned the national security straitjacket of strategic defensive limited war (Limited War Doctrine: A Fatal Flaw). The operative assumption underlying limited war postulates that even the most ardent ideological fanatics will accept stalemate or defeat before employing every means of warfare available to them and will not continue the war notwithstanding the continued capability to wage war. History has not borne out this sanguine assumption.

The idea that the U.S. wouldn't employ its ultimate means (i.e., nuclear weapons) has come to also limit the U.S. ends sought in the conflict. In other words, our refusal to use the ultimate weapon must mean we are not committed to ultimate victory in the form of the decisive defeat of our enemy. Instead, we seek "regime change" and "democracy-building" rather than unconditional surrender of all combatants. Indeed, counterinsurgency is the effort to maintain and build a civil society in and around limited kinetic battles with an enemy we don't seek to destroy. Rather than setting our strategic goal as the destruction of the enemy's CAPABILITY to wage war, we seek to contain, co-opt, integrate, re-integrate, and engage politically all in an effort to reduce the enemy's MOTIVATION to continue the war.

All of the parties in the Iraq conflict know that the CAPABILITY of both stateless Jihadi groups and state-sponsored Jihadi groups is sustained by the logistical centers of gravity located in surrounding states. But the U.S. strategic end of fighting a limited, defensive war confines operations within the border of Iraq. (See, e.g., This is No Way to Win a War!)

We must jettison our Cold War national security thinking featuring limited war and instead realistically reassume our World War II strategic offensive posture.

We should have nuked Tora Bora while Usama was still holed up there.

Insurgencies can be fought indefinitely if the re-supply lines remain open. This means that Coalition forces and their airborne assets are better utilized to prevent cross-border re-supply by striking depots in Iran than engaging in urban warfare at close quarters.

This implies cutting off communication between Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iraq so that the men, material and money can no longer cross the border at will and unimpeded. This implies an aerial campaign against the training camps and supply staging areas in Iran & Syria.

The U.S. must ruthlessly use our technologically superior ground firepower and airpower to fight an asymmetrical war that plays to our strength -- technology, rather than being lured into close urban combat which capitalizes on the suicide commitment of the Shari'a-driven Jihadists.

Whether in conjunction with the current combat in Iraq or at some later date, the Jihadi-sponsoring states of Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and possibly Pakistan will have to be confronted militarily and the Jihadi centers of gravity destroyed.

U.S. gun camera film showing Jihadists being vaporized by Western weapons and emphasizing Islamic impotence should flood the Internet and the TV airwaves.

Rigid control of our borders and immigration policy is a must to stave off the inevitable attempts to attack us from within.

Click this link to read the entire article.
Other Articles by Colonel Thomas Snodgrass (USAF Ret.)...
How to Defeat Shari'a-driven Islam's Army for Jihad Colonel Thomas Snodgrass (USAF, ret.)
Strategy, Tactics and Winning Wars (Part Two of Two) Col. Thomas Snodgrass (USAF, ret.)
Strategy, Tactics, and Winning Wars (Part One of Two) Col. Thomas Snodgrass (USAF, ret.)
Is there a viable military strategy for disarming Iran? Part Two - What is 'Air Control?' Colonel Thomas Snodgrass (USAF, ret.)
Is There a Viable Military Strategy for Disarming Iran? Conclusion of Part 1
Is There A Viable Military Strategy For Disarming Iran? Part One (of Two)
This Is No Way to Win a War! Part One (of Two)

Colonel Snodgrass published his article at Family Security Matters. That organization publishes many excellent articles, visit their site and sign up to receive their newsletter.

Rhetoric/Incidents: Islam's Hypocrisy

In the context of seeking hate crime prosecution in a Californian assault case, CAIR brought up a statement by CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper.

“Our nation’s religious, political and community leaders need to address the growing anti-Muslim rhetoric on the Internet and on talk radio that can lead to such incidents,”

Hooper was demanding enforcement of Islamic blasphemy laws, implying that assaults on Muslims are directly linked to criticism of Islam by bloggers and talk radio hosts. He was echoing the rhetoric of U.N. General Assembly and UNHRC resolutions condemning "defamation of Islam".

• Deplores the use of the print, audio-visual and electronic media, including the Internet, and any other means to incite acts of violence, xenophobia or
  related intolerance and discrimination against Islam or any other religion, as well as targeting of religious symbols
• Also urges 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, to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and their value systems and to complement legal systems with intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance;

More recently, the President of the Ad Hoc Committee On Complementary Standards issued a "Non-Paper Paper" outlining strategy for a protocol to ICERD. Pay close attention to this critical excerpt.

5- Incitement to racial, national and religious hatred

1. There is a need for further clarifying and reinforcing at the international level existing obligations on the eradication of all incitement to hatred and ' discrimination in any form and to prohibit by law, propaganda for war and advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.
2. In this context, complementary standards to be developed should observe the following parameters:
• Article 4 of ICERD shall be extended to the crime of incitement to racial hatred covering offenses motivated by religious hatred against immigrant communities.
• The protection provided shall extend to all individuals and groups within the jurisdiction of the State Party.
• The prohibitions shall equally cover acts committed by any individual, group or organization, including political and media organizations as well as by national or local public authorities.
• The provisions shall apply to any act which, in purpose or effect, incites discrimination, hostility or violence.

In recent months, there have been news reports of rioting and anti-Christian pogroms in India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria & Kenya. When do those events take place? When did the rioting over the Danish Cartoons take place? Why do riots happen immediately after Juma prayer services? What is preached in those sermons?

Muslims want Fiitna and similar revelations criminalize because the connection between the Qur'an & Islamic sermons and riots is revealed therein. They want this and similar blog posts criminalize because I expose their hypocrisy. Predators who slither in dark crevices and under rocks do not like being exposed in the light of truth.

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about 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.” [Emphasis added.]

The Secretary General labeled Fitna "hate speech" & "incitement to violence" . Click the link and watch the documentary. Where is the hate speech? Where is the incitement? They are only in the Qur'an, hadith & Kutbah displayed; they do not flow from the lips of Geert Wilders.

There is plenty of hate speech and incitement to violence in the Qur'an, enough to make Islam a constant static violation of ICERD & ICCPR. This fact is fully documented in the International Qur'an Petition. It is Islam that must be outlawed, not 'Islamophobia'.

Obamination: Iftar Treason

President Obama celebrated sunset with an Iftar Tuesday, August 1, 2009. Excerpts from his remarks follow, with my comments interspersed.

Islam, as we know, is part of America.

Islam can not be a part of America. Islam is, by its own intrinsic nature, permanently alienated. In the Islamic world view, only Allah has the right to rule. Any government that rules by man made law instead of Shari'ah is unjust and must be removed by Jihad, if necessary. Moe prophesied that Jesus Christ will rule by the Qur'an when he returns.

Islam is not compatible with democracy. Allah said "It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision." [33:36] Allah and his Messenger (or Caliph ) make all the decisions; Joe Camel has no choice in the matter. Islam is theocratic autocracy, the polar opposite of democracy.

One of those values is the freedom to practice your religion -- a right that is enshrined in the First Amendment of the Constitution. Nashala Hearn, who joins us from Muskogee, Oklahoma, took a stand for that right at an early age. When her school district told her that she couldn't wear the hijab, she protested that it was a part of her religion. The Department of Justice stood behind her, and she won her right to practice her faith.

The practice of Islam entails more than hijab, salat, zakat, hajj & iman. Islam is not complete without Jihad, which is mandatory, not an optional extra. Jihad is defined in Islamic law as making war on non-Muslims. [Reliance of the Traveller, O9.0.] Jihad is a communal obligation, binding upon Muslims in every year. [O9.1]

The annual obligation to perform Jihad is confirmed by fiqh. Observe what Al-Shafi-i said about it. "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."

If Muslims have a right to practice their religion, then they have a right to kill you, rape your widow, enslave your orphans and seize your property. If there is a right to practice Islam, we have no rights.

They all contain truths. Among those truths are the pursuit of peace and the dignity of all human beings. That must always form the basis upon which we find common ground.

Islam divides the world into Dar al-Islam, where Allah's writ runs and Dar al-Harb, where Allah's writ does not run. Peace is when Dar al-Harb (the house of war) is conquered and engulfed by Dar al-Islam. I suggest that you read O9.8 & O9.9 of Reliance of the Traveller. So much for the pursuit of peace.

Islam recognizes the dignity of Muslims, not all human beings. Pagans & Atheists are to be converted, enslaved or killed, people with scriptural religions are to be subjugated and extorted, surviving as sub-humans living at sufferance. One of Islam's codified oral traditions has Moe declaring that our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims until we become Muslims. [Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387.]

Together, we have a responsibility to foster engagement grounded in mutual interest and mutual respect.

There is no mutual interest between prey and predator. Respect is earned, Islam has not earned it. Respect is reciprocal, Islam gives none, see the citation immediately above: our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims.

So tonight, we celebrate a great religion, and its commitment to justice and progress.

What is Islam's greatness? Judaism gave us monotheism. Christianity gave us hope of salvation. Islam gives us predestination & predation. Islam's 'greatness', which it seeks to restore, is the Caliphate which enslaved nearly half the world at its peak.

What commitment to justice and progress? Shari'ah prescribes hudud, including corporal punishment. Proving rape requires four male witnesses who observed penetration. Rape victims are punished. The testimony of two women is required to equal that of one man.

Ten days prior to the eighth anniversary of the Accursed Abomination, our recently elected President celebrated the month in which the damnable book was "revealed"; the book whose sanctification of Jihad motivated the nineteen murderers of three thousand of our fellows. He referred to the war cult which sponsored the attack a "great religion", praising its "commitment to peace" & justice.

Allahu skata!! Camel dung in the desert. Islam: predatory war cult. Moe: profiteering pirate, pretender to prophecy, pederast, lecher & murderer. Obama: traitor. You fools who elected him should burn your voter registration cards and hang your heads in shame. No words can express my disgust.