President Obama: “We are not at war with Islam” – but is Radical Islam at War with Us?

ISIS Foreign Fighters Source: ADL

ISIS Foreign Fighters Source: ADL

NER, by Jerry Gordon, Feb. 19, 2015:

On Wednesday, February 18, 2014 at a White House Summit, President Obama presented his views on countering “violent extremism”.  He suggested that Islamic terrorists misappropriate Islamic doctrine, exploit disaffected youths in communities across the US and globally throughout the Ummah- the community of Muslim believers. He suggested that youths prone to radicalization outside the US may be victimized by poverty, without job opportunities and oppressed by corrupt regimes. Countering violent extremism he suggests is a multi-pronged approach involving economic programs, political reform and community involvement to halt radicalization. His focus in the US was on creating community partnerships and pilot projects in several American cities, endeavoring to integrate Muslims in America, preserving and protecting their civil rights under our constitution against untoward surveillance. The President gathered Muslim and other religious clerics from the US and abroad, community leaders, law enforcement, homeland security officials, and high tech entrepreneurs seeking means of stopping radicalization of youths. Youths  attracted by the ‘successes’ of  the Islamic State blasted around the world via the internet,  tens of thousands of tweets, high production videos and on-line webzines in a number of languages including English.

Watch this C-Span video excerpt of the President’s remarks at the White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism:

Nowhere in his remarks , did  the President explain what the Islamic doctrine is that has attracted tens of thousands of foreign fighters, Americans  among them,  to be recruited to the cause of this self-styled Caliphate, the Islamic State (IS).  What he has called ISIL, the Islam State in the Levant (ISIL) is a reference to the broad geographic area that stretches from the Mediterranean coast of Israel to the shore of the Persian Gulf encompassing the Arabian Peninsula.   Those ‘successes’ include videos of the savagery perpetrated against the hated Kuffars, Infidels, including Christians, Jews, ancient religious minorities and apostate Muslims.  Those videos show barbaric beheadings, burnings, crucifixions, mass shootings and enslavement.   The President mentioned recent incidents in Paris, Copenhagen, Ottawa and Sydney of attacks on victims without naming the victims; leftists, free thinkers, Christians and Jews. Neither did he identify the perpetrators.  He used the unfortunate murder of three Muslims in North Carolina by an alleged atheist insinuating that it may have been a hate crime equivalent to Antisemitism.  Interestingly, 60 percent of FBI hate crimes reported involve Antisemitic acts, such as vandalism spray painted on garage doors in Madison, Wisconsin last weekend.  Less than 12 percent of such FBI reports involve hate crimes against Muslims.   Coincidentally, the ADL, which the White House invited to the Summit, released a report,   Homegrown Islamic Extremism in 2014, identifying American Muslims involved in perpetrating violent hate crimes and others arrested in the process of leaving to join IS.

February 18th coincided with Ash Wednesday in the Christian calendar signifying the onset of the 40 days of Lent.  The ashes of burned palm fronds dobbed on the foreheads of professing Christians as an emblem of penitence reflects the biblical injunction about the fragility of life   as stated in   Genesis: 3:19: “For dust you are and to dust you shall return.”   Notice of recent atrocities committed against Christians by IS was reflected in remarks of Pope Francis in Rome and Cardinal Donald Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington.  Pope Francis remarked   about the by masked IS followers on the shores  of Libya beheading of 21 Coptic Christians communicating a message to all Nations of the Cross that conquest of Rome could follow, “ they are Christians, the  blood of our brothers and sisters cries out.” Following the slaughter of Christians in Libya IS perpetrated in Iraq, a barbaric burning alive of 45 Kurdish captives held in cages.

Just prior to the mid-February White House Summit, The Atlantic Magazine published an article by Graeme Wood, What ISIS Really Wants.  The subtext capsules the arguments propounded   by Wood:

The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what that means for its strategy—and for how to stop it.

Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam in an email exchange with this writer after reading the Wood Atlantic article commented, “This is a jump in level. First, [Bill] Mahr and now this. The lib/progressive clue phone is ringing.”  Russian historian at Connecticut Central State University, Professor Jay Bergman, wrote, “I read it.  Superb.  The [President] should read it.  But of course…he won’t.”

According to Wood, IS bases all of its power and authority on a strict adherence to a Salafi literal interpretation of Islam and Sharia law, with almost a total focus on the doctrine of Tawhid.  Tawhid calls for strict adherence to the laws of Allah as revealed by the Prophet Mohammed. Further that  all man-made laws and systems must be rejected.  IS considers, any Muslim who  doesn’t adhere  to the doctrine of  Tawhid , an infidel, including “core Al Qaeda” and other Salafists who object to IS public displays  of savagery.

Wood reveals the Tawhid doctrine of IS citing spokesman Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Adnani and   Western experts like Professor Bernard Heykal at Princeton.  Wood interviewed proponents of these same Salafist Jihadist views exemplified by “prophetic methodology” of the exemplar Mohammed, Allah’s messenger.  Among  leading Salafists in the west  interviewed  by  Wood  is Sheik Anjem Choudary in the UK, a subject of monitoring by Mi-5 for his radical views.  Wood’s interview with Australian radical Muslim preacher and IS recruiter Musa Cerantonio, reveals the apocalyptic end time vision espoused by Salafists.   Wood explains how doctrine IS is faithful  to foundational  Islam anchored in Sharia and Islamic legal rulings, frequently citing them in conduct of its feats of savage barbarity. He also notes how  the leaders of the Islamic State, considers the leaders of  the Muslim Brotherhood , Al Qaeda and even other Salafists  as takfir, apostates, subject to death  fatwas.

Read more

Truth About Why Politicians IGNORE Islam EXPLAINED PERFECTLY

Shoebat.com, by Ben Barrack on February 8, 2015

No one knows better than Shoebat.com readers the frustration of Americans – and westerners in general – have with political leaders who so blatantly ignore Islam. The video below doesn’t eliminate that frustration but it may help prevent you from beating your head against the wall as hard.

In the video below (cued up at right moment), Dr. Bill Warner nails it. He has a PhD in math and physics but has also mastered and perfectly enunciates the violent and vicious history of Islam through the centuries. You can watch the entire video in an earlier post but the crescendo is so good and the diagnosis is so spot-on at the end, we encourage everyone to watch it.

The reason western leaders and politicians don’t tell you the truth or stand up against the true threat is indeed fear but that’s an oversimplification that fails to tell you the why. In this clip (the last two minutes of the 44 minute video), Warner gives you the why and you don’t want to miss it.

Bill Warner on Jihad versus Crusades

Published on Aug 20, 2014 by Bill Warner

Whenever you’re dealing with an apologist for Islam, or even a Muslim, and you bring up jihad, almost immediately, they kickback to you: “But what about those terrible crusades? Why they’re the moral justification for jihad and we’re just as bad as they are. So let’s not talk about jihad, okay? Let’s talk about the Crusades.”

Well, what I would like to talk about here, are facts. I created a database of 548 battles that Islam fought: jihad battles against classical civilization. This isn’t even all the battles. It doesn’t include battles Africa, India, Afghanistan and other locations. It’s primarily at data base of the battles against the classical civilization of Rome and Greece.

548 battles are a lot; too many to comprehend. So I created a dynamic battle map with displays of the Mediterranean in 20 year increments. On the display, a white dot designates a battle during the twenty-year period, a new battle. Every time the screen changes to the next 20 year period, the previous white dots turn red and a new set of current battles  are shown with white dots so you can see the unfolding history. This may seem a little confusing, but when you see it you’ll know exactly what I mean.

As the dynamic display starts, Islam bursts out of the Arabian Peninsula and immediately starts attacking the Middle East. Notice that it is not long before there are battles across the Mediterranean and attacks in southern France, and Spain.

Notice something else: when most people think of Islam, they think of Arabs; and of desert. Yet here we see that Islam is projecting power throughout the Mediterranean. Notice how the little islands of the Mediterranean are getting hammered. The navy of Islam would attack coastal towns, kill, rob, rape, and then take slaves. As this entire battle map unfolds, slaves are taken. Over a million slaves were taken from of Europe into the Islamic world. It’s something you don’t think about, but it’s absolutely true.

There were over 200 battles fought in Spain alone. We also see, however, on the east coast, in Turkey, that Islamic forces attempt to break into Europe. What happens in Spain during this ongoing fight that lasted for 400 years is that the Christians push back the Moslems. But what happens in the East is that Constantinople falls and now then eastern Europe gets hammered. The jihad comes to Eastern Europe. It’s pushed out of Spain, but northern Africa becomes completely Islamic, and the Middle East is completely Islamic.

This is all jihad, relentless jihad. And why is it so relentless?

Well, Mohammed was relentless in his jihad, and these people are good students of Islam. And so it’s jihad against the Kafir, endlessly.

It was traditional that when a new Sultan came to power, he would immediately attempt to launch new wars because he would be noted in Islamic history as to how well he fought against the Kafir.

So that’s what the jihad looked like over that time period: 548 battles. But remember, when you bring up jihad, people want to bring up the Crusades. So I also prepared a dynamic battle map of all the offensive raids of the crusaders. Let’s watch it and make a comparison.

As it begins, the Crusades enter Turkey and the Middle East; battles ensue. But there are far fewer than you might think. And in short order, the map concludes. The last battles are fought and the Crusades are over.

Now we can talk about some facts! Yes, there were Crusades. But notice that they ended centuries ago, and jihad is still being practiced today. Jihad has been with us for 1400 years. There is no comparison between jihad and the Crusades; certainly not a moral comparison. And when you’re looking at the Crusades, remember, in one sense the Crusades were defensive wars. Why? As we saw in the first jihad map, it was Islam that came out of Arabia and conquered the Middle East, a Christian Middle East. The crusaders were trying to free their Christian brothers and sisters from jihad. So there’s no moral comparison all. The motivation of the crusaders was to free Christians; the purpose of jihad was, and still is, to enslave the Kafir.

So, the next time you hear somebody talk about “those dreadful Crusades”, respond to the facts of the matter. Speak up and tell that person, “You don’t really know the facts!”

The Muslim as Dhimmi

 

Political Islam, by Bill Warner:

I would like to speak with you today about the Muslim as a Dhimmi.  (Dhimmis are Christians, Jews and other non-Muslims (defined by Muslims as Kafirs) living in Islamic countries as second-class subjects with virtually no rights as citizens.)  I’ve given several talks in which I try to show people that it is the Sharia and the status of “Dhimmi” (D-H-I-M-M-I) that is the root cause of the disappearance of Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and Hinduism in Islamic countries.  And usually what I do is this:  I go through something called the Dhimma, which was a “treaty granted by . . .  Muhammad to the Jewish and Christian populations whom he had subjected,” which included other “peoples vanquished by the Muslims and considered to be protected by their treaty of surrender,” [See The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam From Jihad to Dhimmitude, Bat Ye’or, page 472]  i.e., horrible rules that the conquered Kafirs were coerced into obeying.  But in order to really drive the point home I would like to pretend that the Moslems have signed a Dhimmi Treaty with our culture, with our civilization, and let’s see what it feels like to put the shoe on the other foot.  What would it be like if the Muslim were a Dhimmi in America today?

Every one of the following examples I’m going to give you were the conditions under which Christians in Islamic countries were subjugated.  To start off with:  Muslims are forbidden to build new mosques.   Muslims are prohibited from issuing their call to prayer any louder than can be heard from the sidewalk of the mosque.  (This is a corollary of the prohibition of Christians’ freedom to ring church bells loud enough to be heard by their congregation.)  A minaret shall not be higher than 15 feet.  Muslims cannot build houses greater in height than the height of houses owned by Christians.  Muslims are forbidden from attaining any position of authority over Christians.  Muslims shall not vote nor will they be recognized as citizens in any Kafir nation.  Muslims are prohibited from serving in the military, police force nor hold any government position.  Muslims shall not testify in Kafir courts nor will they be permitted to sue any Kafir.  Muslims shall not give shelter in their mosque or homes to any jihadi.  Muslims shall not teach Islam to any Kafir.  Muslims shall not manifest Islam publicly and they shall not attempt to convert any Kafir and they will not prevent any Mohammedan from leaving the religion of Islam if they so wish.  Muslims shall not own or carry any weapons.  Muslims shall not drive cars, although they will be able to operate mopeds and ride bicycles.  Muslims shall not display their books in the marketplace and Muslims will pay the Islamic tax (Jizya) of 50% of their income.  Once a year they will shave their heads and kneel before the Kafir to present the Jizya.  Any act of disobedience by an individual Muslim could result in collective punishment and nullify the Dhimma and cause the Kafirs to riot, murder and burn down the homes and mosques of the Muslims.

Now as you hear these rules, and it should be absolutely clear that if these laws were enacted and enforced in America Muslims would leave or they would apostatize and convert, which is exactly what Christians did in Turkey, the Balkans, North Africa and the Middle East.  The same thing happened to the Buddhists and the Hindus when they were forcibly subjected to rules just like these and so, after a while, in utter desperation, they converted.  It may have taken centuries, but they converted or escaped from the totalitarian Islamic countries.  Now that you’ve seen how the Dhimma treats the Muslim as a Dhimmi, you can see that no Muslim would ever volunteer to immigrate to a Kafir country and allow themselves to be subjected to the same treatment to which Islamic countries subjected Christians, Jews, Buddhists and Hindus.

The enforcement of the Dhimma is a good example of the dualism of Islamic supremacist countries.  In other words a Weltanschauung of “us versus them” or the Muslim over the Kafir.

Utterly lacking in Islamic culture is The Golden Rule:  “do unto others as you would have others do unto you.”

This exercise of the Muslim as a Dhimmi is a juxtaposition of Dualism and The Golden Rule in reverse (i.e., we will now do unto you, what you have done unto us for centuries).

If you would like to learn more about life as a Christian, Jew or Hindu living in an Islamic totalitarian country I recommend two more fascinating books, in addition to the book cited in the footnote:  The Dhimmi:  Jews and Christians under Islam and Understanding Dhimmitude:  Twenty-one Lectures and Talks on the Position of Non-Muslims in Islamic Societies, both by Bat Ye’or.

Islam is primarily a political ideology

This is Part 4  of a series on Statistical Islam by Bill Warner:

Religious Islam is defined as doctrine concerned with going to Paradise and avoiding Hell by following the Koran and the Sunna. The part of Islam that deals with the “outsider”, the Kafir, is defined as political Islam. Since so much of the Trilogy is about the Kafir, the statistical conclusion is that Islam is primarily a political system, not a religious system.

Mohammed’s success depended on politics, not religion. The Sira, Mohammed’s biography, gives a highly detailed accounting of his rise to power. He preached the religion of Islam for 13 years in Mecca and garnered 150 followers. He was forced to move to Medina and became a politician and warrior. During the last 9 years of his life, he was involved in an event of violence every 6 weeks. When he died every Arab was a Muslim. Mohammed succeeded through politics, not religion.

An estimate can be made that there were 100,000 Muslims when Mohammed died. Using this information allows a graph to be drawn:

MuslimGrowthGraph_300dpi

There are two distinct growth processes-religion and politics. Teaching and religion grew at a rate of about 12 new Muslims per year. Politics and jihad grew at a rate of 10,000 new Muslims per year, an enormous increase. This is a process yield improvement of over 800%. Politics was almost a thousand times more effective than religion.

If Mohammed had continued with preaching religion we can extrapolate that there would have only been 265 Muslims when he died, instead of the 100,000 that resulted from his politics and jihad. This gives us an estimate of 265 conversions due to religion and 99,735 conversions to due the political jihad process. We can calculate the relative contributions of religion and politics in growth. Islam’s success was 0.3% religion and 99.7% politics at the time of Mohammed’s death, 632 AD.

This political importance is reflected in the text of the Sira. There are many more pages devoted to a year of jihad than there are devoted to preaching Islam. It is instructive to see the amount of the Sira text devoted to these stages of development .

AmtSiraTopic_72dpi_previewThe Sira devotes about 5 times as many words to politics than religion on a yearly basis. It gives politics 5 times the coverage because it is that much more important.

Islam’s political nature is also found in the Hadith that devotes 37% of its text to the Kafir.

There would be no Islam today, if it were only a religion. Statistics show that Islamic politics is what brought Islam success, not religion. To say that Islam is the religion of peace misses the point, since the religion is not the core of Islam’s power. It is politics that count, not religion.

The statistical conclusion: Islam is primarily a political ideology.

The Weaponized Rhetoric of Jihad

Gates of Vienna, Posted on December 18, 2014 by :

A non-Muslim who studies Islamic law in any depth soon learns that certain words have different meanings in Islam than they do in ordinary usage. Terms used in Islamic law that have specialized definitions include justice, peace, freedom, innocent, human rights,terrorism, slander, and any number of other seemingly commonplace English words and phrases.

Spokesmen for Islamic organization — and particularly those for Muslim Brotherhood front groups — rely on our ignorance about these “terms of art”. One reason that they are winning their information war with the West is that we simply do not understand what they really mean when they use these deliberately misleading words.

The following video draws on the expertise of Major (ret.) Stephen Coughlin, Dr. Bill Warner, Robert Spencer, and Clare Lopez to explain the special meanings prescribed by sharia for various crucial terms.

Many thanks to the Victor Laszlo Media Group for producing this video:

Note: Maj. Coughlin misspoke at 17:30 when he mentioned the publication date of Islam and Universal Peace by Sayyid Qutb. It was actually published in 1951.

Also see:

Measuring Extremism

 

Political Islam, By Bill Warner:

So how many times have you heard this? Islamic State cuts off heads or they’re selling sex slaves in Africa and the apologists for Islam say, “Oh, that’s radical, that’s extreme, that’s not real Islam. I know some Muslims at work and they’re fine people; and besides that, it’s just a tiny minority that’s doing all those things.” So, in other words, “We don’t need to worry about it.”

What do they mean by extreme? Certainly cutting off heads falls in that category. But, you know there are other things that are extreme, like beating your wife, child brides, inbreeding (i.e., marrying your first cousin). Those are extreme things too. And what do all these extreme things have in common? They’re all in the Sharia. Because the killing of Kafirs (Jihad) is all in the Sharia, as well as child brides and inbreeding. So what we need to do here is to be able to measure not just radical killing, but all forms of radical ideas. In other words, we need to measure the Sharia. This has all been done for us. Pew Research has done a poll of some 38 nations, and what they did was they studied Muslims and how they feel about the Sharia. This is an in-depth study. Interestingly enough, 28% of all those Muslims who think that the Sharia should rule say that apostates should be killed. This is extreme. Killing somebody because they had a change of conscience and leave their religion—if that’s not extreme, what isn’t? And 28% is not a small minority.

Annihilation

Now, there’s another very interesting statistic in here, and that is: out of the Muslims who want Sharia, 52% of them say that it should only cover Muslims. But, 42% think that the Kafir should be ruled by Islam as well. That’s a disaster! Here’s why: Have you ever wondered what happened to Christianity in the Middle East? Well, I’ll tell you what happened to it. Jihad put the Sharia in place and, once the Christians became Dhimmis ( i.e., second class subjects living in Islamic countries), they were ruled by the Sharia, a system that annihilates Christian civilization. In fact, it annihilates all civilizations. That’s what happened in Afghanistan, and that’s what happened in Pakistan. You see, they used to be Buddhist and Hindu, but the Sharia destroyed them. Sharia destroys and annihilates all Kafir civilizations. Now, it can take a while: for instance, the destruction of Christianity in Turkey took several centuries. But, as soon as the Sharia is in place and rules the Kafir, the Kafir civilization will die. This is more important than killing an individual; we’re talking about entire civilizations.

Reformation?

Now, if you’re a good apologist for Islam, you’ll say, “Well, maybe, but we just need a reform. Christians have had a reform.” Let’s examine the idea of reforming Islam. Let’s start with a simple fact. The Koran is complete, perfect, universal. How do you reform that? And, by the way, you do know there are two different Korans. There is an early Koran written in Mecca, and it’s generally tolerant of others and 64% of the Koran is in Mecca. But then there’s a smaller portion, written in Medina, that’s 36%, and the Medinan Koran calls for the rule of Sharia. Now, how are you going to reform this? Because, you see, the Medinan Koran follows the earlier Meccan Koran and the Koran itself says that it’s stronger. So, the minor part of the Koran is stronger than the major part. You can’t get rid of it; it can’t go away. Actually, those Muslims, the 42% who want the rule of Sharia, are the better Muslims. So, we’re stuck with no reform; it cannot change.

The Tiny Minority?

And we also have to remember this, 42% is not a tiny minority, it is a dominating minority. So, think about that the next time somebody tells you: “Oh, that killing, that’s not real, that’s extreme, and it’s just a tiny minority.”

Dr. Bill Warner on “Measuring Extremism in Islam” – on The Glazov Gang

pl-450x285Frontpage:

This week’s Glazov Gang was joined by Dr. Bill Warner, a scientist who has studied Islam since 1970. He has used the scientific method in the study of Islamic texts and has made its doctrine easy to understand. As an example, he had produced a Koran that anyone can read and understand. Visit his site atpoliticalislam.com.

Dr. Warner joined the show to discuss Measuring Extremism in Islam, illuminating how Sharia compliance defines a way to gauge civilizational “extremism” that goes beyond beheadings:

 

***

Bill Warner also spoke to the JDL in Canada on Nov. 17, 2014. Here is the video thanks to Blazing Cat Fur:

A Lesson on Free Speech and Sharia in Knoxville

lk-450x137by Andrew Harrod:

A recent legal victory by Freedom X upheld the right of private citizens to discuss openly sharia law at a Knoxville, Tennessee, high school. “This is a victory for free speech,” Freedom X’s President William J. Becker rightly explained, in yet another instructive example of Islamists seeking to subvert the United States Constitution’s First Amendment.

A local Knoxville chapter of ACT! for America began the case by arranging an April 24 evening town hall at Farragut High School (FHS). The event featured Dr. Bill French, Center for the Study of Political Islam founder under the pen name Warner, and Matt Bonner, regional director of the Crescent Project, a Christian evangelization ministry for Muslims. They intended to address the encroachment in America of sharia, vaguely described in one online report as “Islamic laws governing worship and lifestyle.” Becker correctly clarifies that “Sharia is incompatible with our constitutional and legal protections” in numerous ways.

Both local and national Muslims groups, however, greeted the event with harsh opposition. Abdel Rahman Murphy, a Muslim chaplain at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville, emailed then FHS principal Mike F. Reynolds on April 8 requesting the event’s cancellation. The town hall flyer had “kind of an aggressive tone,” Murphy argued to reporters. “Feel free hosting” the event “anywhere else by renting out a banquet hall,” Murphy added, “but to host it at a public place…is not comfortable for the rest of us.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a radical faux civil rights group and an unindicted terrorism financing coconspirator, also objected. An April 11 CAIR news release publicized a letter by CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper to FHS the previous day that “vilifies…French, Bonner and ACT! for America” with a “false attribution” of “anti-Muslim hate” refuted by Becker’s complaint. “We support the First Amendment right to free speech—even…hate speech used by these speakers,” Hooper argued. The “need for a safe and inclusive learning environment,” though, makes a “school…not the proper setting.”

Principal Reynolds’ April 10 letter to Knox County Schools Superintendent James P. McIntyre, Jr. shared Hooper’s sentiments. “Groups promoting hate rather than tolerance” would have the event “serve as a public forum for harassment and bullying practices that contradict the open-minded, academic discussion we seek to…foster at” FHS, Murphy wrote. The event would generate “little positive press or educational benefit,” yet “polarize our community” when “deemed ours by association.” Concerns of “potential backlash” and “future security threats” from “retaliation of opposing groups” existed. These “expressed concerns…about…disruption” from an event unsuitable for “a safe, healthy and comfortable learning environment” caused McIntyre to rescind ACT!’s invitation in an April 11 letter to its Knoxville chapter leaders.

A Knoxville school official was “happy to announce” ACT!’s uninviting. Hooper boasted of the school’s decision, arguing that “this event in a public school would send an implicit message of endorsement for the bigoted views of the speakers.” Knoxville schools must “remain a safe place for all students,” concurred Remziya Suleyman from the Tennessee-based Muslim organization, American Center for Outreach.

The Knoxville ACT! chapter’s president John Peach held the event in a church, not seeking other public venues for fear of another cancellation. “Sharia is not well-understood and we wanted to inform the public” as “concerned Americans,” Peach said. An “American…should” not “be afraid to speak out on public matters in a public forum.”

Peach noted that Muslim groups such as the Saudi-backed Muslim Students Association, meanwhile, could openly operate unopposed at the University of Tennessee Knoxville campus. “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,” he asked. “This is a great example of what Sharia Law is doing to America.”

Read more at Frontpage

Islamic State – Do We Believe Obama or Mohammed?

Political Islam, by Bill Warner:

We’re at the time in history when ISIS, also called Islamic State or ISIL, has cut off the head of someone in the media. And it was so atrocious that many chose to speak out against it and one of them was Obama.

Here’s what Obama says about Islamic State, “They’ve rampaged across cities and villages killing innocents. They abduct women and children, subject them to torture and rape and slavery. They’ve murdered Moslems, both Sunni and Shia, by the thousands. They target Christians and religious minorities, driving them from their homes, murdering them because they practice a different religion. ISIL speaks for no religion.”

Well, really what Obama’s saying here is Islamic State is not Islamic. That’s really what he’s saying briefly. But, you know it’s not up to Obama to tell us what Islam is. Islam is defined by Mohammed and Allah.

Now, let’s see what happened in the Sira, the life of Mohammed, his official biography, about all these points and let’s start with of all things, rape. On the occasion of Khaybar, once the Jews had been crushed, Mohammed put forth new orders as to how sex would be had with captured women. They were not to be had sex with when they’re having their period, nor if they’re pregnant.So here we have Mohammed giving orders on how to have sex with captives. This is called rape. It is pure Mohammed.

Now, what about the issue of torture. Well, on the same event, once he crushed the Jews at Khaybar, he knew they had buried treasure and so he questioned the chieftain. “Where’s the money? Where’s the gold? Where’s the silver?” And he wouldn’t tell him. So, Mohammed ordered the chieftain staked out on the ground and a small fire built on his chest. Still he would not speak. And so they unstaked him and took him to a man who had lost a brother in the fight against the Jews at Khaybar and he beheaded the Jewish chieftain.

So, here in one event we have torture, we have Jew hatred and we have beheading. All of these are pure Islam.

Now, let’s deal with sex slaves. From the lot of the women, Mohammed had chosen three to give as gifts of pleasure to his chief lieutenants. He gave one to Umar, gave one to Ali and one to Uthman. Oddly enough, Umar passed his sex slave on to his son. So, sex slavery is pure Mohammed.

Now, what about slavery? I’m going to read you a list of things that Mohammed was involved in with slavery. All of these come from the Sira. And by the way, all of these references can be found on politicalislam.com. He was involved in every aspect of slavery. He had Kafir men killed so their women could be made slaves. He gave away slaves for gifts. He owned many slaves, many of them black. He stood by while others beat slaves. He shared the pleasure of forced sex with women conquests. He captured slaves and wholesaled them and retailed them for the profit of jihad. His favorite sexual partner was a sex slave, a Christian woman, who bore him a son. He got slaves as gifts. His pulpit was made by a slave. He ate meals prepared by slaves. His robes were repaired by slaves. And he approved of having sex with your slaves. And if a slave didn’t obey his master he would not go to paradise. Well, that’s pretty clear about the slavery, an issue in Islam.

Now, let’s deal with the last thing, killing Christians. Mohammed had two records in dealing with Christians in Arabia. One was he was kind to them and listened to them. But, once he had crushed the pagans and once he had crushed the Jews, he then turned his attention to the Christians. He sent Khalid, also known as The Sword of Allah, to the fort of a Christian ruler and when the ruler and his brother rode out they killed one and captured the other and subjugated the Christian tribe, made them obey the Sharia and pay the jizyah.

Let me be very clear, Mohammed was a pagan killer, a Jew killer and a Christian killer. Now, let’s go back to what started this off. Who is to determine what Islam is, Obama? No. Mohammed tells us what Islam is and we need to listen to Mohammed and we can ignore Mr. Obama.

Thank you.

The full videos of the four experts who did the analysis of the Islamic State propaganda release

isis-video-hed-2014-652x330Vlad Tepes, Sep. 12, 2014:

Here are the full videos by Christian Zeitz, Robert Spencer, Bill Warner and David Wood. Those who saw the official release and feel they would like more, may enjoy this more comprehensive set of analysis by these scholars.

 

 

 

 

And of course, the actual video these were all filmed to create:

The Real Islam:

 

Bill Warner on the hypocrisy of the OIC’s condemnation of ISIS

By Bill Warner at Political Islam:

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the OIC, the world’s top Islamic body, has denounced the persecution of Christians in Mosul, Iraq. The Secretary-General said that the forced displacement of Mosul’s Christians showed that Islamic State, ISIS, practices have nothing to do with Islam’s principles of tolerance and coexistence. And what is this tolerance and coexistence?

How have the nations of the OIC treated Christians? Members of the OIC include Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt and Lebanon. What has happened to their Christians?

Christians in Iraq are being brutally tortured and raped now. In Iran if you are a Christian you can be jailed for simply being Christian. Turkey used to be called Anatolia and was 100% Christian, but today it’s only 0.3% Christian. How did that happen? Through forced conversions and jihad.

Then we have Saudi Arabia which really knows how to treat its religious minorities, as in not welcome at all. And we move to Syria where Christians have been brutalized. Egypt used to be a Christian nation, but now it’s 90% Muslim. Coptic Christians were driven out and were driven out, persecuted and forcibly converted. Lebanon after the second world war was Christian and now then it is majority Muslim.

So what happened to all the OIC Christians? They were brutalized.

But here’s the important question: why do we want to believe the lie that Islam treats its religious minorities well? We have a lie of our own. Our lie is that we’re not at war with Islam. There are just a few Sunni Islamist extremists. Get it straight. Islam is at war with us and the Sunni Islamist extremists like Islamic State turn out not to be extremist at all. Islam is at war with us and the Sunni Islamist extremists like Islamic State turn out not to be extremist at all. They are devout, orthodox Muslims, devoutly following the fundamental, foundational doctrines of Islam.

The Islamist State, ISIS, follows the Sunna of Mohammed in real time. Read the Sira and the Hadith. And it is the same with the other organizations such as Al Shabab, Boko Haram and all the jihadists. They are all following the example of Mohammed who was not an extremist. Mohammed was a Christian killer, a Jew killer, and a pagan killer. So Islamic state and all the other jihadist organizations are simply doing what they are supposed to do – follow the Sunna of Mohammed. So Islamic State and all the other jihadist organizations are simply doing what they are supposed to do, that is, they are following the Sunna of Mohammed

The problem is that Islam is dualistic and the nice peaceful Muslim at work is Islam, but also cutting off the heads of Christians is Islam. Dualism means two ideas that are contradictory can be true at the same time. The nice Muslim at work is simply part of Islam, but not all of it. Islamic State is Islam, as well. And you cannot eliminate the jihad doctrine from Islam. There is no such thing as the “nice Muslim at work” kind of Islam. Mohammed was a “nice Muslim at work” and he was a jihadist. Therefore, you will always get both kinds of Muslim, because there are both kinds of Islam.

Islamic state is at war with us, but we are not at war with Islamic state. We want to tie, but Islam wants to win. How does that work out?