Islam and the Jihad in London

Security forces respond to the attacks outside Parliament in London, March 22, 2017. (Reuters photo: Stefan Wermuth)

It’s not non-Western. It’s anti-Western.

National Review, by Andrew C. McCarthy, March 25, 2017:

It was a careful choice of words, Bernard Lewis being nothing if not careful. In 2004, the West audibly gasped when its preeminent scholar of Islam famously told the German newspaper Die Welt,“Europe will be Islamic by the end of the century,” if not sooner.

Listen carefully. He did not say that Muslims will be the majority population in what is still recognizably Europe. No, Professor Lewis said “Europe will be Islamic.

We are not talking about Muslims here. We are talking about Islam. Lots of individual Muslims desire peaceful coexistence, even assimilation. But Islam’s aim is to prevail. So, yet again this week, Lewis’s foreboding has been brought to the fore by a jihadist mass-murder attack, this time in London.

As we go to press, five innocent people are dead after Khalid Masood, a terrorist acting on unambiguous scriptural commands to war against non-Muslims, rammed his rental Hyundai SUV into dozens of pedestrians on Westminster Bridge, many of them tourists taking in the iconic views of Parliament. About 50 people suffered injuries, some of them grave, so the death toll may yet rise.

Masood, a burly 52-year-old weightlifter with a long criminal record that included vicious stabbings, then crashed the car through the gate at Westminster Palace, home of the West’s most venerable democratic legislature. He alighted brandishing two long knives, which he used to kill Keith Palmer, a police officer who, pursuant to British policy, was unarmed despite being assigned to provide security at one of the world’s foremost terror targets. Masood was finally shot dead by a protection officer attached to England’s defense minister.

There immediately began the ritual media pondering over Masood’s motive. Yes, what could it possibly have been?

I’m going to stick with the patently obvious.

Masood was born as Adrian Russell Ajao on Christmas Day, 1964, in Kent county, just outside London. His 17-year-old single mother remarried two years later, and he was known as Adrian Elms (his stepfather’s surname) until converting to Islam when he was about 40. Prior to that point, while fathering three children with his wife, he had several arrests, some for violent attacks. During at least one of the resulting stints in prison, like many inmates, he began indoctrination into Islam.

Between 2004 and 2005 came the critical transition: the formal conversion, marriage to a Muslim woman, and relocation to Saudi Arabia (you know, be our “ally” against terrorism). For five years, Masood was immersed in the kingdom’s Wahhabism — fundamentalist Islam rooted in scriptural literalism. He became an English language-teacher working for the Saudi government.

Masood returned to England from Jeddah about seven years ago. By the time of Wednesday’s attack on Westminster Bridge, he had seamlessly gravitated to Birmingham, a city increasingly enveloped by sharia enclaves that, to varying degrees, have become “no-go zones” for non-Muslims and agents of the state, including police.

There is diversity in Islam, including millions of Muslims who adhere only to its spiritual elements or see themselves as more culturally than doctrinally Islamic. But when we speak of Islam, as opposed to Muslims, we are not speaking about a mere religious belief system. We are talking about a competing civilization — that is very much how Islam self-identifies. It has its own history, principles, values, mores, and legal system.

Islam, thus understood, is not non-Western. It is anti-Western.

Like the conversion of Masood, the conversion of Birmingham has been a function of this defining Islamic attribute. Individual Muslims may assimilate, but Islam doesn’t do assimilation. Islam does not melt into your melting pot. Islam, as Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna proclaimed, is content with nothing less than political, cultural, and civilizational dominance.

As Soeren Kern relates in a comprehensive Gatestone Institute report on Islam in Britain, the metamorphosis of Birmingham, along with several other U.K. population centers, signifies this resistance. When the Islamic presence in a Western community reaches a critical mass, Islam’s hostility to Western mores and demands for sharia governance result in non-Muslim flight. Marriages between Muslims resident in the Western community and Muslims overseas tend to result in childbirth rates and household growth that dwarfs that of the indigenous population. Arranged, intra-familial, and polygamous marriages, endorsed by Islamic mores, drastically alter the fabric of communities in short order. Birmingham, in particular, has been ground zero of “Operation Trojan Horse,” a sharia-supremacist scheme to Islamize the public schools.

Kern repeats an account of life in “inner-city Birmingham” by the wife of a British clergyman, first published by Standpoint in 2011. She explained how the neighborhood in which she’d lived for four years had become a “police no-go zone,” in which the large number of newly arrived Somali immigrants now approached that of Pakistanis already resident. Then she recalled her husband’s encounter with an immigrant who had just arrived from Belgium — on an EU passport, like an increasing number of Muslims these days. The migrant was surprised when the clergyman asked why he had chosen to move into their neighborhood. Finally, he replied, “Everybody knows. Birmingham—best place in Europe to be pure Muslim.”

The memory moved the clergyman’s wife to a salient insight:

Well, there must be many places in Europe where Muslims are entirely free to practice their faith, but I suspect there are few places in which they can have so little contact with the civic and legal structure of a Western state if they choose.

To a London reader, born and bred with multiculturalism, I know that my stories may come across as outlandish and exaggerated. . . . When I recently told a friend how a large Taliban flag fluttered gaily on a house near St Andrew’s football stadium for some months, her cry of “Can’t you tell the police?” made me reflect how far many of our inner cities have been abandoned by our key workers: our doctors and nurses drive in from afar, the police, as mentioned before, have shut down their stations and never venture in unless in extremis — they and ambulance crews have been known to be attacked — even the local imam lives in a leafier area.

It is in that milieu that Khalid Masood made his decision, rented an SUV, and drove to Westminster Bridge.

Naturally, the Islamic State terror network (ISIS) took credit for the atrocity, as it has been wont to do since issuing its plea that Muslims conduct attacks “in place” — i.e., against the Western societies where they live. Western leaders have been content to accept these claims, at least as inspirational, if not operational. It is easier to indulge the fiction that ISIS catalyzes jihadism then to ask what catalyzed ISIS.

But the remorseless fact is that before ISIS and al-Qaeda and the Khomeini revolution and Hezbollah and the Blind Sheikh and the Brotherhood and Khalid Masood, there was the single thing that unites them all. There was Islam.

Western political and opinion elites remain willfully blind to this. They cannot help but project onto Islamic beliefs and practices their own progressive pieties — which take seriously neither religion nor the notion that there is any civilization but their own.

In their minds, and therefore ingrained in the media’s coverage, is the notion that a Muslim community is just like any other community. Same with the mosque — it is just a “house of worship,” no different from a church, a safe harbor from worldly concerns and hostilities. Islam, however, does not separate mosque from state; the mosque is every bit as much a center for sharia indoctrination, assimilation resistance, and anti-Western politics as it is a prayer venue. That is why al-Banna regarded the mosque and the Islamic community center commonly attached to it as the “axis” of the “movement” in every community where Islam takes hold.

The movement does not want cohabitation. It wants conquest. It starts with assimilation-resistant enclaves that nurture sharia supremacism today and thereby breed the jihadists of tomorrow. This week, it took the campaign to Westminster Bridge.

— Andrew C. McCarthy is as senior policy fellow at the National Review Institute and a contributing editor of National Review.

 

Two must watch videos by Tom Trento on Islamic jihad and Muhammad

LONDON JIHAD ATTACK…ISLAM V. ISLAMISM
Published on Mar 25, 2017 by theunitedwest

Tom Trento explains how the London jihad attack on March 22, 2017 indicates the beginning of the beginning of increased low-tech, Muslim jihad attacks in the West. The Islamic State along with Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations are developing an operational methodology through the use of the internet that unleashes jihadi fighters in the streets of civilized Western countries. Trento maintains that the West, in particular, America must work ceaselessly to delegitimize the ideological foundation of the comprehensive political/theocratic system we know as Islam. In order to effectively name the enemy and fight the enemy at its core, it is essential to clear up the confusion between the use of the terms, Islam and Islamism. Until that controversial issue is resolved, the West is at a deadly disadvantage in this epic battle between good and evil.

***

“THE MUHAMMAD CODE” – TRENTO & AUTHOR, HOWARD BLOOM

Published on Mar 24, 2017 by theunitedwest

Prolific author, Howard Bloom has written a masterful, scholarly, yet readable book about the leader of all Muslims, the one they call, Prophet Muhammad. In his book, “The Muhammad Code,”
Bloom unlocks the key to why Muslims hate Jews and Christians and other non-Muslims and why Islam is in a perpetual state of war to establish a global leader, the Caliph, to bring in world domination by Islam. Bloom, a writer trained in the sciences, pulls no punches as he simply explains Islamic doctrine as taught by Muhammad and subsequent Muslim leaders.
This book is a must-read for anyone who wants a clear, dispassionate analysis of the leader of a movement that has become the greatest threat to global peace and security.

Stay tuned for more episodes with Howard Bloom and a deeper look at some of his shocking findings.

You can learn more about Howard and buy his book at his web site: http://howardbloom.net/

Nonie Darwish: Wholly Different — Why I Chose Biblical Values Over Islamic Values

The Geller Report, by Nonie Darwish, March 8, 2017:

Many in the West assume that the Islamic threat is only in the form of terrorism, and if only ISIS is destroyed, then the real peaceful Islam will emerge ready to coexist in harmony with Western and Biblical values. That is false. The West is building its entire policy regarding Islam on a false premise. And that is why I have written my fourth book, Wholly Different: Why I Chose Biblical Values Over Islamic Values: to lay out the full scope of the threat of Islam to Western civilization.

After I moved to the US 38 years ago, I discovered that Islamic values are totally opposite to Biblical/Western values. The first Muslim sermon I heard when I visited a mosque in the US in 1979 was on how we, Muslims, must never assimilate in America. I felt that this dangerous advice was paving the way to divide America into the “house of Islam” and the non-Muslim “house of war.” I stopped going to the mosque and lived without a faith for 17 years in America.

But after I started hearing Biblical values in churches and synagogues, I discovered why Islam is afraid of assimilation. If Muslims assimilate in the West, Islam will cease to exist, and that is because its values are opposite in everything about life, human rights, family, and government.

The Original Culture Clash

The original culture clash, or clash of civilization, between Muslims and Bible believers did not start between Europe and the Islamic Middle East. It first erupted inside the Middle East, in the 7th century, when Muhammad led a ferocious bloody rebellion in the Arabian Peninsula against “the people of the book” — Jews and Christians, their values and what they stood for. In a nutshell, Islam came 600 years after Christ, not to confirm the Bible, but to discredit it. Islam was a bloody rebellion against the Bible and its values. All of the Ten Commandments were in fact violated by Muhammad for the sake of making Islam rule supreme.

The Jews and Christians of the Middle East lost the first culture clash, and were forced to submit to Islam and live in humiliation under sharia as dhimmis. Christianity and many Jews were pushed further back Northwest towards Europe. Gradually Europe were left alone holding the banner of the Bible after the Christian Byzantine Empire was decimated by Islam. That was when a second culture clash started between Islam and the Bible, Europe and the Middle East.

These are facts of history that Teddy Roosevelt warned us of when he said that if we do not fight we will lose to Islam, the same way the People of the Book in the Middle East lost to Islam in the seventh century: “Christianity is not the creed of Asia and Africa at this moment solely because the seventh century Christians of Asia and Africa had trained themselves not to fight, whereas the Moslems were trained to fight. Christianity was saved in Europe solely because the peoples of Europe fought. If the peoples of Europe in the seventh and eighth centuries, and on up to and including the seventeenth century, had not possessed a military equal with, and gradually a growing superiority over the Mohammedans who invaded Europe, Europe would at this moment be Mohammedan and the Christian religion would be exterminated….”

Western Biblical theologians believe that the Bible, both the Old and New Testaments, brought an ethics revolution to the world. Islam came to rebel against such a revolution with a counter-revolution that was uniquely Muhammadan.

Everything that Jews and Christian held dear to their heart, Islam sets out to destroy. Below are some of the differences between Biblical and Islamic values mentioned in the book:

  • We are all sinners vs. They are all sinners.
  • Life is sacred vs. Death is worship.
  • Jesus died for us vs. We must die for Allah.
  • Jesus came to save us vs. We must save Muhammad’s  reputation.
  • Judge the sin, not the sinner vs. Judge the sinner not the sin.
  • God the redeemer vs. Allah the Humiliator.
  • Confession of Sin vs. Concealment of Sin.
  • At war with the Devil vs. At war with flesh and blood, the enemies of Allah.
  • Truth will set you Free vs. Lying and slander are an obligation.
  • Changing oneself vs Changing others.
  • Self-Control vs. Controlling others.
  • Vengeance is the Lord’s vs. Vengeance is prescribed to Muslims.
  • Love your enemies vs. Hate Allah’s Enemies (non-Muslims).
  • Work Ethics vs. Wealth through conquest.
  • Kingdom of God is not of this world vs. Allah and the Islamic State are one.

Nonie Darwish is the author of “Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values Over Islamic Values”

Also see:

Understanding Jihad

9% of Koran, 21% of the Hadith, 67% of the Sira is devoted to jihad. Before jihad, Islam only grew at the rate of 10 new Muslims per year. But when Mohammed turned to jihad, Islam grew at an average rate of 10,000 per year. – Bill Warner

Holy War in the Cause of Allah

The Tribune Papers, by Mike Scruggs, March 9, 2017:

Jihad is one of the foundational doctrines of Islam—not “Radical Islam” or “Radical Islamic Terrorism,” just Islam. President Recip Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey told us the simple truth, when he said, “Islam is Islam.” There are many “moderate” (secular and cultural) Muslims, but there is no “moderate” Islam that is not considered heretical by mainstream Sunni and Shia clerics and scholars. Jihad is second only to the Shahada, the testimony of Muslim faith in Islamic doctrine: “La ilaha illa Allah wa-Muhammad rasul Allah,” rendered in English as “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the Prophet (or Messenger) of Allah.” Jihad constitutes a whopping 31 percent of the combined sacred texts of the Koran and the teachings of Muhammad found in the Hadith (traditions) and Sira (biography) of Muhammad.

Jihad is defined in the Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law [Sharia], in Book O, Section 9.0: “Jihad is war against non-Muslims…to establish the religion [of Islam].” All of Section 9 of Book O, of this classic Sharia manual is about Jihad, including its obligatory nature for all Muslims. Muhammad also spoke of a spiritual warfare against the lower self (nafs) when returning from a battle: “We have returned from the lesser Jihad to the greater Jihad.” But this inner struggle with the self only represents about two percent of the total text on Jihad in Islam’s three foundational texts. The other 98 percent is about the necessity, obligations, conduct, and forms of support for Holy War against all who resist Islam. It is clear from the Koran and the words of Muhammad in the Hadith(s) that the “lesser” Jihad of the sword against all non-Muslims is actually the most emphasized and esteemed part of Jihad. The “greater spiritual” Jihad turns out to be spiritual preparation for the Jihad of the sword. Muslim clerics and apologists speaking to non-Muslim audiences frequently refer to Jihad as spiritual struggle, but this is 98 percent deception. As Muhammad himself said, “Know that Paradise is under the shade of swords.”

Following below are seven of the clearest of 109 war verses in the Koran and three short hadiths, which are valuable explanatory passages on Jihad.

Koran 8:12: Allah revealed His will to the angels, saying: “I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels [non-Muslims]. Strike off their heads; strike off the very tips of their fingers.”

Koran 9:5: When the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. Allah is forgiving and merciful.

Koran 9:29: Fight such of those to whom the Scriptures were given [Christians and Jews] as believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His apostle have forbidden, and do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay the tribute by hand with abject submission.

Koran 9:123: Believers, make war on the infidels [non-Muslims] who dwell around you. Deal firmly with then. Know that Allah is with the righteous.

Koran 3:28: Let not believers make friends with infidels [non-Muslims] in preference to the faithful—he that does this has nothing to hope for from Allah—except in self-defense. Allah admonishes you to fear Him: for to Allah shall all return.

Koran 48:29: Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to unbelievers but merciful to one another.

Koran 4:74: Let those who would exchange the life of this world for the hereafter, fight for the cause of Allah, whether he dies or triumphs, on him We [Allah] shall bestow a rich recompense.

Bukari Hadith Volume 4, Book 52, Number 44: A man came to Allah’s Apostle

and said, “Instruct me in such a deed as equals Jihad in reward.” He replied, “I do not find such a deed.”

Bukari Hadith Volume 4, Book 52, Number 73: Allah’s Apostle said, “Know that Paradise is under the shade of swords.”

Abu Muslim Hadith (001, 0031): Muhammad said, “I have been ordered to wage war against mankind until they accept that there is no god but Allah and that they believe I am His prophet and accept all revelations through me.”

Twenty-one percent of the Hadith(s) text is about Jihad, a good bit higher than in the Koran with nine percent. The most revelatory, however, is the Sira, the biography of Muhammad, with 67 percent. Follow the money. Muslim Brotherhood, Qatari, and Saudi Arabian funded departments of religious studies and U.S. and UK political and media apologists for Islam are not credible authorities on Islam or Jihad. Muhammad, the subject or author of most of Islam’s doctrinal texts and the inventor of Jihad, is the true authority on Islam and Jihad. Ninety-one times the Koran calls Muhammad the perfect Muslim example.

The Islam of Muhammad is inherently Jihadist. The counterfactual propaganda narrative that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance is an extremely dangerous lie that is being used to bring down Western Civilization and replace it with totalitarian Islamic government, law, and culture. We must fully understand the threat and develop the will to defeat it before it is too late. The Saracens are already within our gates.

New ISIS Command to EAT Infidels Has Islamic Roots

PJ MEDIA, BY RAYMOND IBRAHIM, MARCH 6, 2017:

In light of recent revelations that the Islamic State is teaching its followers to eatnon-Muslims, surely we can now all agree that — at least with this — ISIS is truly not Islamic?

Alas, no.

The eating of “infidels” has precedents throughout Islamic history, especially as a terror tactic. And the first example concerns the jihadi par excellence, Khalid bin al-Walid (d.642), who was dubbed the “Sword of Allah” — by Muhammad himself. Al-Walid holds a revered position among jihadi groups: the ISIS black flag with white Arabic text is a facsimile of the banner Khalid carried in battle.

During the Ridda, or “apostasy wars” against several Arab tribes that sought to break away from Islam following Muhammad’s death, Khalid falsely accused Malik bin Nuwayra, a well-liked Arab chieftain, of apostasy. After slaughtering him, Khalid raped — though Muslim sources call it “married” — Malik’s wife.

Yet Khalid was still not content:

He [Khalid] ordered his [Malik’s] head and he combined it with two stones and cooked a pot over them. And Khalid ate from it that nightto terrify the apostate Arab tribes and others. And it was said that Malik’s hair created such a blaze that the meat was so thoroughly cooked.

(From Muslim historian al-Tabari’s multi-volume chronicle “al-bidaya w’al nihaya”, The Beginning and the End.” Arabic excerpt here.)

Another anecdote concerns the Islamic conquest of Spain. According to Muslim chronicler Ibn Abdul Hakam, after capturing a group of Christian winemakers, the Islamic invaders:

… made them prisoners. After that they took one of the vinedressers, slaughtered him, cut him in pieces, and boiled him, while the rest of his companions looked on. They had also boiled meat in other cauldrons. When the meat was cooked, they threw away the flesh of that man which they had boiled; no one knowing that it was thrown away: and they ate the meat which they had boiled, while the rest of the vinedressers were spectators.

These did not doubt but that the Moslems ate the flesh of their companion; the rest being afterwards sent away informed the people of Andalus [Christian Spain] that the Moslems feed on human flesh, acquainting them with what had been done to the vinedresser.

Tarek ibn Ziyad was another jihadi extraordinaire, revered for burning his boats on reaching Spain’s shores as proof of his commitment that only conquest (jihad) or death (“martyrdom”) was acceptable. He also had Christian captives slaughtered, cooked up, and apparently eaten in front of their fellow hostages. Then, according to Muslim historian Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Maqqari:

“[Ziyad] allowed some of the captives to escape, that they might report to their countrymen what they had seen. And thus the stratagem produced the desired effect, since the report of the fugitives contributed in no small degree to increase the panic of the infidels” ( The History of the Mohammedan Dynasty, p. 276).

Note that, according to the above-cited Muslim chroniclers, the jihadis engaged in these cannibalistic practices to terrorize and create panic among infidels and apostates, that is, as a form of psychological warfare.[1] This is further pronounced when, as they often do, the chroniclers quote or paraphrase Koran verses that call for “striking terror” into the hearts of nonbelievers (e.g., 3:151, 8:12, 8:60) in juxtaposition to the savage accounts they relay.

There are more related anecdotes. During the earliest Muslim invasions of Christian Syria, one of Muhammad’s companions, ‘Ubadah bin al-Samat, told a Christian commander:

We have tasted blood and find none sweeter than the blood of Romans.

He was referring to Byzantines and/or Christians. Whether literal or figurative, clearly such bloodthirsty references inspire the Islamic State’s worldview, as evidenced by the latter’s assertion:

American blood is best, and we will taste it soon.

Incidentally, veneration and/or emulation of early jihadi barbarity is not limited to “radical” or extreme outfits that, so we are always told, “have nothing to do with Islam.” None other than Al Azhar University in Cairo — the Muslim world’s most prestigious university, where Obama gave his 2009 “New Beginning” speechteaches these accounts of Muslims eating infidels.

The reason is simple: cannibalism as terror doesn’t belong to ISIS any more than it does to Al Azhar. It belongs to Islam.

A final note: one school of thought maintains that in the aforementioned historical anecdotes, Muslims did not just pretend to devour their victims; they really did. However, later Muslim chroniclers, embarrassed by the bestial savagery of their coreligionists, portrayed the cannibalism as only pretend. If true, this further validates why ISIS isn’t merely teaching Muslims to pretend to devour their infidel victims, but to eat them in reality — as when one jihadi cut out and dug his teeth into the heart of a fallen Syrian soldier, after saying

I swear to Allah, soldiers of Bashar, you dogs — we will eat your heart and livers! Allahu Akbar!

Yes, video is here.

This may also shed light on the unsatisfactory explanation given by the Daily Mail on why ISIS is promoting cannibalism. According to Haras Rafiq, the Daily’s authority whom it describes as a “practicing Muslim,” ISIS is only promoting cannibalism “if there are no food supplies available during what they describe as a time of jihad.” Under such circumstances, “terrorists were encouraged to kill non-Muslims or Muslims who do not share their version of Islam for food.”

To be sure, eating humans in times of extreme duress and starvation — or “non-halal” food — is not particularly shocking and has been committed many times, past and present, by peoples of all races and religions. One is therefore left to wonder if Rafiq is one in a long line of embarrassed Muslim authorities trying to rationalize away their coreligionists’ depraved practices in the name of Islam.

—————————–

[1] I watched and linked to a video some years back of a modern day Egyptian cleric who also made it clear that Khalid’s actions were calculated to terrify the apostates. Although YouTube has, as usual, taken it down by now, here’s my original translation of what he said:

People wonder how our lord Khalid could have eaten from such meat? Oh yes — he ate from it! Our lord Khalid had a very strong character, a great appetite, and everything! All to terrorize the desert Arabs [apostates]. The matter requires determination; these matters require strength — terrorism.

What If Islam Really Is Different?

By Citizen Warrior, March 3, 2017:

The following is the “About Us” page on TheReligionOfPeace.com. It was so good I gained permission to republish it here (and on Inquiry Into Islam).

TheReligionofPeace.com (TROP) is a pluralistic, non-partisan site concerned with Islam’s true political and religious teachings according to its own texts. The purpose is to underscore the threat that Islam poses to human dignity and freedom, part of which includes documenting the violence and dysfunction that ensues as a direct consequence of this religion’s supremacist teachings.

TROP is not associated with any organization. The site does not promote any religion, but it is not hostile to religion. We generally support the rights of atheists, Christians, Hindus, Jews, homosexuals, women, Muslims and anyone else on the planet to live as they wish without violating the rights of others.

TheReligionofPeace.com strongly condemns any attempt to harm or harass any Muslim anywhere in the world because of their religion. Every human being is entitled to be treated as an individual and judged only by his or her own words and deeds. (see About Muslims).

We also denounce any act of vandalism against mosques or other property, including juvenile attempts to offend Muslims by desecrating copies of the Quran. (The best way of discrediting the Quran is to tell non-Muslims what it actually says about them).

At the same time, we see no use in pretending that Islam is just another religion – which always seems to be the assumption of those preferring not to look too closely.

In fact, Islam is dreadfully unique — and it should be OK to say so.

What other religion’s most devoted members videotape themselves cutting people’s throats while screaming praises to their god? What other faith has tens of thousands of terrorists across the globe united by an explicit commitment to advance the cause of their religion by pursuing horrific mass murder and mutilation?

What other religion has clerics lauded as ‘moderates’, ‘bridge-builders’, and advocates of ‘peace and tolerance‘ who, at best cannot even bring themselves to condemn suicide bombers or denounce Islamist terror organizations, or at worst actually supportterrorism, wife-beating, female genital mutilation, praise Islamist assassins and justify the killing of apostates and homosexuals?

What other religion kills innocent people over cartoons and teddy bears, burns poets and intellectuals alive and murders humanitarian workers of other faiths who are merely trying to help them?

What other religion childishly brags about its growth while at the same time openly denies other religions equal opportunity to evangelize — and even endorses killing those who leave?

What other religion has prominent PR organizations and charities so closely tied to terrorism – organizations like CAIR, which whine about dress codes and rubber ducks in the West while ignoring the Jihad genocide of thousands in Darfur?

What other religion has verses in its holy book that remind men of their divine permission to beat their wives and rape their slaves?

The list could go on (and does — each day on TheReligionofPeace.com). Islam so routinely produces horrible atrocities in the name of Allah that no one is all that surprised when…

Adults are tied to a tree or planted in the ground and bludgeoned to death by fundamentalists for engaging in consensual sex…

A New York woman trying to file for divorce is beheaded by her husband, who also happens to be the founder of a Muslim-American TV channel dedicated to combating “misconceptions” and “stereotypes” about Islam…

One of Europe’s largest mosques publicly eulogizes a terrorist who killed for the cause of persecuting Christians…

Religious leaders are charged by authorities with plotting spectacular acts of mass murder in the name of their god…

A Christian woman is arrested, raped and tortured by police who also starve her children in an explicit effort to get her to return to Islam…

Gunmen take time out to pray to Allah in amidst shooting and torturing dozens of innocent people at a shopping mall because they are not true believers as a clericapplauds

Clerics advocate raping virgins prior to executing them for verbal crimes and political dissent…

Pollsters admit that about 1 out of 3 Muslims worldwide (450 million) view the terrorism of 9/11 as justified…

The most prominent self-proclaimed Muslim “civil rights” group in America (CAIR) bluntly refuses to condemn an organization (Hamas) that kills innocent people specifically in the name of Islam…

A Christian is murdered in front of his own family for leaving Islam, and his children are then kidnapped and ‘conscripted‘ by his killers…Muslims express no outrage when an admitted terrorist is assigned by a government to oversee “Islamic Affairs”, nor even when unrepentant child killers are invited to make the holy pilgrimage with VIP treatment… 80% of all federal terror prosecutions involve a religion that is practiced by only 1% of all Americans…Each of the top 10 global terrorists in the world happens to share a devout commitment to the same religion

How shocking any of this would be if it didn’t involve the Islamic religion. As it is, much of it barely registers in the media. The very fact that the bar of expectation is set so low for “the Religion of Peace” underscores just how different it really is.

No other religion has to attach “phobia” on the end of its name in order to bully others into silence – lest they be accused of harboring irrational fear for suggesting that Islam is different. Yet, all other religions combined do not account for even a fraction of terrorism in the name of their god that Islam produces each day. No religion is so demanding of respect while doing so little to earn it.

In fact, Islam is more than a religion. It is a rigid political and cultural system with a mandate to conquer and govern the lives of others via necessary force “until religion is only for Allah.” Violence is sanctioned by the Quran, a book which not once tells Muslims to love those outside the faith.

The enemy of this orthodoxy is not just intellectual dissent and free speech, but human freedom. The divine charter of Islam is to impose itself and thus prevent the individual from discovering a different meaning for their own lives.

Islam breeds arrogance and self-absorption, which accounts for the collective petulance and perpetual grievance that characterizes Muslim populations in general — along with the astonishing unwillingness to extend equal moral consideration to those outside the religion.

This disregard for others is rooted in the supremacist ideology of the Quran and Islamic law, which unashamedly draws the sharpest distinction between those within the group of believers and those without – towards whom arbitrary denigration is cast and hatred, harsh treatment and eternal punishment is prescribed.

As a consequence, not a day goes by without someone, somewhere in the world being horribly murdered by devout Muslims in the name of this religion – over ten thousand persons each year. More innocent lives were snuffed out in just two hours by devout Muslims on 9/11 than by the Ku Klux Klan in its entire 145-year history (source). Yet, there was never one massed protest against Osama bin Laden in the entire Muslim world (although many condemned his killing).

Where Islam dominates, there is systematic discrimination and oppression of those of other faiths. Where Muslims are a minority, there is a trend toward peevish self-interest, disloyalty and eventual rebellion and terror when demands for special privilege and entitlements are not met – all part of the eternal jihad to bring about the rule of Islam as Muhammad instructed.

It isn’t the victims who need lessons in tolerance and understanding — it is the Islamic world.

Can one name a single country in the West in which the significant influx of Muslims has not been accompanied by severe social strain? Can one name any country affected in the same way by Hindu immigration?

Those willing to open their minds will find that, regardless of the excuse-du-jour, the remarkably wide-spread level of narcissism, repression and violence is deeply ingrained in the teachings, double standards and early history of the Islamic religion. While there is not a single verse in the Quran that commands love for those outside Islam, there are nearly 500 that either promote violence or allude to Allah’s hatred for unbelievers – in a book that is largely about how to think of and deal harshly with those outside the “true” faith.

Why rely on rosy platitudes and carefully-edited fragments of Quran verses from apologists when Islam speaks so well for itself? Beyond the whitewashing are obvious reasons why so many devotees do horrible things in the name of Allah, while most of the rest never seem to get terribly upset by it – busy as they are throwing tantrums and demanding for themselves what they explicitly deny others.

How much favor are we really doing Muslims by not challenging them to the sort of self-critique necessary for moral progress? How much favor are we doing ourselves by desperately trying to accommodate that which has no intention of accommodating us, or by continuing to sacrifice blood and budgets for those who hate us in return? Is it really in our best interests to assist the expansion within our own borders of a religion that is consistently incapable of building countries in which even Muslims themselves want to live?

Tolerance is a good thing, but not when we allow it to be used cynically against us by those who have no use for it once they obtain power. We need to back away from the altar of political correctness and throw out our preconceptions. We need to embrace critical thinking.

The truth is that Islam is not a religion of peace and it is not like other religion. Sometimes the truth isn’t comfortable. Sometimes the truth offends. But it is far better that we offend others than lose our own freedom.

See also:

FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions
How We Feel about Muslims
Our Case Against Race
What to Do about the Islamic Threat

UTT: Real Truth About Real Threats

guandolo3Understanding theThreat, by John Guandolo, March 6, 2016:

Last week’s UTT article entitled “Unfit for Duty” makes the point that two of the men professionally responsible to the President of the United States for speaking truthfully about national security threats – LtGen HR McMaster and Sebastian Gorka – are not doing so, specifically as it relates to the Islamic threat.

In response to the article, UTT received numerous communications from individuals, groups, and the media.  Many of the comments came from people with a clear understanding of the threat to the United States from the Global Islamic Movement, and the article was referenced and republished in several places including here and here.

Some, however, are still having a hard time understanding the true nature of the threat from Islam.  Many are simply not capable of believing such a grave threat exists in such a real and immediate way.  Some people are still ignorant about what Islam actually teaches because they have been subject to years of Islamic leaders and elected officials in the West telling them Islam is not part of the problem, but is part of the solution.  See the UTT video on this HERE.

Many media outlets appear disinterested in the truth.  Despite the fact Islam – at the doctrinal level at Al-Azhar University in Egypt to Islamic elementary schools – teaches jihad is an obligation until the world is under Islamic rule, the media continues to gobble up whatever the Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas leaders tell them and dutifully regurgitate it.

So when organizations like UTT speak factually about Islam and what Muslims are taught at Islamic schools across the globe, the media stands with terrorists and anti-American terrorist supporters like the Souther Poverty Law Center (SPLC), and levels personal attacks without ever discussing the facts of the matter.  This is because they cannot win the argument on the facts.

SPLC’s President Richard Cohen must remember he sat next to UTT’s Vice President Chris Gaubatz in the summer of 2016 while Mr. Gaubatz – who went undercover at CAIR for six months and retrieved over 12,000 documents from their headquarters revealing Hamas (doing business as CAIR) is involved in fraud, sedition, terrorism, and other offenses – testified before Senator Cruz’s hearing.  Mr. Cohen cannot honestly say he is not aware CAIR is a Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood entity.  We do have photographic and video evidence Mr. Cohen was seated approximately 18 inches away from Mr. Gaubatz as he testified.

gaubatz-testifying

See the coverage of UTT’s rebuttal of SPLC’s attempt to slander UTT and its founder John Guandolo here and Chris Gaubatz’s testimony in front of a U.S. Senate hearing detailing the Muslim Brotherhood/Islamic threat while seated next to SPLC President Richard Cohen here.

A day is fast coming where attorneys and leaders at SPLC, as well as members of the media, will have to account for their direct and material support for terrorist groups, especially since it is a violation of federal law.

So what is it UTT teaches that causes such spasms among hard-left marxists and jihadists?

Its called “The Truth.”  Here is a small taste of it.

“An Introduction to Hadith and Fiqh” published in Uganda for children and adults new to Islam states: “Sharia basically means Islamic Law…Therefore the law is basically a users’ manual (for Muslims)…The Sharia is composite in that Islam is a complete way of life.  In an Islamic state ideology, law and religious faith are interrelated…Sharia is the ideal code of conduct.”

What Islam is All About is a widely used text book for junior high school students in Islamic schools in America.  It says “The law of the land is the sharia of Allah” and also says “The duty of the Muslim citizen is to be loyal to the Islamic state.”

Reliance of the Traveller, a 14th century book of Islamic Law certified as good law by Al Azhar and the Muslim Brotherhood (IIIT & Fiqh Council of North America) states:  “The good is not what reason considers good, nor the bad what reason considers bad.  The measure of good and bad according to this school of thought is the Sacred Law, not reason.”

Reliance of the Traveller is the book of sharia the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) says should be in the home of every Muslim in America, and was widely available at the Muslim Brotherhood’s last few national MAS-ICNA conferences.  It defines jihad as:  “Jihad means to war against non-Muslims” and is “obligatory” until the world is under sharia.  Reliance also includes “There is no indemnity for killing an apostate since it is killing someone who deserves to die.”

The last fatwa issued by a sitting Caliph was clear about the duties of Muslims with regard to jihad and fighting non-Muslims:  “Those who, at a time when all Moslems are summoned to fight, avoid the struggle and refuse to join in the Holy War, are they exposed to the wrath of God, to great misfortunes, and to the deserved punishment?  Yes.”  (Caliph Mehmed V, November 15, 1914)

The Muslim community voted the Grand Sheikh of Al Azhar the number 1 most influential Muslim on the planet demonstrating how Muslims view the authority of Al Azhar.  The Chairman of Al Azhar, Dr. Abdul Fatah Idris states:  “This is jihad, when a Muslim fights an infidel without treaty to make the word of Allah Most High supreme, forcing him to fight or invading his land, this is a permissible matter according to the consensus of the jurists.  Indeed, it is an obligation for all Muslims.  Now, if the deeds of jihad — including fighting the infidels and breaking their spine through all possible means — are permissible according to the Sharia, then it is impossible to define those acts as terrorism.”

Islamic scholars identify Sura (chapter) 9, verse 5 of the Koran as “the verse of the sword” and it reads: “Fight the unbelievers wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush.”  The Tafsir, which legally defines every verse in the Koran (because this is a LEGAL system), defines the phrase “and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush” to mean:  “Do not wait until you find them.  Rather, seek and besiege them in their areas and forts, gather intelligence about them in the various roads and fairways so that what is made wide looks even smaller to them.  This way, they will have no choice but to die or embrace Islam.

The most authoritative hadith scholar in Islam is Bukhari who quotes the Islamic prophet Mohammad as saying (2926, Book 56, Hadith 139):  “The hour of judgment will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them.”

This would naturally lead to Islamic schools in America teaching:  “Jihad in the path of God – which consists of battling against unbelief, oppression, injustice, and those who perpetrate it – is the summit of Islam. This religion arose through jihad and through jihad was its banner raised high. It is one of the noblest acts, which brings one closer to God, and one of the most magnificent acts of obedience to God.” (Hadith and Islamic Culture: Management, Social Studies, Natural History, and Technical Studies)

The question is not “Why would they teach this in Islamic schools in America?”  The question is “Why wouldn’t they teach this?”  It is what Islam is.

Why are Anwar al Awlaki’s CDs and books sold in mosque bookstores across America?  Why was Omar Abdel Rahman (the “Blind Sheikh”) a revered Islamic scholar around the world?  Why did a prominent scholar and teacher at Al Azhar, Abdullah Azzam, join Osama bin Laden to create Al Qaeda?  These men were teaching and acting on authentic and authoritative Islamic doctrine.

The Law of Apostasy states acts that entail leaving Islam include:  “to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law” and carries the death penalty. [Reliance, o8.7 (19)]

It is a capital crime in Islam for a Muslim to teach another Muslim something about Islam that is not true, and it is obligatory for Muslims to lie to non-Muslims when the goal is obligatory (Reliance, r8.0) – like in jihad.

So, for national security strategists, intelligence professionals, media people, elected officials, university presidents, and others – if you want to learn about Islam, and your path to learning includes talking to the local Imam or your friend who is a Muslim, that is unprofessional.  Read books written for Muslim audiences by Islamic authorities and you will always get the “version” of Islam ISIS and Al Qaeda teach and propagate.

There is one Islam and one Sharia.

Come take a class with UTT and learn the truth.

***

Go to UTT YouTube channel for more of the truth

On Defining Religion

(Image source: Brent Payne/Flickr)

(Image source: Brent Payne/Flickr)

Gatestone Institute, by Nonie Darwish, February 12, 2017:

  • What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam and that Muslims must, sooner or later, demand to live under an Islamic government.
  • The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader.
  • Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book” — Jews and Christians — but to replace them, after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible.
  • Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and it relies on government enforcement to do so.
  • Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) said that President Donald Trump’s 90-day ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries is “a religiously based ban,” and “if they can ban Muslims, why can’t they ban Mormons.” This has become the position of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, which has influenced not only the American public but has convinced the majority of the world that America is “bad.” How can we blame the world, and even a good segment of American citizens, for hating America when such disingenuous and misleading claims are aired to the world from US officials and broadcast by American television channels?

The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump Administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader, rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader. He ran as a Republican; meanwhile, Democrats and the mainstream media refuse to engage in respectful and legitimate debate on the most vital threat to Western civilization in the twenty-first century: Islam. Truth has become irrelevant; people seem to prefer a political game of tug-of-war to sway public opinion against the Trump Administration, and, presumably, to elect Democrats forever. That is how the system is set up.

Political discussions on television have become extremely frustrating; they have turned into shouting matches and name-calling at the least informative levels. Television hosts often become instigators and participants in the shouting matches. The thinking is apparently that the louder they get, the more attractive the program will be. Meanwhile everyone is talking at once; the viewer cannot hear anyone, so the program could not be more boring.

Under the US Constitution, freedom of religion is protected. and Islam has been welcomed inside the West on that basis as one of the three Abrahamic religions. According to Western values and the Western understanding of the word, “religion” is supposed to be a personal relationship with God, where free will is of utmost importance; the believer has authority only over himself or herself when it comes to religious laws or punishing sins (such as leaving the religion or committing adultery) — quite different from criminal laws intended to protect society. Western values also allow followers of a religion the freedom to proselytize, but never by resorting to government enforcement.

Bottom line, the Western definition of religion is in harmony with the Biblical values of the human rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that all human beings are created equal under the law. It is considered a basic Western value to view God, family and country as a top priority.

Now let us compare these values to Islamic values:

  1. Muslim citizens have the right to punish other citizens with humiliating, severe, cruel and unusual punishments such as death, flogging and amputation, for sinning against Allah, the Quran or Islam. Those “crimes” include leaving Islam, being a homosexual, or committing adultery. And if the Islamic government does not enforce such punishments, any Muslim on the street has the right to apply the punishment against another Muslim and not be prosecuted. That is why apostates, such as myself, cannot visit any Muslim county; the fear is not only from Islamic governments but from anyone on the street.
  2. Being a Muslim is not a personal relationship with God, as it is under the Bible, but is enforced by the state at birth. When a child is born in Egypt to a Muslim father, the birth certificate is stamped “Muslim” and all government-issued documents as well. A child must learn Islamic studies in school and practice Islam throughout his life. In Egypt, the twin sons of a Christian divorced mother were forced to take Islamic studies and become Muslim just because their originally-Christian father converted to Islam. Today, in Egypt, I am still considered Muslim and such a status could never change if I ever lived there again.
  3. Islamic law and leaders rely on government enforcement — under penalty of death — to keep Muslims within Islam and to convert the minority Christian population into Islam. Islamic sharia law, obliges Islamic states to enforce religious law, and if the Muslim head of state refuses to follow religious law, sharia permits the public to use force to remove the head of state from office.
  4. Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book,” Jews and Christians, but to replace them — after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible. Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and relies on government enforcement to do so.

The tenets above are just a few of the differences in values between Islam, the Bible and the Western concept of religion. What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam, and Muslims must demand to live under an Islamic government sooner or later. That might explain the reason for the eternal violence in nearly all Muslim countries, between government being in the hands of a religious theocracy or of the military. Islam, as it is practiced today, has violated all Western definitions of religion and values.

Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of “Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values.”

Gad Saad interviews Ibn Warraq

warraq-books
Published on Feb 8, 2017 by Gad Saad

Topics covered include Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton, Trump’s recent executive order on immigration, multiculturalism, cultural relativism, Islamic doctrines, Sharia law, the Western mindset regarding Islam, the rise of atheism in the Muslim world, and Islamic reformation, among other topics.

Ibn Warraq’s Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/Ibn-Warraq-8…

Ibn Warraq’s website: http://www.ibnwarraq.com

Trump’s immigration order: Why Islam is the issue

donald_trump_29093637770-868x579WND, BY LT. COL. JAMES ZUMWALT, 02/01/2017

On Friday, Jan. 27, President Donald Trump fulfilled a campaign promise, briefly imposing a temporary ban on immigrants entering the U.S. to allow the government time to implement a more effective screening policy. Cries ranging from unconstitutionality to simply being un-American quickly followed.

It is imperative any analysis of this issue be driven by logic – not emotion. Yet critics play on emotion, claiming Trump’s ban targets Muslims.

As of 2010, 49 countries had Muslim majority populations; this ban only lists seven. And, all seven were flagged earlier by President Barack Obama as “countries of concern.”

They also were countries Obama had previously imposed restrictions against, including Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. All Trump did was to broaden those restrictions into a temporary ban. Critics voicing concerns about Trump’s ban registered no concerns about Obama’s earlier restrictions.

Other critics complain the ban fails to include countries with links to the 9/11 attacks – Saudi Arabia, Egypt and United Arab Emirates. This may well have been motivated by the false hope using Obama’s list would stymy criticism.

Clearly, the seven represent countries either in turmoil or known to foster anti-U.S. and terrorist sentiments. The fact all are heavily Islamic does not give them a free pass precisely for this reason. The ban is legal, focusing on threats emanating from the most prevalent countries.

Democracies have a value system tolerant of diverse beliefs, particularly when it concerns religion. What we need understand is some beliefs come with “baggage” – i.e., a noted propensity for violence. We simply cannot wave these believers through on the hope and prayer they will not act upon them.

Without stigmatizing an entire religion as violent, but while recognizing believers have performed numerous violent acts in its name, scrutinizing entry is not unreasonable. This is particularly so for immigrants originating from countries known as cauldrons of violence.

We must understand the baggage Islam brings with it and the threat it presents to our national security.

Islam is unique among religions. It is a hybrid involving two ideologies – one religious, one political. Fundamentals for both rest upon three pillars: the Quran, the Sira (Prophet Muhammad’s biography) and the Hadith (traditions mandating believers live their lives as did Muhammad).

An effort to separate these two ideologies by analyzing these pillars was undertaken by professor Bill Warner. Known as the Trilogy Project, his approach “was based upon scientific principles and objective methods, so that any independent person could achieve the same results if they used the same methods.”

It involved identifying every reference within the pillars where Islam dictates how Muslims are to treat “kafirs” – i.e., non-believers. Such references were tagged as “political” Islam for failing to address the believer’s relationship with Allah, while references that did address it were deemed “religious.”

Astonishingly, Warner found, “The Quran says that the kafir may be murdered, tortured, plotted against, enslaved, robbed, insulted, beheaded, demeaned, mocked and so forth. The Hadith and Sira agree. …”

Warner’s analysis applied a well-known ethical yardstick – the Golden Rule. As it demands one treat others as one would like to be treated, he noted its application, “…removes the brutality, insults and prejudice directed at the kafir. The constant attacks would disappear.”

Significant to our Muslim immigration threat analysis is noting Project Trilogy’s results. Applying the Golden Rule to these three pillars would require a large amount of their content, disguised as religion, be eliminated as purely political. Warner determined that 61 percent of the Quran’s content, 75 percent of the Sira’s and 20 percent of the Hadith’s meet this test.

Warner underscores Islam’s bottom line: “The worst error in thinking about Islam is that it is a religion … religion is the smallest part of Islam.” We must understand this: Islam is predominantly a political ideology packaged as a religion.

Just imagine Democrats or Republicans seeking to do what Muslims have – establishing a political ideology disguised as a religion. Think how much more effective they would be in imposing it upon Americans.

As Muslims’ fundamental beliefs evolve from these pillars, we must recognize what they teach believers about non-believers: intolerance.

The pillars tell Muslims to force non-believers, by whatever means necessary, to submit to Islam or die. Interestingly, any Muslim denying this is true becomes an apostate (disbeliever); however, any Muslim denying it just to mislead a kafir is exempted under taqiyya — the Islamic concept sanctioning lies by Muslims to non-Muslims to further Islam’s influence.

This leads us to question President Barack Obama’s assertions over the years that Islam is “peaceful.” The Trilogy Project results undermine this. Obama claimed Islam was hijacked by extremists endeavoring to give it a violent interpretation; we now know Islam was hijacked by moderates endeavoring to give it a peaceful one.

If an ideology is built around a belief system mandating all others submit to it or die, its believers potentially are a threat to non-believers. Does this mean all believers will embrace their right to kill? Of course not; however, the ideology issues believers an Allah-sanctioned “hunting license” to do so. Indiscriminately opening our doors to them without adequate screening leaves us to determine the identification of license users by the non-believer body count they leave behind. This was what we had to do in San Bernardino, Orlando, Fort Hood and elsewhere.

Accordingly, all Muslims conceivably present a potential danger to followers of all other religions. But critics objecting to Trump’s ban as targeting a specific religion ignore a responsibility to better understand Islam’s political ideology. Giving Islam the full weight of a religion only invites future attacks by Muslim extremists, gaining entry posing as moderates. Harboring a political ideology, Islam exceeds its baggage weight as a religion.

Too many of Trump’s immigration critics base their opposition on what is right about America without understanding what is wrong about Islam. What is wrong about Islam is the intolerant political ideology it brings, packaged as a religion. Islam’s small religious component has become the camel’s nose under the West’s tent seeking to impose its political ideology upon us. We ignore it at our peril.

Video: Bill Warner Speaks at ACT Cleveland 5 Dec 2016

Published on Dec 7, 2016 by KRoseVideo

From ACT For America – Cleveland, Ohio Chapter:
=======================================
“I am pleased to invite you to come and hear our next guest, Dr. Bill Warner. He is considered by CAIR to be one of the top Islamophobes in the country. Now consider the source, LOL!

Dr. Warner is a renowned national and international speaker on the topics of Islamic doctrine and history.

Dr. Warner will explain quite clearly how and why Mohammed’s success began with migration. The Islamic calendar is based on Mohammed’s migration, the Hijra. Islamic migration is the beginning of Sharia and Jihad.

Here’s more of Dr. Warner’s Bio:

Dr. Bill Warner has been a physicist, businessman and professor. He is the director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam. He is the first person to use the scientific method to produce a Koran that can be easily understood.

Dr. Warner made the other two sacred texts of Islam, the Sira, Mohammed’s biography, and the Hadith, his Traditions, simple to read and understand. He has written a dozen books on Islam. His Sharia Law for Non-Muslims is an international best seller.

Dr. Warner developed the first self-study courses on Islam — The Foundations of Islam and a three level training-A Self-Study Course on Political Islam, that explains Islamic political doctrine.”
======================================
see: http://www.politicalislam.com

maxresdefault-11

Identifying the Threat

maxresdefault-1-868x488AIM, by Retired Adm. James A. Lyons

On 13 December 2016, Israeli Ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer received the prestigious Freedom Flame Award presented annually by the Center For Security Policy (CSP) for his unswerving commitment to freedom and democracy. The CSP is headed by Frank Gaffney, who has been a staunch voice in promoting freedom and democracy for the Western world, but also for Israel which finds itself in a sea of hostility.

Gaffney and the dedicated team of professionals at CSP, in their fight to protect our Constitution, have always put principle foremost in their efforts. This fact was recognized by Ambassador Dermer in his acceptance remarks. Separately, Ambassador Dermer was criticized by the left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) for accepting the award because the SPLC considers Gaffney and the CSP to be anti-Muslim.

What SPLC principally objects to is the CSP’s exposure of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) penetration in all of our government agencies including the White House. This should be of great concern to all Americans since the MB creed is to destroy America from within (Civilization Jihad) by our own miserable hands and replace our Constitution with the seventh century draconian Islamic “Shariah Law.” This point is not debatable, since facts supporting this claim were introduced as evidence in the Holy Land Foundation HAMAS terror funding trial in 2008 in Dallas, Texas. Two principal MB front groups, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) were designated (among others) as un-indicated co-conspirators in that trial. The Obama White House frequently uses these two MB front groups to deflect any linkage of Islam to terrorist acts.

Ambassador Dermer then went on to address how, in his view, the main terrorist threat we face today, what he called is “militant Islam.” This was more than surprising as it implies that there is some “non-militant” or “moderate” version of Islam. While it is true that all Muslims do not adhere to the scriptures in the Quran, there is only one Islam; one doctrine; one Islamic law (Shariah); and one scripture–the Quran!

Muslims do not consider Islam a religion but more “a complete way of life.” Furthermore, according to that doctrine, the law and scriptures in the Quran, as affirmed by all senior scholars of Islam since the 10th century, jihad (warfare against non-Muslims per Islamic law) is obligatory for all Muslims. This is true for all time until the world is dominated by Allah (Q 8:39).

Many Western leaders have failed to comprehend the supremacist hostility of Islamic doctrine and are delusional to the point that they believe that there is some version of Islam that can co-exist with Western values. They are quick to point out that not all Muslims are terrorists. True, Muslims are individuals and some will be more devout or faithful or obedient than other Muslims. But that doesn’t matter because it has no bearing whatsoever on the core doctrine of Islam which includes the obligation to support jihad. Therefore, even though individual Muslims may be fine upstanding human beings, friendly, and embracing our culture, that has no bearing on the core principles of Islam.

All four major schools of Sunni Islam and the principal Shiite one are in agreement about all major elements of Shariah, including death for adultery, apostasy, homosexuality and sometimes slander. They also all agree on the commitment to jihad, Jew-hatred and Islamic supremacism. Jihad on the part of both Sunnis and Shiites has continued non-stop since Muhammad led the migration (hijra) to Medina in 622 A.D. Therefore, what we are witnessing today in Europe and here in the U.S. is nothing more than the continuation of the jihad launched by Muhammad following the hijra. Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in 1838, “Jihad, holy war, is an obligation for all believers….The state of war is the natural state with regard to the infidel….These doctrines of which the practical outcome is obvious are found on every page and in almost every word of the Koran….The violent tendencies of the Koran are so striking that I cannot understand how any man with good sense could miss them.” Amen! Jihad is not something unique to the 20th or 21st century. It has only been suppressed when confronted resolutely by both political and military force.

While President al-Sisi of Egypt, speaking before all the leading Sunni clerics at al-Azhar University, called for a reformation of Islam on 1 January 2015, unfortunately, his call has no standing with the leading Sunni clerics. He is viewed by them as a political/military leader, not a scholar or jurist of Islam. In fact, it may be said that Islam already has been through three major “Reformations”: these were led by the 1st Caliph Abu Bakr in the Ridda—or Apostasy—wars; Ibn Wahhab in the 1700’s; and now the Islamic State and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, whose name tells you whom it is he emulates. These reformations have been more in the sense of “purification and returning to Mohammad’s true intent” than making Islam compatible with Western values.

Until it is understood by Western leaders that Islam is a totalitarian ideology bent on world domination, masquerading as a religion, we will not be successful in defeating this threat. The current migrations to America and Europe must not only be stopped but reversed. Islam cannot coexist with Western values and must be confronted resolutely, both politically and militarily.

Retired Adm. James A. Lyons was commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations. Lyons is a member of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi.

‘Real Housewives of ISIS’

real-housewives-of-isis

Geller Report, By Pamela Geller – on January 4, 2017

The BBC created a short video designed as a fake trailer for a show parodying Real Housewives – ‘Real Housewives of ISIS.’

I, for one, do not think it funny. Not for the reasons that Muslims and leftists don’t. Leftists and most especially Muslims don’t think it’s funny because they see it as mocking Islam and many support the work of ISIS. Insulting, mocking or criticizing Islam is punishable by death which is why I have been targeted for assassination multiple times by devout Muslims.

I don’t think it’s funny because the oppression, subjugation, misery, and slaughtering of millions to impose Islam across the world is happening now. The blood in Istanbul still stains the streets. Berlin, Nice, San Bernardino, Paris, Copenhagen, Orlando, Ohio State, Garland, NYC, Jerusalem, Brussels, Munich, Nairobi, etc — it’s too fresh, the flesh and the bone.

And yes, while Charlie Chaplin was funny and phenomenal as Hitler in The Dictator, his film was a warning in 1940. And Hogan’s Heroes was funny because we had already won the war.  But the films of the mid-forties about the Nazis were dead serious and rightly so. America was in the thick of it then just as ewe are now. And like the Europe is really in the throes of war.

I guess we should applaud the BBC for evening attempting such a thing because they are as much the problem as the ideologies they protect — jihad and sharia. Still it is something.

WATCH: LEFTISTS AND MUSLIMS HAVE MELTDOWN AFTER BBC AIRS PARODY ‘REAL HOUSEWIVES OF ISIS’

The Rebel, January 4, 2017:

The BBC did something no one expected and amusingly mocked the Islamic State and women who travel to Syria in a clip from their show Revolting.

The short video is designed as a fake trailer for a show parodying Real Housewives. There’s actually some fun shots thrown at Islamists, feminists, and the religion of Islam itself. It’s borderline politically incorrect, which means it’s way funnier than anything the CBC has ever done.

However, some on the left don’t like this one bit. On Facebook Aftab Bashir wrote, “Let’s make satire about British soldiers being killed in Iraq and let’s ridicule their widows and children coz its all a bit of a laugh ain’t it.”

In a follow up comment, Ebrahim Dar-wa said, “Funny for non Muslims but we don’t take this as a joke. Even though ISIS is made up by the West a lot of views are based on religion so this is attacking Islamic values.”

Another user, Hannah Berry wrote, “How about instead of putting in the money to make this you could actually send the money out to help those suffering in places like Allepo.”

More Muslims whined saying “Disgraceful and distasteful. The BBC is normalising Islamophobia through comedy” and “So a show depicting hijab wearing women as terrorists. How do you think this will help the Muslim women living in west suffering daily attacks from ignorant, hateful people? This is really sick.”

While these may seem like minority Muslim opinions, you’d be surprised. A poll released last year found that 23 per cent of British Muslims support the introduction of Sharia law. And that’s not all. 39 per cent of Muslims, male and female, say a woman should always obey her husband.

Inside the Minds of Orthodox Muslims

islam2

Citizen Warrior, January 3, 2017:

The following are excerpts from an article in The Week entitled, Inside the Minds of Jihadis. It is a book review:

As with any enemy, the best way to defeat the Islamic State is to understand it. And to do that, the best place to start is a new book by Graeme Wood, The Way of the Strangers. This book gives us the best insight yet into what makes the Islamic State tick.

Wood, a national correspondent at The Atlantic and lecturer in political science at Yale, spent years from the streets of Cairo to London to the Philippines to Australia, interviewing supporters of the Islamic State and getting inside their heads. What results is a series of gripping, fascinating portraits. Wood’s subjects have little cageyness towards him. Since everything is foreordained by Allah anyway, revealing your plans to a Western journalist won’t change the outcome. Plus, Wood has the talented journalist’s skill for interview and observation. He’s an astute psychologist and a good writer to boot…

The book’s implicit thesis, one which is both inarguably true and persistently denied by so many decision makers in the West, is that ideas have consequences. While the motives of any individual and group of people are always multifaceted and almost always include a good helping of interest-seeking and self-delusion, it is also impossible to deny that large sections of Islamic State members and supporters, from its leadership down to foot soldiers, make decisions on the basis of what they believe.

As the Islamic State keeps repeating over and over through its high-polish propaganda apparatus, it has a theology, and this theology has content, and an internal logic, that can be understood on its merits. Once this theology is understood, and once the proponents of this theology are actually listened to, and their actions watched, it becomes impossible to deny that this theology is a key cause (maybe not the cause, but a key cause) of the actions of the Islamic State, most of its leaders, and most of its supporters.

What’s more — and this is the source of the willful blindness of elite policymakers and commentators towards the Islamic State — this theology does have Islamic roots…

All Muslims agree on at least one thing, which is that Muslims should follow the example of the Prophet Muhammad. And the Prophet Muhammad did do many of the things that the Islamic State is most reviled for, such as waging absolute religious warfare, engaging in slavery, stoning adulterers, and so forth…

It’s a great read. But more importantly, Wood’s book reveals truths about ISIS that are hiding in plain sight — but that our leaders make themselves willfully ignorant of. They ought to read his book, too.

Read the whole article here: Inside the Minds of Jihadis