Why Free Speech & Why Not

I received an email titled "Properly Understanding The Times - Part 2" from Act! for America. If you haven't joined yet, you can read the article by clicking the title above.

In the article, Guy Rodgers points out the risk inherent in tolerating relatively minor impositions against liberty. Islam's demand for censorship though national & international imposition of its blasphemy law is one such imposition which threatens our freedom of expression. He illustrates his point with mention of an Austrian M.P. recently prosecuted & convicted of "hate speech" and the pending prosecution of Geert Wilders, Dutch M.P. He shows us that the issue is not novel, with a censorship anecdote more than 200 years old.

Rodgers follows up by reproducing Andrew Bostom's article: "Wilders' Defense of Free Speech". Dr. Bostom goes into some detail concerning the accuracy of Wilders' citation of the Qur'an.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference is pressing for censorship in the U.N. and its append ant bodies. Recent resolutions by the General Assembly & Human Rights Council demand global imposition of Islam's blasphemy laws. That demand is echoed in the Durban II Draft Document.

What consequences would ensue from criminalizing criticism of Nazism before and during the Second World War or Communism at the peak of the Cold War? Accurately identifying and characterizing our enemy is vitally necessary to preparing and executing defense against aggression.

In a representative republic, the electors need to be free to hold open and honest discussion of all facets of current officials, aspirants to high office and their legislative programs. The Democrat Party seeks, through re-imposition of the 'fairness doctrine', 'ownership diversity' and 'community advisory boards' to intimidate broadcasters so that Conservative talk radio hosts will be silenced.

In an article entitled "Why Freedom of Speech?" Baron Bodissey reminds me of a statement by President Barack Hussein Obama in his first international television interview.

Quoted, from msnbc out of context, emphasis added.

Now, my job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect. I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.

The largest one, Indonesia. And so what I want to communicate is the fact that in all my travels throughout the Muslim world, what I've come to understand is that regardless of your faith -- and America is a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers -- regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams.

And my job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.

The highlighted expression indicates to this writer that President Obama is in sympathy with the OIC campaign of censorship. It raises severe doubts concerning his supposed withdrawal from the preparations for the U.N. Racism Conference because objections to proposed censorship were cited as one reason for pulling out. The remainder of the excerpt would give the impression that Islam is, as President George W. Bush described it, a 'religion of peace'. In actual fact, it is a war cult. For documented proof of that fatal fact, download and read Know Thine Enemy.chm.

By reading the U.N. resolutions linked above, you can discover how the O.I.C. couches its demands in terms of 'respect' for sanctities and association of Islam with terrorism & violence. By reading the appropriate sections of Shari'ah, you can discover the law they intend to impose. These quotes are from Umdat as-Salik, Book O. [Enter the reference letter & numbers in the search engine in the frame surrounding the text image to locate the text for further exploration. ]

O8.7: Acts that Entail Leaving Islam...
-4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);

-5- to deny the existence of Allah, His beginingless eternality, His endless eternality, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him (dis: v1);

-6- to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat;

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

-16- to revile the religion of Islam;

Those are acts of apostasy, punishable by death, prescribed in this statement.

O8.1

When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.

O8.2

In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.

Dhimmis, conquered Jews,Christians & Zoroastrians submitted under a 'treaty of protection' suffer a similar imposition.

Chapter O11.0: Non-Muslim Subjects of the Islamic State (Ahl Al-Dhimma)

O11.5

Such non-Muslim subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. In addition, they:

-6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;

-7- and are forbidden to build new churches.

O11.10

The agreement is also violated (A: with respect to the offender alone) if the state has stipulated that any of the following things break it, and one of the subjects does so anyway, though if the state has not stipulated that these break the agreement, then they do not; namely, if one of the subject people:

-5- or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam.

O11.11

When a subject's agreement with the state has been violated, the caliph chooses between the four alternatives mentioned above in connection with prisoners of war (o9.14).

O9.14

When an adult male is taken captive, the caliph (def: o25) considers the interests (O: of Islam and the Muslims) and decides between the prisoner's death, slavery, release without paying anything, or ransoming himself in exchange for money or for a Muslim captive held by the enemy.

If the enormity of that has not sunk in, re-read the portions I emphasized until it does. A dhimmi may be killed for criticizing Islam. Like it or not, that is Islamic law, which the O.I.C & President Obama seek to impose upon us. Respect is given where respect is due; not to a war cult. If you don't understand that Islam is a war cult, read O9.1 through O10.3.

Big Lies in High Places

Many Voices: understanding the debate about preventing violent extremism - Hazel Blears MP
Source: DCLG
Published Friday, 27 February, 2009 - 09:28
British Member of Parliament Hazel Blears spoke to the London School of Economics, making several idiotic statements. At the conclusion of her remarks, she said this.

And if we are to change minds and win this debate, it will not be through restricting our engagement to a select few, but through bringing in new voices: not through concealing what we believe in, but through making our arguments confidently: and not through acquiescing with those with whom we disagree, but through being robust in our challenge to them.

Thank you for listening - I welcome your questions and comments.

M.P. Blears probably won't see my comments, and surely would not welcome them. While I agree with much of what she said, I find these expressions of idiotic ignorance too egregious to let pass without condemnation.

Barack Obama used his Inaugural Address in February to tell the world:

"Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred."

So what is this 'far-reaching network of violence and hatred'?

It is rooted in a shifting mosaic of international groupings, with their origins in the struggle of the mujahedeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan, in the refugee camps and some madrassas on the Afghan-Pakistan border, in Algeria's political unrest of the 1980s and 1990s, and in the war in Iraq.

Islamic Jihad, with its tactics of genocide & terrorism, flows directly from Islam's canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence. None of the major schools of Shari'ah rejects the Jihad imperatives found in Surah Al-Anfal & At-Taubah. The congruent pattern of speech & conduct formed by Moe's recitation & sunnah is reflected in Shari'ah. Let doubters & dissenters turn first to the two surahs above named, next to Riyad us-Saliheen Book 11, Chapter 234: Obligation of Jihad and finally to Umdat as-Salik Book O, Chapter 9.

There is the obvious danger that we say 'Islamism' but people hear 'Islam' or 'Islamic', especially as the word translates poorly into other languages such as Arabic. Even in English, where the two words are distinct, many people lack the political literacy to distinguish between a political ideology dubbed by some as Islamism and Islam itself. There are plenty of people, for example the far right in this country, or Geert Wilders' outfit in Holland, who would wish to conflate the two in order to stir up race hate.

Islam is not a race, it is a war cult which has enslaved members of several races. Arabs, Asians,Blacks, and Europeans became Muslims at sword point. Many of their descendants remain Muslim out of tradition and filial piety; they have known nothing else and would be dispossessed, tortured and killed as required by Islamic law if they abandoned Islam. Moe's abominable creation is classified as a Deen, way of life, which encompasses all human activity. It conflates the spiritual & temporal. It prescribes certain duties which must be performed; Jihad: the military conquest of the world, is one of them.

A second trap is that to talk of 'Islamism' suggests there is a unified, single movement. But there is no more a unified Islamism than there is a single socialism, or a single conservatism, or a single liberalism.

While maintenance of perfect uniformity is nearly impossible, Islam has a standard, which was set by Moe in his recitation and exemplified in his sunnah for all Muslims to obey and emulate. Which schismatic group rejects and denies the Qur'an? What Allah said about Jihad, terror & genocide is law. What did he say about them? Unless you read the Qur'an,. you will have no clue. To complete the pattern which forms Shari'ah, you must know what Moe said and did about them, from his sunnah.

For example, Al-Qaeda is in conflict with the Muslim Brotherhood over fundamental questions such as the nature of the state, and the duty of the individual to fight the perceived enemies of Islam.

Does the ignorant speaker know her head from her butt? For certain she does not know that Al-Qaeda is a branch of Al-Ikhwan Al-Islamiyya. Has she read the writings of Hasan Al-Banna or Abdullah Azzam? Has she read the Charter of Hamas, which includes the Al-Ikhwan's motto? No, instead she pontificates from atop the pedestal of ignorance.

A third trap is to assume that all Islamists are terrorists. Some groups specifically oppose violence but have religious views which are very conservative and can conflict with other values we share in society.

It is not possible to be a Muslim and oppose violence & terrorism, both of which are intrinsic sacraments of Islam. Such opponents are branded hypocrites by Islam's demon and founder; accursed, to be fought and ushered into Hell along with us Kuffar. Islam is all or nothing; you can not pick and choose.

A belief in the supremacy of the Muslim people, in a divine duty to bring the world under the control of hegemonic Islam, in the establishment of a theocratic Caliphate, and in the undemocratic imposition of theocratic law on whole societies: these are the defining and common characteristics of the disparate strands of this ideology here and around the world.

The items in that list flow directly from Allah's word, as recited by Moe and codified in the Qur'an; exemplified by his sunnah. They are standard Islam, not exceptional ism.

You can't ignore the facts that this ideology is rooted in a twisted reading of Islam. The academics, scholars and imams I meet to discuss these issues tell me that the message of Islam is one of peace; and the followers of Islam I meet oppose the single narrative promulgated by Al-Qaeda, and certainly oppose violence. Indeed, the vast majority are proud of their faith and their nationality, see no conflict or contradiction between being British and being Muslim, and are an integral part of the economic, cultural and social life of their neighbourhood and the country, giving the lie to the ideas of division and difference that lie at the heart of extremist ideology.

Your facts are fallacies! Allah's commands are contained in clear verses whose meanings are obvious. You do not know this because you have not read 3:7; nor have you read Ibn Kathir's Tafsir of 3:7.
The message of Islam is one of peace: the peace pertaining after the violent conquest of the entire world! "Fight them until", "fight those who","strive hard and fight with your lives...""made a great slaughter", "killed and wounded many of them". Hell yes, a religion of peace indeed. The ignorant fool has not read the Qur'an. Ibn Kathir's Tafsir will make it easy for you; it presents the ayat, their translations and the hadith which exemplify them all in one compact text. Read them and understand the truth.

• The Command to strike the Enemies' Necks, tighten Their Bonds, and then free Them either by an Act of Grace or for a Ransom
• The Order to fight until there is no more Fitnah
• Allah gives Victory to the Believing Group
• Permission to fight; this is the first Ayah of Jihad
• The Order for Jihad against the Disbelievers, the Closest, then the Farthest Areas
• The Order to fight to eradicate Shirk and Kufr
• The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah
• The Order for Jihad against the Disbelievers and Hypocrites
• The Good News that Muslims will conquer the Known World, and ultimately the Entire World
• The Good News that Muslims will Dominate the People of the Book
• The Good News that Islam shall prevail

This is what Islam truly means in practice for the vast majority: a personal and spiritual faith matched by a sense of social responsibility, motivating people to do good for their neighbourhood and community.

The vast majority of Muslims know little of Islam beyond what they have been told by the Imam or Mullah. One recent survey reported that only 13% of Muslims have read the Qur'an.

With groups which call for or support terrorist acts there is no room whatsoever for debate, only vociferous opposition.

There is one such group: Islam. Have you read 3:151, 8:12, 8:60, 33:26-27, 59:2 and 59:13? Why not? Here is your chance, click the links and read them. Because you have not read the hadith, you did not know that Moe was a terrorist. He did not just preach it, he practiced it. Read them and curse Islam!
Bukhari Volume 1, Book 7, Number 331, Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220

If you will make good use of the links I have provided in this post, you can access the Qur'an & tafsir and four hadith collections along with an assortment of hadith with commentary and the handbook of Islamic law. If you will not take the time and exert the effort necessary to comprehend the reality of Islam, you will surely fall prey to the liars & ignoramuses who pontificate from the pedestals of al-takeyya & ignorance. The most egregious ayat, along with relevant tafsir have been compiled with the most egregious hadith and Shari'ah, into a Windows Help File: EgregiousAyat.chm. Download it and start learning.

Church of England Surrenders to Islam

In one of the most stunning remarks in the Church of England's 1500 year history, current Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams ceded centuries of ideological ground to marauding Muslim demands without even a fight.

Rowan actually said that, "the introduction in Britain of some aspects of sharia law was unavoidable."

Britons are rightfully outraged. Based on the high volume of protest hurled at the Archbishop, many are not only convinced his statements are untrue, but are quite willing to take action to prevent such paganry to rule the people of England.

Williams later defended his statements by saying, he was "exploring ways in which reasonable accommodation might be made within existing arrangements for religious conscience" and his core aim was "to tease out some of the broader issues around the rights of religious groups within a secular state".

What the good, most and right reverend ought to do is check his history books a little and see that Islam does not have the heretofore: "conscience." Or perhaps he could simply turn on the news - any channel, any day.

As for the "rights of religious groups within a secular state, " what about a group that hates the state, that is diligently seeking to overthrow the state and would love to kill all its citizens; how many rights should such people have, according to the good bishop?

Though Mr. William's kindness is noble, it seems that he is blissfully unaware of the nature of the snake that has woven its way into many aspects of British society, and he is bending over backwards to try to make accommodations for it. "Sure, Mr. Snaik," says the archbishop, "Come in and lie down and make yourself comfortable. Why, you can sleep right here in this young child's crib."

Why should any society make accommodations for those who would seek to overthrow it? In fact are not those people who seek to overthrow England and other western countries actually, then, the enemies of the host country? And how should a state deal with its enemies, from those who seek to change its laws or kill its citizens? Should the state invite such enemies into the homes of her people?

A millennia ago, the Archbishop's forerunners also were confronted with the scourge of Islam, when it once before sought to conquer Europe. Fortunately previous generations of Brits were braver and more insightful than Mr. Williams as they aggressively went to the middle east and gave the muslims the kind of whatfor that they were asking for.

I doubt many of those who gave their lives on such battlefields would be too proud of the Archbishop's current attempts at secession or surrender.


(Cartoon from Red Planet Cartoons, http://www.redplanetcartoons.com/) :
T.K.O. (Technical Knock Out)