Tennessee: School enforces sharia, bans town hall on…sharia law

By Creeping Sharia:

via FBI-banned, DOJ classified unindicted terror funding co-conspirator, fed judge confirmed Hamas front group CAIR Welcomes Cancellation of Anti-Muslim Event in Tenn. School

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today said it has joined with concerned Muslims in Tennessee in welcoming cancellation of an anti-Muslim event scheduled for April 24 at a Knoxville high school.

Another American inflicted with Adult Onset Islam via Approval rescinded for Shari’a Law event at Farragut High School.

"It's kind of an aggressive tone on the flyer," said AbdelRahman Murphy.

“It’s kind of an aggressive tone on the flyer,” said AbdelRahman Murphy.

“Feel free hosting it anywhere else by renting out a banquet hall, but to host it at a public place is one that is not comfortable for the rest of us to know about,” said [AbdelRahman] Murphy.

6 News reached out to the Knoxville chapter of ACT! for America. They say it is about education.

“He is going to be coming to share with us his expertise on what Shari’a law can be doing to Tennessee and to America as a whole,” said John Peach with ACT! For America.

They also say the venue simply should not matter.

“We feel like it’s very important that we have our public institutions take part in this because it’s not meant to be a religious thing. It’s not a political thing. It’s particularly for education purposes,” said Peach.

There is no word yet if ACT! for America plans to hold the event in a new venue.

John Peach issued this statement late Friday afternoon:

“Why is it that Muslims engage in teaching about how good Islam is for Tennessee at the Cedar Bluff Library – a public building, but they feel “uncomfortable” when ACT! for America plans an event to show the opposite viewpoint at a public building? (This is documented as follows):

Muslims like the support the University of Tennessee gives them to host activities and venues on their campus. Furthermore, it likes its Muslim Student Association (MSA) to hold events at their tax supported public UT campus.

“Why is it that all Tennessee social study textbooks to be authorized for use in our public schools must be approved by Muslim affiliates? (Hundreds of reviews have exposed the fact that our textbooks are overwhelmingly biased toward Muslims over Christianity and Judaism, with Islam always portrayed as being more significant than all other religions).

“Political Correctness has gone amuck and is destroying our country. Whatever happened to freedom of speech? If it’s right for Muslims to host events in tax-funded public facilities, then what is wrong with a group of citizens wanting the same privilege?

“Last December, ACT! for America – Knoxville Chapter was granted permission by Knox County Schools to use the facilities of Farragut High School to hold an educational forum including two speakers, followed by an opportunity for the public to answer any questions of the two. This we called the Town Hall – Farragut.

“We in good faith and urgent vitality have been promoting this event for the past four months, believing we were following all the guidelines given to us. We have spent over $1500.00 to advance this cause, including taking out a special insurance policy just to cover this occasion.

“The purpose of the meeting was to educate our local citizens about the dangers of Sharia Law, especially as it negatively affects our children, our churches, our law enforcement personnel, and our community leaders. Now, due to the fear of Muslims in the Knoxville area, the venue for the event that was open to everyone was cancelled. This is a great example of what Sharia Law is doing to America.”

 

 

Kosher Meals For Inmates Will Cost Florida Taxpayers $14.9 Million A year

20140330_inmates_Jail_foodMealsLby ALAN KORNMAN:

Judge Patricia Seitz of the United States District in Miami, FL on December 5, 2013  ordered the Florida Department of Corrections to provide Kosher meals to inmates beginning July 1, 2014.  That is unless the Florida Attorney General puts a stop to this raping of Florida taxpayers money.

Cost To The Taxpayers

The estimated additional cost to provide Florida housed convicts with Kosher meals would be approximately $14,952,283 per year.

This $14.9 Million dollar number is based on 6,283 convicts who identify with religious groups that have previously maintained that Kosher diets are necessary.

Seventh Day Adventists =    402 Convicts

Jewish                            = 2,136 Convicts

Muslim                            = 3,745 Convicts

Kathleen Fuhrman, Public Health Nutrition Manager for the Department of Corrections estimates the annual cost to provide an inmate Kosher meals would be $2,379 compared to $584 per year for regular meals.  According to Judge Seitz’s ruling if  this program goes statewide it could result in a cost upwards of $54.1 Million.

Florida’s prison system, the third-largest in the country, is projected to run a $45 million deficit this year alone and yet, in this case, we taxpayers are forced to foot the bill for this unnecessarily expense food accommodation.

The Hypocrisy of Prison Meal Accommodations

The Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) already provides an alternative entree program which includes dairy and eggs but no meat or a vegan program where all animal products are avoided. These alternative entree’s are provided at little or no added expense to the taxpayer.

In and of themselves,  these ‘alternative entree’s’ are Kosher, Halal, Seventh Day Adventist, Hindu, and frankly acceptable in practice for any particular religious based special dietary requirements.

The most glaring hypocrisy comes from these inmates who had already violated their deeply held religious beliefs committing crimes that landed them in prison to begin with.  Therefore, it is safe to conclude, in most cases, these inmates believed their criminal activity was more important to them than following their faiths religious doctrines.

These inmates, by their own actions, are solely responsible for being wards of the state.  The rights to any special diet is a luxury forfeited when they committed their crimes against society.

The FDOC has already gone above and beyond by offering vegan and dairy & egg only alternative entree’s.  The FDOC has voluntarily removed all pork products from their menus as an accommodation to Muslim inmates.

Bruce Rich, one of the Plaintiff’s in this Kosher meal suit, stated in court documents that, “his soul would be negatively affected if he ingested anything non-kosher.”  Was Mr. Rich’s soul negatively affected when he murdered his parents, Irving and Blanche Rich?

Prosecutors proved Rich killed his parents for their life insurance policy and will, and he tried to make their deaths look like a murder-suicide.  Rich,  also claimed that because of his parents’ Jewish faith, they could not be subjected to autopsy. Inmate Bruce Rich is no ‘Greener’ he is using Judaism to scam the system and Judge Seitz is his patsy.

Now Bruce Rich is trying to make the case that a Vegan diet is not Kosher because of the way alternative entree’s are prepared. Judge Patricia Seitz is allowing this travesty of religious blackmail to continue.  Shame on the Aleph Institute for aiding and abetting this farce that is going to cost Florida taxpayers a minimum of $15 million per year and more likely $54 million by the time this is all over with.

CAIR-FL Says Halal Diets Are Next

 

The Council On American Islamic Relations (CAIR) Director Hassan Shibly says making Halal food available to Muslim convicts will be  a priority for his organization in 2014.

This is just another example of CAIR’s Hassan Shibly trying to game the FDOC when the vegan alternative entree fulfills Halal dietary requirements short of an Imam blessing the food. The fact that a federal court has declared CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist funding trial in U.S. history should limit their credibility with the court until their terrorist status is removed by a Federal judge.

Read more: Family Security Matters

Islamic Association Of North Texas Building A “Vast Community” In the Heart of Texas

islmic_village

Freedom Outpost, by Janna Brock:

Is a mini Mecca being built in Dallas, Texas? Of all the frightening propositions, this is happening right now. The Lone Star State is morphing into an Islamic hotspot. How could this happen in a state that revels in its guns and Bibles? By slow, deliberate integration and patience. The Islamic Association of North Texas (IANT) did not come to prominence overnight, but flew under the radar. Thus, the Islamic community has expanded and prospered. With the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA) set to train 200 Imans in February of this year in Dallas, Sharia is coming to Texas. The subject of this conference will be “Islamic Home Finance in the West.” This is instructing Imans on Sharia Finance and implementing sharia by force. At this point, there couldn’t be a better place to set up a vast Islamic community than Sharia compliant north Dallas. It is not a matter of if, but when.

IANT2-300x225Dallas, Texas is one of the last places one would expect to encounter Sharia law, much less a thriving Islamic community. However, the Devil works while people aren’t paying attention, and when political correctness overrides ationale. The Islamic Association of North Texas has been active for thirty years in the Dallas area, making inroads and growing. With this, the IANT has come and conquered. The IANT’s website is eye opening and something every American should look at to get a feel for what an Islamic invasion looks like. This is happening in our own backyards.

More than thirty years ago, the Islamic Association of North Texas (IANT) was established to serve the local Muslim community. Since then, our community has grown considerably, and so have our needs. As we inaugurate our next quarter-century in North Texas, we introduce a novel community idea: the Islamic Village Project, a Muslim neighborhood.”

The Islamic Village Project is a multi-million dollar project that will foster great change in the Muslim community of Dallas. It will house a senior center, Youth center, Social Services department, residential quarters, play area for the children, retail center, clinic, and a separate building for IQA and Suffa Islamic Seminary classes. The project will extend from the current Masjid facility at Abrams, on the North and South side of Spring Valley across from the masjid, and West towards Greenville.

This sounds like an ambush, but in actuality it required careful planning. An Islamic village in North Texas seems like something out of the Twilight Zone. But if Sharia can come and conquer other American locales, Texas is not exempt. There is no area in the United States that is immune to an Islamic invasion. To unobservant eyes, this will look like a well formed, integrated community. For all practical purposes, this works in a secular American society that has lost its vigilance when it comes to true Islam, and never truly understood it to begin with. Islam invaded America and has thrived because of the ignorance of the American people.

One of the cornerstones of the Islamic Village will be it Educational Complex housing our IANT Quranic Academy and Suffa Islamic Seminary under the leadership of Imam Yusuf Ziya Kavakci. In addition, the Educational Complex is expected to have a Youth Center, Day Care Facilities, and playground areas for children of all ages.

When you memorize the Quran you’ve planted the seed. The seed needs to be watered and taken care of, so make the Quran part of your life.” This is on the IQA-IANT Quranic Academy’s Facebook page.

the_greater_jihad__prayer_by_musl1m-d3ixajt-300x150What a perfect breeding ground for eager young jihadist minds. This Islamic Association of North Texas has direct ties to Hamas. This is not community integration, but terrorist training and preparation. To be an ardent Islamist is to wage jihad. Their official mission reads like a Interfaith conference bulletin.

To educate on the virtues of Islam and practice it. To build bridges of cooperation, mutual respect, and understanding among faiths.

What lies and deception! No one will be the wiser! To be in opposition is to be an “Islamophobe.” In the name of progressive idiocy, Islam is peace, in spite of the obvious truth. In 2008, five Muslim leaders, working under the guise of a charity known as the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development in Dallas, were arrested for funneling millions of dollars to Hamas. No doubt many of the same people involved in this terror operation are working for the IANT to build Dallas’s version of Mecca.
Read more at Freedom Outpost

Also see:

Texas: Islamic Association building vast ‘Islamic Village – A Muslim Neighborhood’ (video) *updated (creepingsharia.com)

Early school dismissal for Florida Muslim students – religious entitlement or con job?

Released for jummah prayers on Fridays

Released for jummah prayers on Fridays

By Randy McDaniels and Jerry Gordon:

The Islamic Society of Tampa Bay (ISTABA) issued a press release last week urging parents to fill out their “Religious Observance Early Dismissal Request Form” and press their respective schools for special and indefinite religious accommodations for Muslims Studentsenabling them to attend the “Mandatory” Friday Islamic sermon and prayers every week from 12:30 PM until 3:00 PM.  A request which would essentially deprive Muslim students at least a half day of required teaching each week on a permanent basis.

The Dismissal Request Form was in all actuality a demand rather than a request.  The Islamic Society of Tampa cited Florida Statue(s) 1006.53, 1002.20 (2c)(c), and 1003.21 (2)(b), stating these dismissal were a matter of Florida Law, while failing to cite all of the language, ISTABA conspicuously omitted sections of the statutes which state Boards must adopt a policy which REASONABLY accommodate Religious Observances.

The Islamic Society went on to state, “According to Islamic teachings, it is an obligation to observe this prayer otherwise it is a sin”

The Friday Jumu’ah prayer is not the only mandatory [fard] Islamic prayer. The fact is there are five daily prayers which are mandatory for Muslims, to include the noon (Zuhr) prayer, which in the context Mahmoud Elkasaby of the Islamic Society of Tampa Bay has laid out; would also require special religious accommodations for Muslim students not on a weekly but daily basis.

However, according to Islamic teachings ALL missed prayers can be made up at a later time and would therefore not constitute a sin, as the School Board and community are lead to believe.

In fact, the Reliance of the  Traveller: a Classical Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, which bears the approval the most prestigious Islamic institutions and groups in the Middle East and North America devotes a whole book to this subject of prayer(Book F:  The Prayer (SALAT)) and several sections go into detail on how to perform makeup prayers.

The following Q & A was found on the website Islam.about.com:

Question: Can missed prayers be performed at a later time?

Answer: The schedule of Muslim prayer is one that is generous and flexible. Yet many of us miss prayers during the day — sometimes for unavoidable reasons, sometimes due to negligence.  If a prayer is missed…it is to be made up as soon as one is able to do so. This is known as Qadaa’. For example, if one misses the noon prayer because of a work meeting that could not be interrupted, one should pray as soon as the meeting is over. If the next prayer time has already come, one should first perform the prayer that was missed, and immediately after it the “on time” prayer.

Religious freedom is a cornerstone of American culture and heritage, and although our Constitutional Republic, as well as our legal system is founded on Judeo/Christian principles; these same values are responsible for the establishment of laws to ensure religious observance of all faiths are protected and reasonably accommodated.

The Question before the School Board, the Tampa community, and the State of Florida for that matter should be whether or not this request passes the litmus test of REASONABLE accommodation of religious observances.  It is important to note that Muslims have thrived in America society for several decades and the issue of these observances is only just surfacing?

Upon reflecting on dubious association of ISTABA with Ahmed Bedier, affiliations with the Islamic Center of Pinellas Park – the former Mosque of convicted terrorist Sami Al-Arian, glaring omissions regarding Florida Statutes on religious observances, as well as the misleading  requirements in regard to Islamic prayers, it seems more likely political maneuvering by  Mahmoud Elkasaby and ISTABA via another Islamic teaching – a type of holy deception or permissibly lying.  Kitman is the Islamic Doctrine of lying by omission, in this case to obtain SPECIAL or Preferential treatment rather than reasonable accommodations as a show of Islamic superiority.

This type of deception is not restricted educational institutions, in fact , another Trojan Horse being used to insinuate Sharia in America over the past decade is Sharia Compliant Finance (SCF).  SCF was introduce to the western financial sector Sharia adherent Islamist are selling the west the concept of paying or receiving interest (Riba) is a sin.

Read more at Watchdog Wire

Randy McDaniels is a former United States Marine who occupational specialty was in Operation and later Counter Intelligence. Served 6 years before being honoraby discharged. A Chapter Leader for ACT! for America and Mentor for the South East.

Religious Practice Versus Imposition

dearborn-michigan-ramadan-high-school-football-night-practiceBy Citizen Warrior:

Earlier tonight an acquaintance said he had heard that during Ramadan in Dearborn, Michigan, there’s a high school football team that does their football practice from 11:00 p.m. until 4:00 a.m. because some of the devout Muslim players can’t eat or drink anything during the daylight. He said this without any judgment at all. It looked like he felt absolutely neutral about it.

I said, “in other words, the Muslims are imposing their practices on non-Muslims.” I said it with a face that clearly displayed disapproval.

He was casually dismissive. “Well, other religions do crazy stuff too,” he said.

I said, “they don’t impose their stuff on me. Are there religious people who impose something on you? Or try to get you to grant a concession? Or try to make your values yield to theirs? To practice a religion is personal and private. If someone wants to go without food, what do I care? They can go right ahead. But when it impinges on people who are not members of the religion, that’s no longer religious. It’s political. So all the high school students who want to play football at that school have to practice in the middle of the night because Muslims are thrusting their Islamic practice into the non-Islamic public sphere. Those non-Muslim kids have to disrupt their normal sleep cycle because the Muslims won’t bend and the non-Muslims will. And step by step, inch by inch, orthodox Muslims gain one concession after another as our tolerant culture yields to their intolerant culture. Is that okay with you? It’s not okay with me.”

I had to leave, but this brief conversation inserted an idea I got from Bill Warner. And my acquaintance looked like he heard something he had never even thought about. I wish I’d had time to explain to him that religious supremacism is the belief that a particular religion is superior to others and entitles members of the religion to control or dominate non-members. That’s what these Muslim football players were doing.

But maybe it was better that I didn’t go into any more detail. Sometimes less is better. Sometimes it’s actually more effective to let things sink in a little at a time.

Given how many people are becoming aware of the disturbing nature of Islamic texts, these kinds of brief conversations must be taking place all over the free world. Let’s keep it up. We should think in terms of small bits and long campaigns.

Blasphemy

images (78)by Justin O Smith

“I imagine myself following in Malcolm’s discovery… that some whites might live beside him as brothers in Islam.” -Obama, ‘Dreams From My Father (pg 86)

On June 4, 2013, approximately fifteen-hundred American patriots arrived in an inspiring and spectacular fashion at the Conference Center in Manchester, Tennessee. They came from as far away as Georgia, Texas and New York to defend the First Amendment, one of our most cherished rights, against Sharia law encroachment and manipulations and Department of Justice impediments and violations, as the Obama administration advances the plan to criminalize any criticism of Islam under the UN Resolution 16/18. Old and young alike, Armed Forces Veterans of several wars and community and spiritual leaders arrived, with a very few naively expressing support for the American Muslim Advisory Council’s (AMAC) position and most expecting a propaganda and indoctrination event; the latter were prescient in this matter.

The AMAC advertised this event, Public Disclosure in a Diverse Society, as communities learning about and achieving a better understanding of their American Muslim neighbors, which they organized due to a “distasteful” Facebook post made by Coffee County Commissioner Barry West regarding Muslims; however, early into the presentation, the condensension and arrogance of U.S. Attorney Bill Killian and other speakers made it quite apparent that any dialogue was going to be one-sided, and we were there to receive a lecture on Muslims as victims in the U.S. and excuses for criminalizing our free speech under the existing civil rights codes and 18 U.S.C. 249-Hate Crimes Act…no wonder the crowd became “combative”…No matter how despicable, bigoted or inappropriate one may view expressions such as West’s, they cannot legally or constitutionally be stopped or infringed upon, as the AMAC and Bill Killian attempted to suggest!

Zak Mohyuddin, the first AMAC speaker stated, “Nothing stays the same, everything changes. How do we effectively manage the change… how do we manage the past?” He seemingly indirectly intimated that Americans would have to consider changes to laws and even the U.S. Constitution, so as to avoid slandering Muslims and insulting Islam and Muslim sensibilities. But in the Islamic world, the definition of “slander” is anything that offends Muslims, even if it is a historical fact!

Christians in America and across the globe are used to the idea that their religion is open to criticism and ridicule. Most accept this as a price of living in a free society, and even those Christians deeply offended by such criticism aren’t going about enmasse and killing over it, in the manner most Muslims do over every little perceived insult to Islam or Mohammed; while Muslims would be going crazy in the streets if Gordon Gee, president of Ohio State University, had jokingly addressed the Athletic Council with “You can’t trust those damn Muslims” rather than “You can’t trust those damn Catholics on a Thursday or Friday”, as he did recently, most Catholics would simply have a laugh over the silly remark.

Mohyuddin also alluded to “colonial injustices”, which made the audience groan in disbelief. America has bent over backwards in its efforts to help the Muslim community integrate and assimilate in one of the most tolerant nations in existence today. This comment illuminated the resentment many Muslims still have over Western domination of the post-colonial political structuring of the Middle East.

At one point during the propaganda film that was shown, ‘Welcome to Shelbyville’, a man identifying himself only as a Shelbyville pastor said, “We as Gods children..we need to get along with them (Muslims). Immediately, someone shouted, “Whatever happened to assimilation?”

Sabina Mohyuddin, born in Nashville and a Vandy graduate, delivered a sometimes rambling presentation in the face of numerous interruptions, which were largely provoked by her inaccurate version of American history and more Muslim victimology. Her narrative suggested that Muslims were working to strengthen America’s security, but we have already seen the AMAC align itself with CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood and actively work against Tennessee’s anti-terrorism bill; history shows that Muslim’s use America’s fascination with “moderates” to strike us when we least expect it, just like Anwar al-Awlaki, one of the world’s most notorious islamofascists, and also Abdurahman Alamoudi, a top Al Qaeda financier, who was promoted by Grover Norquist and welcomed at both the Clinton and Bush White House before being caught and sentenced to 23 years in prison in 2004!

In the name of multiculturalism, tools such as U.S. Attorney Bill Killian and FBI Special Agent Kenneth Moore have relaxed security procedures and scrutiny of the Muslim community in tandem with Homeland Security, which occured at the urging of the Islamic Society of North America and with the cooperation of John Brennan, Muslim convert and presidential advisor, in 2010. And, while Brennan gave assurances towards the protection of Muslim “civil rights”, he did not receive any reciprocal assurances of their commitment to opposing terrorism; both the Homeland Security and the Department of Justice have made their obeisance to Islam by cleansing their training materials of anything in their curriculum that gives offense to the various islamofascist Muslim organizations.

Kenneth Moore attempt to convince the crowd to ignore their own lying eyes and ears as he stated: “People think we want to step on and stifle their First Amendment rights. Nothing could be further from the truth.” One certainly must question Moore’s truthfulness, especially in light of Hillary Clinton’s collaborative work with Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC) regarding the implementation of UN Resolution 16/18 under the guise of civil rights laws.

Although touted as a resolution to combat “intolerance”, Resolution 16/18 advances Islamic intolerance. Should one accurately state that Mohammed was a hashish addict and a pedophile, under 16/18′s “incitement to imminent violence” clause as a “test of consequences”, one could be criminally prosecuted if their statement caused Muslims to lose their self-restraint and riot. Such a prior restraint on free speech would be chilling; the “test of consequences” corrupts a free society by clearing a path for any administration to create a “consequence”, a phony scenario, that could justify a change in America’s free speech rights, just as Obama attempted with the anti-Islamic video and the 9/11 attack at Benghazi!

Who will decide what is inflammatory? …What Muslim scholar or Muslim jurist is going to set the guidelines for our nation that determine what constitutes “blasphemy”?… How can any of this even pass Constitutional muster?

America has survived wars upon wars, numerous sneak attacks, communist infiltration, presidential assassinations and social upheaval over injustice in race relations, but many Americans have turned a blind-eye towards Islam, the very peril that has infiltrated the highest levels of our government as it seeks our destruction. A significant portion of U.S. citizens are currently disavowing the ideology of our American Heritage, as they substitute the rights of individuals with the rights of groups that are identified by race, ethnicity, sex and sexual preference; so, Special Agent Moore’s observation, “What has always seen us through difficult times has been our unity as Americans”, serves as a reminder in the search for solutions that we must rediscover our creed of ‘E Pluribus Unum’: We must reject multiculturalism and the calls to identify the United States with the Middle East, and we must reassert that we are a Western people…part of the Western Civilization’s family.

Blaspemy laws are pure Sharia doctrine, and they are antithetical to the U.S. Constitution and have no place in America. Any de facto blaspemy restrictions in the U.S. threatens free speech and the free exchange of ideas; islamofascists would be enabled by any such restrictions to crush debate in these United States, in the same manner they do throughout the Islamic world. Blasphemy laws narrow the bounds of acceptable discourse in all spheres of life from religion to literature and science to culture in general. Rather than criminalize free speech and general criticisms and debate, which only aids the islamofascists in their attempts to impose a spiritually void and harsh ideology upon all the world, this administration should end any discussion of speech with the OIC and the UN. Our government should reaffirm and declare that in a free society, all views and religions are subject to criticism and contradiction, and they should firmly defend freedom of expression: If any administration fails in this duty and their oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution, the American Patriots residing in Tennessee will not!

 

Voice of the Vanquished: a Warning from History

imagesCAHPKOZNIslam Versus Europe:

by Cheradenine Zakalwe  h/t BNI

This is a very interesting essay that was posted in French on the website kabyles.net. It is written by a Kabyle, one of the indigenous peoples of Algeria who were subjugated by Muslims. In the essay, the author reflects on the similarities of his own people’s historical experience of being islamised and what is happening to contemporary Europe, especially France. I’ve translated most of it but not all of it. If you can read French, I suggest you read all of it at the link provided.

When I was a teenager I thought that my ancestors were idiots, useless imbeciles for having accepted this miserable religion 15 centuries ago. I was ashamed of my people of origin. I forgot that they had simply been beaten in war and submitted to their conquerors who hurried to rewrite their history.

That twisted history that I learned myself at school and had to unlearn on my own, through effort and perseverance. Looking at France, Belgium, Germany, England, Spain and lots of other countries too, I realise that even people who have been warned can be islamised by stealth, by small innocent touches. In truth, it’s their political, cultural and economic environment that is being islamised under the attacks of new unassimilable North African populations.

As usual, the jihadists islamise the “continent” and the leaders first, then the “human content” adapts bit by bit after one or two generations. It’s a quiet colonisation of spirits and space. Of course the leaders of France deny it. It’s as if you’re looking at the big hand on a watch: fix your eyes on it and you would swear that it doesn’t move, but after a while it’s in a different place all the same. They fell for it!

French men, French women, don’t be surprised if one day the islamists force you to rewrite your own history. I say to you: don’t be surprised if you happen to notice it. They already forbid you, just by being there, from mentioning the battle of Poitiers and Charles Martel. In expecting you to teach in your schools that Charles Martel did not fight Islam, but only some undisciplined Muslim soldiers who took to pillaging.

They are already obliging you to revise your national identity by making you say publicly that Islam is one of the roots of France, waiting till it becomes the only root.

They already claim Victor Hugo was a Muslim, Commander Cousteau was a religious fanatic 5 times a day and that Bonaparte admired the genius of Islamic civilisation.

You liste soberly to Malek Chebel telling you about the Golden Age of Islam and to a “really nice” reading of the Koran without anyone laughing at it openly.

You already let Bouteldja insulte you with impunity on all the television panels and MRAP drags you in front of the courts with the first breath that isn’t halal.

You already hear Tariq Ramadan keep trotting out to you that jihad is a defensive combat, without anyone asking what the Muslims were defending themselves from in North Africa, Spain, the Balkans, India, Vienna and Poitiers.

You are already eating halal without knowing it and if this goes on, soon you will close your butcher’s shops and your bar terraces, without knowing it either. They have already put you on your knees byu forcing you to acknowledge the greatest lie in history, namely that the West discovered philosophy, mathematics, science, astronomy and technology thanksw to Islam which generously passed them on to you (all the same forgetting to pass them on to Muslims).

Soon, you will be ashamed in bulk of Pierre and Marie Curie, Voltaire, Pasteur, Flaubert, Claude Levis Strauss, Molière, Louis IV and Jean Moulin. These renegades betrayed the Islamic roots of France!

Islam doesn’t give a damn about the truth, history and the identity of peoples. The only thing that counts for it is that these people submit to its law. It demands therefore as a sign of submission that these peoples themselves revise their own history, making a travesty of the truth, deny their collective identity, change their cultural references, profane their ancient religious places and discredit their own symbols. This is what all the people conquered by Arabo-Islamism have done. This is what the majority of elite intellectuals, almost all elected representatives, the majority of artists and almost all the French media. Only the ordinary people remain, silently enraged. And even the ordinary people are infested with the suicidally naive.

I say to the French people who are collaborating and the French people who are sleeping: France, and beyond that all of Europe, is at an advanced stage of its islamisation from on high. You have already accepted Islam from the moment where the you complain about radical Islamand Salafists. That implies that you don’t have a problem with living under the yoke of an Islam that is temporarily more soft. ¬Don’t delude yourself: even the softest Islam will never renounce Sharia. Even if the islamist leaders in France promulgated a 100 year moratorium on everything that bothers the French, Sharia will remain a sword of Damocles that will fall fatally on your heads one day, unless you oppose Islam firmly and at the official level, without appeal.

You have already made Islam a religion of state when your leaders deal with the UOIF and CFCM, and trasnfer part of the authority of the state to them in a sign of allegiance. Islam is a religion of state in France from the moment where your leaders celebrate it, cajole it, subsidise it, protect it, it and it alone. In a good Islamic state, France manages the questions of hijab, burka, street prayers, halal, lamb sacrifice, breaking the fast during Ramadan and “Islamic events” with supposedly moderate Muslim dignitaries. These dignitaries treat the elected representatives of the people like veritable tribal chiefs from whom they need allegiance and loyalty. And they get it!

When Dalil Boubekeur [head of Islamic association] speaks, he presents himself as as a second head of state, head high, wth a facile tongue and an assurance ready for any test. Islam is now at home in France, A mini-Islamic republic in the Republic. The cuckoo has laid its egg. Just a few more recalcitrant “tribal chiefs” to be reduced and the country will be declared “Dar al Islam”. Then they’ll just have to learn the technical modalities for practising Islam through the assimilation method. Morocco and Algeria will supply (are already supplying) teachers paid for with the taxes – I mean the zakat – of the French taxpayer.

Ordinary French people aren’t blind. They see the pressures their politicians are subjected to from the communitarian Muslim population organised in strata:
The mass of practising Muslims brandished as a threat to public order, Moderately radical Muslims whom their leaders think of as reservists, The militants Islamists who deal with propaganda, lobbying and legal jihad, the Salafists who create a diversion and the terrorists who terrorise.

They form an ensemble of players who work in concert with only one objective: forcing the Republic to bend to their will by forcing the politicians and institutions to bend to their will. All are hammering on the same nail : sharia, the ultimate goal of Islamic doctrine. Do you think all the North Africans were islamised one by one the day after the landing at Oqba? No. It was necessary to islamise the chiefs of the tribes first of all, then mark the physical, political, cultural environment with Islamic markers. Once this environment has become familiar to the natives, the leaders have no trouble islamising their small tribes “en masse”. Sharia follows later to ensure that the process remains irreversible. That’s what the conquering Muslims in France are trying to do. Tariq Ramadan is the first to swear that there is no question of sharia in France. But inside he adds: “for now”. What Muslim, however moderate, would be ready to definitively and publicly renounce sharia? At best, they will defer it till later. The more cheeky claim that it is these others who are deficient in intellect and don’t properly understand sharia.

Not have weapons to match the West, the islamist conquerors don’t lower their arms for all that. They fight, conduct their jihad openly, mobilise more and more troops, form alliances with NGOs, infiltrate the political world, literally buy the conscience of elected officials and use the slightest flaw in the law to turn it to their advantage. As the icing on the cake, they authorise here and there some attacks and murders, to show the capacity of this foul ideology to do harm and thus paralyse any vague desire to resist. Ils montent haut la barre pour amener les Français à accepter un SMIG islamique dans un premier temps. The French leftists don’t understand that what they call Salafists are to the moderates (Moussaoui, Boubekeur, Ramadan and other preachers) what air power is to infantry. Air power smashes all serious defences, which allows the infantry to advance by stealth until it has encircled the enemy HQ and forced the generals to surrender. The French “generals” here are the elected representatives of the people and the government. They are surrendering one by one.

In the end, in France, the Islamist conquerors are doing their job of conquerors, but those who are supposed to defend the homeland – that is to say the politicians, the ministers, civil society, the intellectuals…- are not doing the job of patriots. That’s why Islam is penetrating into France like butter. Without the slightest resistance. Those who try to resist are just ordinary citizens who end up neutralised by the law, discredited by the politically correct or intimidated by the readymade thoughts beaten in day and night by the media. At the slightest misdemeanour, they are hauled in front of the tribunals under the ironic eye of the burka and kamis wearers, more arrogant than ever. This isn’t meant to discourage you, but I doubt very much that those who are Islam-aware in the virtual world are going to succeed in dissolving the UOIF, or the CFCM, or in getting an event of the pyromaniac Tariq Ramadan banned, or even closing the site oumma.com, this giant mosque filled with islamist propagande, brainwashing material and smears of French patriots. It’s no longer that the worm is inside the fruit, but the fruit is enmeshed in a tangle of slimy worms. In France, those who present themselves as saviours of Marianne [symbol of France] engage in navel-gazing, cry cock-a-doodle-doo, make fun of the islamists instead of combating them on the ground, get caught up in moaning and remain on the defensive against MRAP, LICRA, SOS Racisme [all “anti-racist” multicult associations] and other French “intellectuals”, notorious and well-established collaborators. These terrific online resistance fighters end up disappearing, like Bivouac ID and Liberty vox [French anti-Islam websites] or reduced to defending their skin like Riposte laïque.

In France, it is now fascist to fight against fascism. We’re right in 1984! Madness! It seems that fascism shouldn’t be fought against when it is hungry, when it is unemployed and when it is brought by hundreds of millions of people without resources, without culture, without education and, above all, without shame.

Source: Kabyles.net

 

Gaffney at Dallas Eagle Forum: Shariah and Civilization Jihad in America

Frank Gaffney spoke to the Dallas Eagle Forum on September 27, 2012, giving a short course on Shariah Law and Civilization Jihad in America.

 

 

Europe Bows to Muslim Demands to Limit Free Speech

By Soeren Kern:

Protests over an American-made anti-Islamic YouTube film, Innocence of Muslims, have spread to Europe. Muslim rioters have clashed with police in several European cities, and more demonstrations are being planned. The protests are part of widespread anger across the Muslim world about the amateur film, which ridicules Islam and depicts the Muslim Prophet Mohammed as a fraud, a madman and a sexual deviant.

Muslims in many European countries are calling on governments to outlaw the controversial film. They are also pressing elected officials to enact anti-blasphemy laws that would criminalize the criticism of Islam. As most European countries lack American-like First Amendment protections, the momentum is building for the imposition of legal curbs on free speech when such speech is perceived to be offensive to Islam.

Police clash with protesters in Belgium

In Belgium, police using pepper spray and batons arrested more than 200 Muslims in the northern city of Antwerp after clashes at a demonstration against the film. The protest in the Borgerhout district of the city was organized by an Islamic fundamentalist group called Sharia4Belgium. The protest was organized via a text message which read: “We are ready to work with our souls and hearts to fight for our beloved prophet, even if death comes to meet us. Whoever has love for the Prophet must be present.” In Brussels, police arrested more than 30 individuals who participated in two separate protests — one in the Sint-Joost-ten-Node district, and another one in downtown Brussels near the American embassy.

In Britain, some 300 Muslims protested in central London outside the American Embassy. The crowd included many radical Muslims associated with the hardline group, Hizb ut-Tahrir; they shouted slogans and held placards, saying, “America — Get Out of Muslim Lands.” The gathering, which consisted mostly of men but also some women and children, listened to speakers who condemned the film, U.S. foreign policy and the “oppression” of Muslims.

In France, police in Paris arrested 152 Muslims for taking part in an unauthorized, impromptu protest on September 15 at the Place de la Concorde near the American Embassy; there were a number of clashes, with four police officers hurt.

French Interior Minister Manuel Valls said he would prevent any further anti-American demonstrations sparked by the anti-Islam film. “I have issued instructions so that this does not happen again,” Valls told France 2 television. “These protests are forbidden. Any incitement to hatred must be fought with the greatest firmness.” Valls also said that among the roughly 250 protesters, there were some groups that “advocate radical Islam.”

Nevertheless, Muslims have now issued a call via text messages and social media for new protests to be held on Saturday, September 22, at 2pm at the Trocadero district in Paris. The President of the anti-immigrant National Front party, Marine Le Pen, said the protests mark the beginning of a process of “intimidation” by Muslims.

In Germany, major Muslim umbrella organizations have warned that the movie could “endanger the public peace” and lead to “street massacres” in German cities. The chairman of Germany’s Central Council of Muslims, Aiman ​​Mazyek, has also called for a legal ban on the film within the Federal Republic. “I do think that we must use all legal means to ban the film,” Mazyek said in an interview with ARD television. Mazyek continued that the video had the goal of “sowing discord and hatred,” and therefore “I would use all means possible to outlaw the film.”

German political leaders are now equivocating about their commitment to free speech. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, commenting on the anti-Islam movie, said, “I can imagine there would be good reasons to outlaw the film” – a reversal of her statement of just two years ago, when, commenting on the Danish cartoon controversy, she declared: “Free speech is one of the greatest treasures of our society.”

Separately, Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich said he would consider all legal options to ban public showings of the anti-Islamic film. He said Islamic extremists such as the Salafists are likely to incite violent protests within Germany, which Friedrich called a “highly dangerous” situation.

Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle has also pleaded for a ban on the movie, arguing that freedom of expression has its limits. “The abuse of a religion that is likely to disturb the public peace is forbidden to us,” he said in an interview on Deutschlandfunk German radio. He also argued that a ban on the film would send the message that “Germany does not stand behind right-wing radicals who insult other religions.”

Section 166 of the German Penal Code already restricts free speech when it involves “insulting religion or belief.” In a landmark Section 166 case in 2006, for example, a German retiree in Lüdinghausen was sentenced to 12 months in prison for writing the words “Koran, the holy Koran” on toilet paper and mailing it local mosques.

Read more at Radical Islam

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group.

2012 Tipping Point?

There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures. William Shakespeare

By Frank Gaffney, Jr.

History is replete with examples of strategic miscalculations in which an over-reach – usually born of contemptuous disdain for a foe – led to disaster for the aggressor.  Think Napoleon’s invasion of Russia in 1812.  Or Hitler’s of the Soviet Union 131 years later. We may look back at September 11, 2012 as the kick-off date for such a tipping point in our time.

To be sure, the Muslim Brotherhood and its fellow Islamists – notably, al Qaeda franchises throughout the Middle East and beyond, other so-called “Salafists,” Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia and the mullahs of Iran – were becoming increasingly aggressive towards us even before last week’s mayhem in Libya, Egypt, Yemen, etc.  Team Obama (notably in the person of its hapless and overexposed UN Ambassador, Susan Rice) and its running dogs in the elite media would nonetheless have us believe that the upset is the by-product of an amateurish short video that disparages Mohamed.

In fact, as most sentient beings have realized by now, that film is but the latest pretext for Islamists to demand our adherence to what they call shariah blasphemy laws.  [Such laws are but a part of the larger, brutally repressive Islamic political, military and legal doctrine that prohibits any expression that offends, or otherwise is unhelpful to, their faith.]

Unfortunately, the Obama administration has repeatedly conveyed a willingness to accommodate – or at least tolerate – this threat to one of our most fundamental constitutional liberties: freedom of speech.  That willingness is part of a pattern of submissive behavior that has encouraged the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies to believe that America is in retreat and that shariah’s inevitable, divinely-directed and global triumph is at hand.  Their response, predictably, is to redouble efforts to make us, in the Quran’s words, “feel subdued.”

Examples of such behavior abound.  Consider just a few of the more telling cases-in-point (for more, visit www.MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com):

  • In May 2009, President Obama insisted that Muslim Brotherhood representatives be in the audience for his first speech directed at the Islamic world.  It was delivered at Cairo University and freighted with apologies for past U.S. policies and efforts to associate himself with the beliefs and priorities of his audience.
  • Interestingly, Mr. Obama had already operationalized that policy approach two months before, by having the U.S. delegation to the UN Human Rights Council co-sponsor with Egypt a resolution drafted by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).  The object of the exercise was to further the OIC’s longstanding objective of forcing UN member nations to prohibit and criminalize expression that offends Islam.
  • In July 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton launched a formal effort with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation dubbed the “Istanbul Process” to explore ways in which our First Amendment rights could accommodate shariah blasphemy laws.  (Some of those playing an influential role in this exercise are discussed in a booklet about “The Muslim Brotherhood in the Obama Administration” I just published with the David Horowitz Freedom Center: http://frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/the-muslim-brotherhood-in-the-obama-administration/.)
  • In December 2011, the Istanbul Process achieved an ominous milestone:  The odious UN Human Rights Council adopted, with strong U.S. support, Resolution 16/18 committing member nations to adopt “measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on religion or belief.”  Lest anyone think this a clever finesse, more or less in alignment with current U.S. law, the OIC’s secretary general made clear that his organization did not view it as “the end of the road.”  And, indeed, developments of the past week – both here and abroad, official and non-governmental – suggest that Team Obama is prepared to go farther, too.

Given such encouragement, it is not surprising that the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies would respond by demanding further accommodations to them and their shariah agenda.  What is a surprise, though, is that they are acting out their ambitions at this juncture – not after November 6th, when President Obama will, in his words, “have more flexibility.”  It suggests that the Islamists have reached their tipping point, propelled to seek decisive domination by President Obama’s perceived weakness, irresolution and submissiveness.

In the face of our enemies’ overreaching aggressiveness, however, the American people now face a tipping point of their own.  If they arrive at the only sensible conclusion – namely, that four more years of the Obama administration’s malfeasance with respect to jihadism of both the violent and the stealthy, pre-violent kind – they may just respond by refusing to re-up a presidency that enables and emboldens our foes and undermines our liberties and friends.  And should such a tipping point be realized, it will be one of truly epic historic proportions and prized by freedom-loving peoples forever.

Islamic Murder, Western Submission

by Paul Weston

The word “Islam” when translated into English means “submission”. The general idea is that Muslims submit to Allah and all non-Muslims around the world submit to Muslims. The Islamic murder of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens earlier this week provides a frightening looking glass through which the sheer scale of Western submission to Muslim violence and terror can be viewed.

The murder of a U.S. Ambassador is effectively an act of war. It shouldn’t matter that the murderers attempted to dress this up as a natural (in the Muslim world) reaction to some obscure YouTube video negatively portraying Mohammed. The only thing that matters is the cold blooded murder of a human being.

The immediate reaction of the Western political and media class was horrifying. Barack Obama issued a statement which included the following: “While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants.

Not wishing to be outdone in abject cowardice and evasion, the American Embassy in Cairo went out of its way to excuse the Muslim murderers: “The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims. … We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.” [Note: the linked press release has since been pulled – ed.]

Obama and his representatives are essentially siding with the murderers here. The attacks had nothing to do with the denigration of Mohammed. Spontaneous gatherings of protestors tend not to come armed with rocket propelled grenades. To regurgitate the lie of yet more contrived Muslim displeasure is to actively excuse their murderous behaviour.

A well planned series of attacks, carried out on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 against American Embassies in various parts of the middle-east simply did not happen because some unknown Joe posted a video on YouTube. What they really represent is yet another small part of Islam’s ongoing war against the West.

And why does Obama call it “senseless violence?” There is nothing senseless about it in the eyes of the perpetrators. They knew exactly what they were doing, and they also knew that if they provided a wholly contrived pretext for it, the Dhimmis in the West would dutifully parrot their lies.

Have you noticed there is no reference to murder in Obama’s statement? Despite the fact they were clearly murdered (and possibly sodomised and tortured) Obama would rather not acknowledge this stark reality. Their lives were “taken” you see, by some ambiguous people with no apparent
motive other than being angry.

This cowardly use of deceptive wording is shocking. Hard-line Islamists carried out the barbaric murders in the name of Islam against non-Muslims. Period. There is no other honest way of describing it.

And why is it an abuse of free speech to criticise, or to tell the truth about Mohammed?

Is it not a fact that he was himself a murderer and a warlord?

Is it not a fact that political Islam and religious Islam cannot be separated in the eyes of Muslims?

Is it therefore not a fact that to refer to the criticism of a political/religious
ideology as an “abuse” of free speech is tantamount to elevating political Islam
to a height beyond democratic discourse?

Read more at Gates of Vienna

 

The GOP’s ‘No Foreign Law’ Platform

by: Karen Lugo:

Republican convention delegates voted last week to adopt a platform plank, cautioning against the use of foreign law in U.S. courts. While jurists such as Supreme Court Justice Scalia have said that “foreign legal materials can never be relevant to an interpretation of the meaning of the U.S. Constitution,” and Justice Thomas has written that the Court should not “impose foreign moods, fads, or fashions on Americans,” other jurists have searched foreign legal sources to locate “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.”

This GOP platform provision, however, represents something beyond concern over the practice of buttressing sketchy legal reasoning with extra-American sources; the GOP statement also objects to Sharia law or any other foreign legal code that threatens to creep into judicial decisions disguised as validated ethnic customs. As suggested, this admonition would apply when claims in a legal dispute are based upon cultural codes with deficient individual and civil right protections compared to American constitutional standards.

The publicized New Jersey spousal abuse case first raised widespread alarm when a trial court judge refused to issue a restraining order against a husband despite the established record of domestic violence and assault (reversed on appeal). The judge ruled that the husband did not demonstrate sufficient legal criminal intent in light of an imam’s testimony that wives are required to comply with husbands’ sexual demands. The man’s wife, known in the opinion as S.D., was 17 on the day of her wedding and did not know the bridegroom before the marriage ceremony in Morocco.

Another case that presented the Sharia terms of a foreign marriage in an American court is that of Joohi Hosain. When Joohi left her marriage (under strict Sharia rules, wives are not generally allowed to sue for divorce), her husband in Pakistan sued for custody of their daughter, Joohi fled to America on a student visa with her daughter, and eventually presented her custody case in U.S. courts after her by-then-ex-husband pursued her to Maryland. Although Joohi explained that making an appearance in a Pakistani court would likely result in accusations of adultery and the possible punishment of whipping or stoning, the Maryland appellate court determined that even so, the mother had the notice and opportunity to be heard and was thus afforded proper due process. The Maryland Court of Special Appeals then deferred to the Pakistani ruling that it was in the best interest of the child for the father to have primary custody.

About half of the cases involving Sharia family customs which have been presented for adjudication by American judges involve marriages solemnized in other countries, but many Islamic domestic marriages are also based on Sharia norms. These domestic unions present unique challenges: they often begin with disregard for the state law regarding the registration of officiants and the licensing of marriages. Even worse is the disregard for due process and informed contract formation when marriages and property distributions are arranged without the bride’s participation.

After a review of both foreign and domestic Islamic marriages, I recently presented a survey to the Federalist Society that considered both published and unpublished family court cases that adjudicated Sharia terms. To date, about 25 U.S. family law cases reflect the U.S. approval of the Sharia-based marital terms in the family court or the court of appeal.

Read more at Radical Islam

Karen Lugo is the Founder of the Libertas-West Project and a co-director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence.

The New Islamic Vigilantes of Speech

by EDWARD  CLINE:

David J. Rusin of the Middle East Forum recently published an article on Islamist  Watch about the vandalizing of “anti-Islamic” ads. He reveals just how  pervasive the phenomenon is worldwide.

When Cyrus McGoldrick, advocacy director for the New York office of the  Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR),  logged into Facebook  on August 12 to hint at his desire to vandalize anti-jihad ads that may soon run  on city buses, he did not simply underline CAIR’s troubling attitude toward free  expression. McGoldrick’s words – and the subsequent actions of others – have  illuminated an overlooked aspect of the Islamist assault on Western speech: the  defacement, if not obliteration, of political and commercial messages.

Of particular interest is the destruction of print or commercial ads of  scantily clad women. I find this interesting because of the near psychotic or  pathological mindset about women that Islam inculcates in Muslim men.

This phenomenon has been especially prevalent in the UK. A Times of  London article revealed in 2005 that Muslims Against Advertising (MAAD) had  launched a website with instructions on how to vandalize ads and which ones to  select. “There is no longer any need to cringe as you walk past a sleazy  poster,” the group declared. “We’ll improve it.” Many answered the call, as ads  pitching bras, beauty products, and even television programs were trashed.  “Photographs of semi-dressed women are the most frequently targeted, with the  offending body parts painted over or ripped off,” the Times observed. In a  telling example, thugs destroyed images of scantily clad women on an East London  billboard promoting the series Desperate Housewives, but fully clothed  characters were untouched. Responding to the controversy, leading British  Islamist Ahmed Sheikh argued that “freedom of speech should end when you offend  others.”

Cultural jihad, or the de facto imposition of Sharia  law on Western non-Muslims, is insidiously accumulative. In Britain it begins  with such things as complaining about images or figures of pigs that Muslims  might see in a bank or a shop. They are removed so that Muslims are not  offended. Next will come a complaint about halal food not being served in  restaurants and schools. Non-Muslims will be served it, as well, with or without  their knowledge. Next will be a complaint that one must have some place to pray  five times a day, and if an employer does not provide such a space, the street  outside will do just as well, and damn the traffic jam caused by hundreds of  Muslims mooning non-Muslims as they express their obeisance to a rock thousands  of miles away. Language must also be altered to preempt potential  offense. Muslim criminal suspects are called “Asians.” Polygamy is taboo among  non-Muslims, but Muslim men collecting welfare and enjoying subsidized housing  may have several dependent wives and a dozen dependent children. The taxes  collected to pay for their special welfare is a form of jizya, or a tax  levied on conquered infidels. Muslims may demonstrate en masse, displaying signs  that damn freedom of speech, sneer at British culture, warn of violence if  non-Muslims resist, and predict the Islamization of Britain, and not be charged  with hate speech. Any other group behaving in such an obnoxious manner would see  its members hauled into court. Criticism of Islam is forbidden and  regarded as “defamation,” “bigotry,” or “racism.” Muslim activists are  aggressive in this respect, going after not only titillating ads but serious  discussions of Islam. Rusin writes:

Islamists also have adapted to the information age, recognizing that much of  the Western speech they despise now exists online. Al-Azhar University scholars,  representatives of the highest religious authority in the Sunni Muslim world,  even crafted a fatwa in 2008 that sanctions hacking for the purposes of jihad.  Therefore, those who criticize Islam or otherwise offend its followers often  find that their freedom of expression is no safer on the internet than it is on  a Tower Hamlets billboard. Arab News sympathetically profiled one such  hacker, a Saudi native, in 2011. “An Alkhobar woman studying in the United    States is taking credit for destroying 23 Danish websites that denigrated the  Prophet Muhammad,” the piece begins, relaying material originally published by  an Arabic-language source. “Nouf Rashid told the Arabic newspaper she was  hacking into Danish websites having references to cartoons of the Prophet along  with other sites that had questionable content in her view,” including  pornographic ones.

The focus here, however, is the pseudo-ironic and psychotic symbiosis  between a creed/ideology that finds bare female anatomy offensive, yet is lured  to it in spite of the proscriptions against it. There is a link  between such vandalizing and the rape and often disfigurement of non-Muslim  women in Europe by Muslims, the “sex slave” rings recently exposed in Britain,  and the honor-killings of Muslim-born women and girls who break Islamic rules  and “go Western.” This has everything to do with the Muslim dictum compelling  women to cover themselves up as much as possible in burqas, veils or some other  form of self-effacing garb, depending on the Islamic sect. The  phenomenon swings wildly, like bipolar dysfunction, between the vigilante  censorship described by Rusin and incidents such as the rape of Lara Logan in  Cairo, in which her clothes were ripped from her and even part of her hair torn  out during the assault. That was not the only such incident endured by Western  women in Cairo, but it is the most notorious. Her attackers wished to extinguish  Logan, to wipe her out of existence.

This is the behavior of  nihilists.

Read more: Family Security Matters

Edward Cline is the author of the Sparrowhawk novels set in  England  and Virginia in the pre-Revolutionary period, of several detective and  suspense  novels, and three collections of his commentaries and columns, all  available on  Amazon Books. His essays, book reviews, and other articles have  appeared in The  Wall Street Journal, the Journal of Information Ethics and other  publications.  He is a frequent contributor to Rule of Reason, Family Security  Matters,  Capitalism Magazine and other Web publications. 

No Common Ground

by Justin O Smith:

Genesis 16:12 “And he will be a wild ass of a man; his hand will be against every man…” -Hebrew Bible

The barbaric ideology of Islam can no longer be tolerated in America, and we must facilitate its change or its self-destruction through direct ideological and philisophical confrontations. This must be done, because Islam represents an ideology that declared war on the West, and specifically America decades ago. And contrary to current U.S. policies and some positions asserted by misguided segments of the Church, there exists no common ground to be found with Islamic religious leaders.

The battle to halt the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro is far from over, since
attorney Joe Brandon petitioned federal Judge Kevin Sharp to let him intervene
in the Dept of Justice case, that resulted in the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for the ICM. Brandon rightfully stated, “It doesn’t follow the law.”
And on August 29, Judge Sharp ruled that the ICM opponents can
intervene.

DOJ attorney Eric W. Treene made an asinine comparison of ICM opponents to “people not wanting the desegregation of schools.” Black people were only seeking rights that were long overdue to them, not the destruction of the U.S. government or the U.S. Constitution in the manner of many Muslims, who also use our system to demand rights above and beyond those guaranteed by law.

For anyone still in doubt about the intent or the forces behind the ICM, one should view the picture of CAIR Chairman Awad Nihad standing just to the side of Essam Fathy as the opening of the ICM was announced on July 19. Yes… Nihad… the man who has continually reiterated Ibrahim Hooper’s statement that “Islam is not here to be one of many religions. Islam is here to dominate.” This perfectly illustrates that Islam on the whole…the “ummah”… cannot and will not ever fully assimilate with American culture or truly abide by the U.S. Constitution; their purpose is the conquest of America!

In Russia last month, a suicide bomber killed seven police officers attending a
funeral, wounding fifteen others; a week later in Tatarstan, 500 miles east of
Moscow, another attack occurred in an area where they thought “peaceful
coexistence” had been achieved between Muslims and Christians. Why am I telling you this in relation to America’s Islamic problem? Because this is what can be expected eventually, wherever Islam sets up shop.

Muslims have trouble living peacefully with their neighbors. In Lebanon, Maronite Christians have fought a losing battle with Muslim invaders from Iran, Syria and Jordan. The Muslim Fulani-Hausa of Nigeria has callously attempted to systematically destroy the Christian Igboo tribes, and in the same manner, Sudan’s Muslims have engaged in genocide against South Sudan’s Christians and Animists. In southern Thailand, Muslims have raised insurgencies against a Buddhist government, while in the southern Phillipines, a Muslim insurgency fights for “independence” from a Catholic country and government. Out of fifty-nine conflicts occurring in the 1990s, sixty-six percent were Muslims attacking other Muslims or non-Muslims, and today that figure hovers near 90%.

Michael Powell, New York Times columnist, recalls his conversation in a mosque with a Muslim cleric in upstate New York, Lackawanna, in 2002: “I was trying to figure out why this seemingly gentle man had allowed a stern young man from Saudi Arabia to counsel impressionable Yemeni-American teenagers. That stern sort turned out to be an Al Qaeda recruiter. And those impressionable young men ended up in training camps in Pakistan and are now doing long stretches in penitentiaries in the United States.”

During this recent respite from terrorist acts (don’t hold your breath), the Islamists from Tulsa to Chicago to Garden City and home to Murfreesboro have accelerated their political agendas…their political “jihad”/holy war… under the guise of “cultural exchange” programs (read indoctrination/ propaganda) in our Public School Systems through Islamist groups, such as Connecting Cultures and the TN American Muslim Advisory Council.

Their protectors in the highest echelons of every branch of our Tennessee and
U.S. governments try to make us believe that there are no religious connotations associated with these programs, and They Lie! The Muslim culture is Islam… the “ummah”/their community centers around Islam… they are entertwined and one in the same… Islam defines their culture!

Do the Muslims have to integrate with us, or do we have to integrate with them? These are the United States of America with a legal system/framework based largely on English Common Law and in Judeo-Christian principles, which are an important part of our national identity. The answer should be obvious, and yet, some of our elected officials, along with the Islamists, seem to suggest that it is us who must integrate with them!

In their quest for power and wealth, politicians from the Far Left, like Obama and Rep Mary Waters, and the RHINO-Right, like Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Rep Eric Cantor and Gov Bill Haslam, have unified in an unholy Triple Alliance with Islam like a private club that shelters a likely 6-8
million Sons of Allah and God only knows how many real terrorists, terrorist
candidates or future terrorists. A club that fornicates with the Islamists like
a whore and fills its pockets with dirty petrodollars… the very petrodollars
that fund terrorism, buys our banks and our industrial and commercial firms… a
club that dares to speak of “cultural similarities with the Middle East.” What
the hell are these mentally deficient chatterers saying? Where the hell is there
any similarity between America’s culture and Islam or the Middle East?!? At
Kabul? At Bethlehem, at Damascus at Beirut?!? At Baghdad, at Cairo, at Tehran, at Mecca?!?

Those champions of Islam invoke a solitary diatribe where, in the name of “liberal thought and of intellectual generosityy”, issues are seen from one point of view only. The Islamists of CAIR and TN AMAC ask for the withdrawal and/or revision of textbooks referencing anything Christian related or that makes no mention of the presumed contributions Islam has made to America’s culture; because virtually everything about modern America originates in the Judeo-Christian principles and values, this amounts to nothing less than a demand for us to deny Our Heritage and historical fact. They also ask us to accept Sharia concepts/ Koranic Law within our education system, especially universities. Have we any evidence of their intention to explain, in the spirit of “cultural exchange”, the enormity of contributions that Christianity and Western values have brought the world and Islamic communities? Shouldn’t we hand them a flat, resounding “NO!”, as we suggest they can either assimilate or move to some balmy Middle Eastern community where the wonders of Sharia compliant societies can be fully experienced everywhere?

In the meantime, open U.S, borders and non-existent enforcement of immigration laws by the Obama administration has placed the nation at extreme risk, as U.S. Border Agents have noted numerous abandoned prayer rugs and Korans at our borders with Mexico. Many U.S. military leaders are still saying, “It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when” in regards to possible Islamic backed biological, chemical or nuclear weapons attacks on major U.S. population centers. As terrible a threat as this truly represents, an equal and more insidious threat lies in the continued legal and illegal immigration of Muslims into the U.S., and it must be stopped at all costs… this threatens the very essence of American culture!

Justin O. Smith is a concerned citizen with a B.S.-MTSU/ International Relations & Cultural Geography, ex-firefighter, U.S. Army and freelance writer.

Related articles

GOP Platform Addresses Sharia Encroachment

By Andrew Bostom:

Reports  (at “Live”  wire , repeated at Salon)  are quoting Kansas Republican Secretary of State Kris Kobach to the effect that  the GOP platform has adopted an amendment which addresses Sharia encroachment.  Kobach stated,

We  see it from the top where the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly quoted  foreign law in interpreting our U.S. constitution and it’s actually coming in at  the bottom as well, it’s being raised as an argument in courts around the  country. We actually put a provision affecting Kansas statute this year and I  think it’s important for us to say foreign sources of law should not be used as  part of common law decisions or statutory interpretations by judges in the lower  state courts as well.

…I’m  not aware of any court that’s accepted the argument, but in cases involving  either spousal abuse or assault or other crimes against persons, sometimes  defenses are raised that are based in Sharia law

Despite  the predictable sneering and distressing ignorance which frames these reports by  two agitprop  “journalists,”  and Kobach’s own noble, if incomplete assessment of the profundity of the  problem, this is very welcome news.

Kobach  referred to Kansas’s recently passed law-a version of American Laws for American  Courts (ALAC) legislation-which should remind us all that the earliest of these  laws (now also passed in Tennessee, Arizona, and Louisiana) have been in effect  for several years without being challenged, let alone overturned. David  Yerushalmi recently provided a very clear, didactic example of the need for  ALAC-style laws, which corrects Kobach’s assessment about courts not having  accepted Sharia-based arguments.

Yersuhlami  described in brief an appellate court decision from Maryland, cited in a Center for Security  Policy Study, where

…the  court enforced a Pakistani Sharia court’s judgment of custody  in favor of the father even though the mother had argued that she was not  provided due process because had she gone to Pakistan to contest the case, she could have been subject to capital  punishment for having a new relationship with a man not sanctioned by sharia.

The  salient facts of the case,  and appellate court ruling, were summarized by  Yerushalmi as follows:

The  Maryland appellate court ruled that since the woman could not prove she’d be  executed had she gone to Pakistan to litigate custody in the Pakistan Sharia  Court, which is a national-state court in Pakistan, her failure to go to  Pakistan and take the risk of execution precluded her from making the void as  against public policy argument. ALAC  would have provided the Maryland appellate court the legislative clarity to have  reversed the lower court’s outrageous  decision.

Here  are the Maryland appellate court’s own words, cited by Yerushalmi:

Additionally,  appellant [the mother] asserts that the Pakistani custody orders were founded on  principles of law repugnant to Maryland public policy because the Pakistani  courts allegedly “penalized the mother for not appearing without considering the  affect of her admission to adultery on her ability to return to Pakistan.” In  this regard, appellant points out that if convicted under Pakistani criminal law, her penalty could be public whipping or death  by stoning. Although Dr. Malik [the expert] opined that appellant would be arrested for adultery if she returned to  Pakistan for the custody proceedings, he also conceded that punishment for  adultery was extremely unlikely and that proving the crime was extremely  difficult. Given this testimony, the circuit court was not clearly erroneous in  not considering the effect of whether appellant’s admission to adultery [under  sharia] was “repugnant” to Maryland public policy in its failure to find that  the Pakistani courts punished her for not appearing.”}

Let  me summarize for the (hope against hope) edification of  the “Live”  wire , and Salon,  agitprop journalists, the liberty-crushing, dehumanizing nature of Sharia:  open-ended jihadism to subjugate the world to a totalitarian Islamic order;  rejection of bedrock Western liberties-including freedom of conscience and  speech-enforced by imprisonment, beating, or death; discriminatory relegation of  non-Muslims to outcast, vulnerable pariahs, and even Muslim women to subservient  chattel; and barbaric punishments which violate human dignity, such as  amputation for theft, stoning for adultery, and lashing for alcohol  consumption.

I  would also point out how the two agitpropjournalists  steadfastly ignore: ominous polling data from US  Muslims; jihad funding trial  revelations and the content of more banal Muslim litigation  proceedings; mosque  surveillance reports; analyses  of Islamic education institutions and their Muslim schoolchildren’s textbooks;  the issuance of obscurantist “fatwas” (Islamic legal rulings) by the respected,  mainstream Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America; and an open declaration by  one of America’s largest mainstream Muslim organizations, the Islamic Circle of  North America (ICNA), in its 2010 ICNA Member’s  Hand Book, which calls for the (re-)creation of a global Muslim Caliphate,  and the imposition of Sharia in America.

Notwithstanding  the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America’s (AMJA’s) mainstream acceptance,  including uncritical  endorsement of its seventh annual American conference in Houston (October  15-18, 2010) to train American imams, AMJA  has issued rulings which sanction the killing of apostates (here),  “blasphemers” (including non-Muslims guilty of this “crime”; here),  or adulterers (by stoning to death, here),  and condone  marital rape. Even more ominously, another Arabic-language fatwa from AMJA’s Dr.  Salah Al-Sawy leaves open the possibility for offensive jihad against America  and the West, as soon as Muslims are strong enough to do so. When asked whether  “the Islamic missionary effort in the West … [was] to the point where it could  take advantage of offensive jihad,” Al-Sawy ruled:

The  Islamic community does not possess the strength to engage in offensive jihad at  this time. With our current capabilities, we are aspiring toward defensive  jihad, and to improve our position with regards to jurisprudence at this stage.  But there is a different discussion for each situation. Allah Almighty knows  best.

Just  six months ago (3/14/12), Translating  Jihad put what one might wish to deem as these circumscribed, “purely  Islamic” rulings, in a more disturbing-and entirely unacceptable, seditious  context. AMJA’s own  words make plain the organization’s long term commitment to superseding the  US legal code with its antithesis, a Sharia-based system.

Read more at American Thinker