Hedaya 2.140 Annotated

Hedaya 2.141 Annotated

Preserve the First Amendment from Attack by the OIC!

Showing posts with label ban. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ban. Show all posts

Thursday, November 17, 2016

Ban Islam? The Forward Appears Clueless

Ban Islam? The Forward appears clueless Ban Islam? The Forward appears clueless:
http://forward.com/sisterhood/354817/proposed-georgia-bill-addresses-imagined-threat-from-burqa-clad-drivers/

The proposed legislation bans the niqab, not the buqa.  The objection is to the face cover which hinders identification.  Criminals and terrorists could disguise themselves with the burqa & niqab. There have already been a few incidents.

    Fitra, including the hijab & burqa serve as warning signs to alert us to the presence of Islamic supremacists. While France and Georgia are wise to ban garments that prevent identification, banning the burqa & hijhab is functionally equivalent to amputating a snake's rattles or painting over a skunk's stripes.

    Phoebe Maltz Bovy invokes "the dignity-of-Muslim-women " , apparently ignorant of the fact that they have none.  Islamic law requires that Muslim women  suffer clitoridectomy and deems them to be defcient in religion and intelligence.
The Profit said that Muslim's wives are like prisoners, having no control over their lives. He also said that women are the majority in the fire.

     Of course, the hijab is a major source of the Muslima's dignity, or is it? Is it really about modesty and piety or  something less dignified? 

    What can be less dignified than open defecation in the desert? Moe gave his wives permission to go out to the desert at night "for their personal needs".  Umar, who was campaigning for  head covering, spyed on them and harassed Sauda.   Here is the sorry story in graphic novel form. Note that it is documented. I have linked the relevant ahadith below.

    The last ahadith listed above is not included in the video. In it, Aisha finks on Moe, exposing his issuance of situational scripture.  It fits hand in glove with Moe's use of the Qur'an to justify his actions to his wives.

    From that video we learn that the hijab is about open defecation and Islam is all about getting Moe what he wanted: sex.
It is Islam, not the burqa & hijab that should be banned. It should be banned because its mission is mercenary: accrual of ransom, tribute & spoils for Moe's personal emolument and its method is martial.  I now present proof of that fact.

What's Wrong With Islam_Muslims? by Kab Ashraf on Scribd


   

Saturday, December 19, 2015

Open Letter to a LibTard AssWhole: Michael Moore~I Am not a Muslim!!

Open Letter to a LibTard AssWhole: Michael Moore~I Am not a Muslim!!     Occasionally, in the course of human affairs, it becomes necessary to call out an obnoxious AssWhole and expose him as a LibTard, refuting his insane blathering with facts and logic.

    Michael Moore's Open letter To Donald Trump is one of those incidents which requires exposure.  Moore reproduced, on his web site, a photograph of himself holding an incredibly stupid sign in front of the Trump Towers, followed by his insane screed. I have reproduced the pertinent paragraphs of the screed below with emphasis added to excrement.
And now, here we are in 2015 and, like many other angry white guys, you are frightened by a bogeyman who is out to get you. That bogeyman, in your mind, are all Muslims. Not just the ones who have killed, but ALL MUSLIMS.
Fortunately, Donald, you and your supporters no longer look like what America actually is today. We are not a country of angry white guys. Here's a statistic that is going to make your hair spin: Eighty-one percent of the electorate who will pick the president next year are either female, people of color, or young people between the ages of 18 and 35. In other words, not you. And not the people who want you leading their country.
So, in desperation and insanity, you call for a ban on all Muslims entering this country. I was raised to believe that we are all each other's brother and sister, regardless of race, creed or color. That means if you want to ban Muslims, you are first going to have to ban me. And everyone else.
We are all Muslim.
Just as we are all Mexican, we are all Catholic and Jewish and white and black and every shade in between. We are all children of God (or nature or whatever you believe in), part of the human family, and nothing you say or do can change that fact one iota. If you don't like living by these American rules, then you need to go to the time-out room in any one of your Towers, sit there, and think about what you've said.

angry white guys

    Describing Trump as  an  "angry white guy"  is an irrelevant ad hominem attack  entirely related  to the issue of  a moratorium on Islamic immigration.  
   
    Mr. Trump has good cause to be angry: 14 of his potential constituents are dead and 21 injured because insane national policies allowed the parents of Syed Farook to immigrate from Pakistan and spawn him here.      Describing Trump as  "white" is  irrelevant.  Race is not at issue in this  matter, only ideology is involved.  By using the word, in that manner, Moore  insults  his own race.

frightened by a bogeyman

    Describing Trump as "frightened"  is another egregious ad hominem.  Trump's emotional state is irrelevant to the issue of a moratorium on Islamic immigration.

    "Bogeyman" was  included in the phrase  as an added insult, implying that Trump is  frightened by an imaginary , amorphous threat.

    Terrorism is an Islamic Jihad tactic intended to render victims incapable of resisting attack.  Moe described the effects of terror in Bukhari 4.55.567 saying that on the last day, nursing mothers would abandon their infants, pregnant women drop their loads and children turn white with terror.  The Wise Ass will retort that  the description fits only  Judgment  Day.  But  Allah knew better:  he told Moe that the Jews were more afraid of him and his army than of Allah [59.13]

    A strategy manual used by the army of Pakistan makes reality abundantly clear, read it and curse Islam. [Emphasis added.]
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 me decision we wish to impose upon him.

all Muslims

    Three Muslims killed 14 people and injured 21 at a Christmas party in San Bernardino.  All Muslims are commanded to do whatever they can to terrorize us. Three Muslims did, the rest praised Allah and celebrated their triumph.  3:151, 8:12,39,57,60,65,67, 9:5,29,38, 39,111,120,123, 33:26,27, 47:4,49:15, 59:2,13, 61:10-13; Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220.

    Have you read those verses, Michael?  Do you understand their clear meaning?  When Allah says "to strike terror" &  "to terrify thereby", what does he mean?  When Allah promises to  impute any step taken to injure or enrage us to the mujahid's credit as a righteous good deed, what does he mean by that?

    When Khalid Sheikh Mohammad wrote that "terrorizing us is a great religious duty in Islam", what the Hell was he basing that on?

    Offensive Jihad is fard al-Kifaya, a communal obligation. When we retaliate by invading Dar ul-Islam, the obligation converts to fard al-ayn: individually binding on all Muslims wheresoever dispersed over the face of the earth.

    Every Muslim, young or old, male or female, free or slave; all are obligated to do us any harm they can.  That is why excluding them is common sense, neither paranoia, racism nor bigotry.

look like

    That ambiguous and verbose paragraph boils down to a token of a Marxist/Alinsky  tactic used by LibTards: divide and conquer.  The LibTards  are Balkanizing America, dividing us by age, gender, ethnicity and economic status.

    Personal safety and national security are common issues affecting all Americans.  not limited to any sub set.  Only a bigoted, hypocritical  AssWhole would write that paragraph.

desperation and insanity

    You, Michael, are the one who is insane and desperate.  As such, you align yourself with members of the most evil cult on the face of the earth, which sacrifices innocent people to Satan.

    In your desperation, you engage in calumny and  play the race card, seeking to  divide, not unite Americans.

brotherhood of man

    Universal brotherhood does not  entail accepting the damnable dictum that I must be slaughtered for not  embracing Islam.  Cain and Able were brothers, Cain committed fratricide. That does not make me a fratricidal maniac.  I am not in sympathy or solidarity with Cain or those who emulate him.

We are all Muslim. 

    Have you recited the Shahada three times in Arabic before witnesses?  If not, you are  a damned fool, not a Muslim.  If you have, you are a damned fool and a Muslim, get out of here!

    I am neither a damned fool nor a Muslim, and never will be!  I am not in sympathy or solidarity with Muslims and never will be!  I expose, curse and condemn Islam and will never be silenced!

    I do not trust Donald Trump and will not vote for him. He is not my choice for nominee  & president. But I agree with him on the issue of ending Islamic immigration, as far as he goes.

    I go further: make the ban permanent and expel the Muslims already residing in America.  We will never be safe and secure while America is infested with our sworn enemies.  Muslims are an enemy fifth column, remove them.

    You, Mr. Moore are not Friedrich Gustav Emil Martin Niemöller, and Muslims are not  innocent Jews persecuted by Nazis.

    Judaism is passive, anodyne and benevolent. Islam is aggressive, militant and malevolent with a trail of tears, blood and bones laid down since 623, stretching from China to France and now extending to America.

    At the top of Crusader's Armory there are two embedded pdf files which expose the ugly reality of Islamic law to the discerning reader.  Those who are open minded, intelligent and reasonable will read those files, click through the links to examine the context, and curse Islam as a result of what they learn.  The truth will not penetrate the fact shields of bigoted LibTards.      

Sunday, August 21, 2011

If Bibi had Balls

He would connect Ban Ki-moon, Barack Obama, Nicolas Sarkozy, Angela Merkel, David Cameron and Catherine Ashton om a conference call.  The monologue would flow like this:

Your pets have fired twenty rockets too many. The first rocket was one million too many. The attacks will stop immediately and will not resume now or at any future time. The next bullet, knife, bomb, mortar shell or rocket will be the last.  Gaza will be purged of survivors and annexed.  Gaza will be a living place for Jews forever.

    Our Ambassadors have been instructed to prepare for permanent return to Jerusalem and will leave at the first mention of  "restraint", "cease fire", "negitiation", "compromise", "peace keepers" or "end the conflict".  With 'friends' such as you we don't need enemies. We will eliminate our enemies without respect for your disapproval.


    Unfortunately, Bibi lacks the resolve, fortitude and common sense to make that statement and do what is necessary for Israel's survival.  It may be too late to replace him with someone wiser and stronger.

Sunday, December 06, 2009

Swiss Minaret Ban: Big Deal

Regular readers of my blog posts know that I waste few opportunities to blast Islam with facts. They must be wondering why I have not written about the Nov. 29 referendum which banned new minarets in Switzerland. There are two primary reasons. First, I am not entirely in agreement with the concept. Second, I wanted to let others write first so that I could take the role of clean up writer.

First and foremost, I am opposed to superficial, symbolic attacks which accomplish nothing beyond the counter productive stimulation of Islamic resentment. Beards, burkas & hijabs are symbolic, but they are not more important to the wearer as they are to us. Their value is more than symbolic, they are warning signs. Like a skunk's stripes and a rattle snake's noisy tail, they serve to alert us to the proximity of danger.

Second, I perceive the vote to be a temporary victory. I have little doubt that the result will be overturned in the courts. The vote serves mainly as a signal of rising public awareness of Islam's true nature and the existential threat it poses to Western Civilization.

My readers know that I will take on anyone, without fear or favor. While other writings have been more deserving of criticism, My choice did a better job of clarifying some of the issues involved. Dr. Sami Alrabaa wrote an exclusive for Family Security Matters: Minarets are Symbols of Bigotry. I will quote some good parts, but you really should click the link and read the entire article because the quotes which follow are taken out of context. .

It is also true that huge lavish mosques funded by petrodollars are being constructed to prove that Islam is omnipresent everywhere and Islam – the best religion on earth! – is increasingly being accepted and practiced all over the world.
The huge mosques & soaring minarets are symbols of Islamic supremacism & domination.
Minaret construction is an exhibition of political power spearheaded by Islamists. These “towers” are simply aggressive symbols of fanatic defying power.

Minaret construction has nothing to do with freedom of religion. It is a symbol of bigotry.
If we allow the erection of minarets without offering resistance, our silent acquiescence is a token of surrender. The Swiss electorate decided not to surrender, but they stopped short of effective resistance. They attacked symbolism, not substance.

But when it comes to referendum, the majority in the Western world would also reject Islam as a stone-age “religion.” I am pretty sure that if the Swiss referendum were held in other European countries, the majority would also vote in favor of banning the construction of minarets. The European public is better informed than their self-appointed defenders of Islam.
I am not yet convinced that a majority are fully aware of the nature of Islam. But the Swiss vote may indicate a trend of increasing awareness. Lapidation may be a stone age execution method, but Moe had weapons made of more advanced materials. 610 was hardly part of the stone age.
It is also true that the Swiss and the rest of the world are not against Muslims practicing their own religion in peace like all followers of other religions.
Islam can not be practiced in peace. Jihad is an intrinsic and inseverable part of Islam. Al-Anfal & At-Taubah are permanent parts of Islamic scripture. If we are not against the practice of Islam, then we are passively surrendering.
If, however, people around the globe, especially in the West, read the Koran and Hadith and realize how this religion incites to hatred and violence against non-Muslims, and discrimination against women, they would classify it as an extremist ideology, as politically incorrect and demand banning it like all extremist organizations. Check out “Is Islam a Violent Faith?” and “Women in Hadith.”

Nevertheless, the world community, including Switzerland, accepts Islam as a “religion” and allows its followers to practice it under the principle of religious freedom.
We accept Islam as a "religion" and allow its practice, but if we read Islam's canon of scripture and tradition we would reject it. Will anyone get a clue from those vital paragraphs?
Before the West accepts Islam as a religion it must demand that Muslim states reform Islam; accept/apply universal human rights and religious freedom in their societies.

Preaching hatred and violence must be banned and their perpetrators must be punished. Additionally, the free civilized world must demand from Muslims and their religious institutions and states: Drop all those atrocious passages from your Koran and Hadith if you want to be part of the civilized world.
So Islam must be reformed; the violent passages must be removed from its canon of scripture & tradition. You forgot one, Dr. Alrabaa : Shari'ah. Islamic law reflects Islamic scripture & tradition. How many of those texts exist in book stores and in libraries all over the world? How many exist in computer hard disks and web pages? How do you hope to edit all of them? Who will edit all the copies of Ibn Kathir's Tafsir and Riyad us-saliheen?

Allah tells us in 5:3 & 11:1 that Islam and its scripture are perfected. Perfection can only be defiled, not improved. Allah tells us in 6:115, 10:64 and 30:30 that the Koran and the "religion" of which it is the foundation can not be changed. In Sahih Bukhari 9.78.174 Moe is on record cursing anyone who changes Islam after his death, saying that they will be far removed from mercy. Abu Dawud 23.3455 has Moe saying that if Muslims abandon Jihad in favor of agriculture, "Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion." [Emphasis added.]


Muslims who would reform Islam risk fatwa as apostates. Muslims Against Sharia is a prime example. Their Koran revision leaves As-Saff 10-13 intact. while Surah At-Taubah has been entirely excised. Surahs 8 & 47 lose context & continuity when the violent ayat are removed.

Perhaps you'd prefer to re-interpret the Koran. But the gates of ijtihad have been closed for 900 years. They are not about to spring open. Who knows the interpretation better than the one who revealed it? His Sunna & Sira show us what the Koran means. What does this mean?
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.
Moe will tell you what it means!

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." [Emphasis added.]
Allah's jihad imperatives mean exactly what they say. They can not be edited, and if they were, they would eventually be restored.
Sunan Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4278:

Narrated AbuHurayrah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Allah will raise for this community at the end of every hundred years the one who will renovate its religion for it.

The Swiss initiative is symbolic, with no effect beyond giving visibility to the rising tide of rejection of Islam. Islam is an intolerable predator which can not be reformed. That leaves Western Civilization one alternative: Islam must be prohibited by law. Ban the substance, not its symbols.

Dr. Sami Alrabaa asserts that we would reject Islam and favor banning it if we understood it from reading the Koran & hadith. You can test that hypothesis without slogging through thousands of pages of musty text. The ayat most relevant to Islamic aggression, the tafsir which explain them and the ahadith which confirm them are contained in EgregiousAyat.chm, along with the most important part of Shari'ah which codifies them into law.

The practical application of those texts is found in fiqh: rulings by Islamic jurists. FOMIJihad.chm's Jihad in Fiqh chapter presents a significant sample of relevant rulings. For those who prefer the hard slog method, the Muslim Student Association at USC maintains a data base containing three parallel translations of the Koran and four of the six canonical hadith collections.

For those who need the look, feel, permanence & aroma of printed text: