Martyrdom of Hector Aleem: Why Blasphemy Laws Must Go

A son of Hector Aleem sent an update message through Facebook. I am transmitting his message to you so that you can more fully comprehend why lovers of life and liberty must never accept Islamic blasphemy laws in any time or place, in any form, to any degree no matter how they are disguised. I have added bold font emphasis to the message, it is otherwise unedited.

It is obvious to me that Hector Aleem has almost certainly joined the blessed martyrs waiting under the heavenly altar for divine justice. Murder: its what Islam is; what Muslims do. Simon does not want to confront that reality. I sympathize with him, but I have no hope of a good ending.

Ignore the cloaking prose of the legislation on Pakistan's books. Look through it to Shari'ah and witness the execrable reality of Islam, which causes reasonable men to curse it.

Chapter O8.0: Apostasy from Islam (Ridda)

(O: Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst. It may come about through sarcasm, as when someone is told, ``Trim your nails, it is sunna,'' and he replies, ``I would not do it even if it were,'' as opposed to when some circumstance exists which exonerates him of having committed apostasy, such as when his tongue runs away with him, or when he is quoting someone, or says it out of fear.)

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.

O8.3

If he is a freeman, no one besides the caliph or his representative may kill him. If someone else kills him, the killer is disciplined (def: o17) (O: for arrogating the caliph's prerogative and encroaching upon his rights, as this is one of his duties).

O8.4

There is no indemnity for killing an apostate (O: or any expiation, since it is killing someone who deserves to die).

http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO8-2.html

There is no doubt about the penalty prescribed for apostasy. Nor is there any doubt concerning its definition. The list of acts and attitudes is long, I cite here those most relevant.

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;

-15- to hold that any of Allah's messengers or prophets are liars, or to deny their being sent;

(n: `Ala' al-din' Abidin adds the following:

-16- to revile the religion of Islam;

-19- to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law;

-20- or to deny that Allah intended the Prophet's message (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be the religion followed by the entire world (dis: w4.3-4) (al-Hadiyya al-`Ala'iyya (y4), 423-24). )

http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO8-7.html

That Islamic law applies to Muslims, how does it affect me? Take another long hard look at item 20 above. What part of that do you not comprehend: Islamic law has global applicability. Another paragraph lists the limits on conquered Christians. Yet another paragraph identifies acts which abrogate a Christian's treaty of protection, subjecting him to immediate execution. Five items are listed, one is relevant.

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.

http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO11-10.html

The OIC has pushed through resolutions condemning "defamation of Islam" every year since '05. Now they are campaigning to make those resolutions legally binding on U.N. member states. The Ad Hoc Cmte. meets again at the end of November. Very few people are aware of this threat to our lives & liberties. Only a few organizations such as Art. 19 & IHEU are publicizing it. Almost nobody is paying attention.

• Ad Hoc Committee On Compelmentary standards (126.1K pdf) Compiled from a series of blog posts about a proposed protocol to ICERD which will criminalize all criticism of Islam. The cmte meets from Oct. 19-30 '09 to write the protocol.
• Ad Hoc Cmte On Complementary Stds 125KB pdf compiled from several blog posts.
• Ad Hoc Cmte Draft Document 120KB pdf containing Google's Translation of the French language draft plus links to references and blog posts.

The linkage between Islamic genocide and Islamic scripture is direct and immediate. I have pointed that out in numerous blog posts. In Australia, Great Britain, Denmark and Finland I could be fined and imprisoned for that revelation. Thank God and the Founding Fathers, America has the First Amendment. But not for long. Soon, we shall be led dumb, like lambs to the slaughter.

I want you to do something about it. I want you to sign the International Qur'an Petition, send its url to everyone in your email address book and exhort them to sign and forward it.

International Qur'an Petition

This is what will happen to us eventually if you don't take action now.

Simon Yaqoob Aleem June 17 at 12:30pm

It is to inform you all that Hector Aleem has been disappeared suddenly from Jail. We can’t find him anywhere. When our lawyer sent legal papers in jail to get them signed by Hector Aleem then the Jail authorities told that Hector Aleem is NOT in jail and some agencies took him somewhere. We are trying for three days to confirm that where is daddy but no one is able to tell us anything. Our lawyer has searched him in each and every Police Station of Rawalpindi/Islamabad but we couldn’t find him anywhere. Three days have passed now and we still don’t have any clue about daddy. We don’t know if he is being tortured somewhere or being kidnapped. Even Jail authorities can’t tell where he is now. They just say, “Some agencies took him”. But they don’t tell us that where he is and who took him? Please pray for him and tell your friends and family to pray for daddy. If you got your blogs then please publish it in your blogs, and if your friends got any kind of blog then please tell them to publish this news. This is not fair that daddy is not even safe inside the jail, and we don’t know where he is now.

Please keep on donating for Hector Aleem’s lawyer, his legal expenses and his food and clothes. You can donate through Pay Pal or you can donate through any other way.

If you want to donate through pay pal then here is the link: http://tinyurl.com/hectoraleem

And if you want to donate through any other way then please contact Mohammad Shouman who is a group admin.

And also keep writing to Canadian Embassy in Islamabad for the Asylum of Hector Aleem and his family, you can write by yourself or you can print the petition, get it signed by your friends and family and send it to Canadian Embassy in Islamabad Pakistan.

Here is the link to the Petition: http://hectoraleem.blogspot.com/2010/06/write-to-canadian-embassy-in-islamabad.html

Please keep praying for Hector Aleem, This is a very tense situation for us.

Obama the Muslim

Are you is, or are you isn't?

If you are asking Obama, the answer is that he IS.

Just watch this video compilation.

It's conclusions are obvious...

Joe Lieberman Spews Excrement!

An email from Newsmax contained this link Lieberman Slams Obama on Radical Islam Silence which contained a few provocative quotes but no link to the source. They did mention that their source was an op ed piece at the Wall Street Journal. Google came to my rescue.

Throughout this blog post, blue, underlined text is hyperlinked to a source document. Clicking any link will open the source in a new window. Through some of those links you can gain access to the Qur'an & hadith which form the core of Islam.

Who's the Enemy in the War on Terror?

I do not know who supplied the head & sub head, but I will begin my criticism there because the head & sub head contain egregious deceptions which deserve to be exposed.

"War on Terror" implies that terror is the enemy. In reality, terror is a psychological and physiological state in which the mind and body are so agitated that immediate effective defense becomes impossible. The heart races and palpitates, the hands and knees shake, and the mind is filled with a forboding of doom and despair. Flight takes precedence to fight when terror reigns.

Terror is a condition, instilling terror is an enemy tactic. Identify the entity which uses that tactic and you have identified the enemy. I am about to perform an act most bloggers, commentators, news media and politicians will not do. I am about to bore you with the most vital facts which will enable you to identify the enemy who is waging war against us.

The following quotation is from the bottom of page 58 of The Qur'anic Concept of War, a strategic training manual written by Brig. S.K. Malik for the army of Pakistan.

Terror struck into the hearts of the enemies is not only a means, it is the end in itself. Once a condition of terror into
the opponenfs heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be achieved. It is the point where the means and the end meet
and merge. Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is me decinbn we wish to impose upon him.

Inflicting terror is both a means and an end which makes victory possible. No, Pakistan is not the enemy; don't jump to conclusions. Look at the title of the book. What is the origin of the tactical use of terror? If you answered "the Qur'an", you are beginning to catch on. If not, I suggest that you take a remedial reading course to improve your comprehension skills.

The Qur'an is the scripture of Islam, its guide to all aspects of life including warfare. Allah said that he would cast terror into the hearts of disbelievers. That statement is found in 3:151 and 8:12. In the latter verse, he told the angels and the Muslims what to do to cast terror. In 8:57, he commanded Muslims to inflict a severe defeat on their victims in order to affect the psychology of future victims; to terrify them. In 8:60, he commanded the Muslims to maximize the power of their army so as to terrify their enemies.

Allah said that he cast terror, resulting in victory for the Muslims. In 33:26-27, we learn that Allah's casting of terror resulted in the killing of the men of one tribe and the enslavement of their widows and orphans. It also resulted in the seizeure of their real and personal property. In 59:2 we learn that casting terror resulted in the defeat of another tribe who destroyed their own homes. At the conclusion of the latter verse, we find something special. "Then take admonition, O you with eyes (to see)." As hinted in 8:57, Allah is setting up the destruction of one set of victims as an example to instill terror in future victims.

The Qur'anic sanctification of terrorism might be dismissed as metaphorical or apocryphal but for the ample confirmations found in hadith, the oral traditions of Moe's companions on the battlefield. Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 lists five special gifts that distinguish Moe from other Prophets. The first of those five items is most instructive: "Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey.". Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220 tells us how Moe was made victorious: "...I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), ...".

The tactic of casting terror is sanctified by the Qur'an and exemplifed by hadith. Now we know who owns it: Islam. That is standard, off the shelf, orthdox, mainstream Islam, not some imaginary "radical", "extremist" or "fundamentalist" sub set or offshoot.

Perpetual warfare is another sacrament of Islam, mandated by 2:216 and commanded in 8:39, 9:29 and 9:123. The imperative is confirmed in Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387. The perpetual duration of jihad is confirmed in Sunan Abu Dawud 14.2526.

Attacks on us, threatened and performed by Muslims, flow directly from the venomous verses of the Qur'an & Hadith. The identity of the enemy is no mystery; it is Islam.

The U.S. is at war with violent Islamist extremism, and the Obama administration does moderate Muslims no favor by refusing to recognize this.

The sub head, reproduced above, contains two egregious lies, disguised by code words: "violent Islamist extremism" & "moderate Muslims". I already proved the fact that offensive jihad using terrorism as a tactic is an intrinsic sacrament of Islam as Moe preached and practiced it. Muslims who reject the sacrament of offensive jihad are not moderates, they are hypocrites. That term is used in 18 of the 114 Surahs. 3:156 denounces them as cowards. In 9:38, Allah threatens the hypocrites with hell fire for refusing to join the jihad. in 9:68 he converts the threat into a promise.

In his opening paragraphs, Senator Lieberman compares the current National Security Strategy, which does not identify Islam as the enemy, to the 2006 ecition. Here is the money quote: "It correctly identified our enemy as "the transnational terrorists [who] exploit the proud religion of Islam to serve a violent political vision." ". We need to identify the most egregious lie in that quote, it is contained in this clause: "exploit the proud religion of Islam to serve a violent political vision'. Islam is a violent political vision! I gave you links to the jihad imperatives and a hadith which confirms them. That is standard mainstream Islam, not bi'da.

The third paragraph contains a repetition of the big lie: "violent Islamist extremism". Islam is intrinsically violent. Muslims engaged in terroristic jihad are obeying Allah and emulating their profit. They are zealots; believers [8:2, 49:15 ], not extremists.

Senator Lieberman correctly identifies the weakness in identifying al-Qaeda as the enemy, but in the process, he repeats the big lie.

First, it is not fully accurate. Defining the enemy by reference to al Qaeda implies that this war is primarily about destroying an organization, rather than defeating a broader political ideology. This war will not end when al Qaeda has been vanquished—though that, of course, is a critical goal—but only when the ideology of violent Islamist extremism that inspires and predates it is decisively rejected. That ideology motivates many other groups and individuals.

I added bold face emphasis to the critical clause and red font color & italics to the big lie. The quote would be true if Islam were substituted for the big lie.

Lieberman seems to make a habit of skirting close to the edge of truth without crossing over from the lie. I will add emphasis to this quote to make the lies stand out for you.

Finally, characterizing this war as being against a specific organization risks distracting our government from important policy questions about how to combat the ideological dimensions of the war that is taking place within Islam. It also may send a message to moderate Muslims that they can and should remain on the sidelines of this fight, while governments use conventional means to defeat al Qaeda.

A specific organization is waging war against us: Islam. Senator Lieberman, like most politicians, won't acknowledge that fact, though it is obvious that he is aware of it.

Senator Lieberman swerved near to the truth before quickly counter steering: ideological dimensions. The ideas that Allah is the deity, that he mandates global conquest, that Islam must be made to dominate the world are central to this war. This war can not be won without breaking the Muslim's faith. One man leads the way: Father Zakaria Botros; follow his lead!!! It all rests on one man's image: Moe. We must make Muslims aware of his true charactr and conduct. Fr. Botros knows how to do that, and he does it. We must scale up his mission.

The other big lie: war taking place within Islam. Hypocrites are not fighting. They are not armed. They are not motivated to take militant action. They are intimidated; they will be easily killed by believers. The believing salafists have the texts on their side; hypocrites nave nothing with which to argue against believers. The hypocrites have no viable option unless they unite, arm themselves, kill the believers and apostatize.

Al-Qaeda and Islam are one. Islam can not be defeated conventionally short of complete extermination. Is anyone willing to do that? If not, then we must defeat Islam ideologically.

Just when I start to think that Senator Lieberman might be redeemable, he comes up with another restatement of the big lie.

Muslims in fact understand better than anyone else the enormous difference between their faith and the terrorist political ideology that has exploited it.

Islam is a way of life: intra-species predation. What did Allah say? What did Moe do? Get a clue!

It appears from the next quote that Senator Lieberman may be living in fantasy land.

We must encourage and empower the non-violent Muslim majority to raise their voices to condemn the Islamist extremist ideology as a desecration of Islam, responsible for the murder of tens of thousands of innocent Muslims and people of other faiths. How can we expect those Muslims to have the courage to stand and do that if we are unwilling to define and describe the enemy as dramatically different from them?

Islam is the enemy, of the hypocrites as much as us. Allah lumps them in with us, to be killed and gathered into Hell. Muslims are the enemy; they are not different from the enemy, they are part of it. Islam is what Moe preached and practiced; Muslims are believers in what Moe preached, who attempt to emulate his works. Moe's preaching & example are not moderate, they are not peaceful and anodyne.

There is no end to ignorance & insanity.

We must recognize the nature of the fight we are in, not paper it over. The United States is definitely not at war with Islam. But a group of self-identified, extremist Muslims has definitely declared war on us, a war which they explicitly justify by reference to their religion. Muslims across the world see the ideological nature of this struggle. I believe it is disrespectful to suggest they cannot understand these distinctions and act on them.

The first sentence of that quote is entirely true. It is papered over by the traitors who mislead us, including Senator Leiberman, because, from their viewpoint, recognizing the enemy would require making the enemy extinct, which they foolishly equate with genocide. Doing to the enemy what they are trying to do to you does not lower you to their level, it leaves you alive and more secure. "Never Again!" refers to the murder of innocents, not to the extermination of predators.

The second sentence is also true. We should be at war against Islam, a declared war, as provide for by the Constitution, but we fail to identify and recognize the enemy.

Usama bin Laden's declaration of war against us is not the first. The first Islamic declaration of of war against us was not specific, it was generic and global. It is contained in 8:39 & 9:29, which are codifed in Shar'iah as Book O, Chapter 9.8 & 9.9 of Reliance of the Traveller. Sentient people will read them and curse Islam.

• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-8.html The caliph makes war on Jews... codification of 9:29.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-9.html The caliph fights all other people... codification of 8:39.

When Caliph Umar sent his army to Persia, his general made a statement you need to know about. It is found in Sahih Bukhari 4.53.386.

Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."

Compare the quote above to the response given to Adams & Jefferson when they asked by what right the Barbary Pirates attacked our shipping. The quote comes from Wikipedia.

The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet (Mohammed), that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman (or Muslim) who should be slain in battle was sure to go to heaven. [3]

The "ideological nature of this struggle" boils down to: Allah's exclusive right to be worshipped, Allah's exclusive right to rule and the Muslim's obligation to enforce them. If you can't comprehend that, Senator, then step down; you are not intelligent enough to be a legislator. If you can not acknowledge the truth, Senator, then step down; you are not honest and courageous enough to be a legislator.

The real disrespect is underestimating the intelligence of the American electorate, urinating on our shoes and swearing that it is raining. We know the difference. A growing number of Americans are wising up to the fact that Islam is the enemy and terrorism is motivated by its intrinsic doctrines, not be your mythical extremism.

Atlas Shrugs Hassled by Paypal

Paypal has threatened to cut off Atlas Shrugs and related sites for "hate speech", while continuing to allow Islamic hate sites to collect donations through their service.

The link above displays an email Pamela Geller received from Paypal plus links to genuine hate sites that use Paypal. This is not a First Amendment issue, it is private, not governmental. It is safe to assume that Paypal received complaints from Muslims, who agitated for cutting off Geller's service. This is a matter of intimidation tactics and corporate hypocrisy, not a matter of federal law.

Revealing the objective truth about Islamic doctrine & practice is not hate speech. Geller is not urging her readers to vandalize Mosques nor assault Muslims. Neither are advertisements offering information and assistance to apostates hate speech.

Here is a direct link to Geller's blog, read it and judge for yourself: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/ .

Why Did You Vote for Obama?

Most of the information about Barack Hussein Obama contained in this video was known and publicized prior to the election. If you knew about it, why did you vote for the Mekkan candidate?

Did he promise you something you desperately wanted? Did he fulfill that promise? Is there any remote possibility of fulfilling that promise? Is fulfilling that promise lawful under the Constitution?

Did you swoon over his looks? Or was it his slickly delivered, ambiguous rhetoric? Is either of those factors a good basis for choosing a President? "Hope and change", how is that working out for you now? Were you just running over the cliff with the lemmings?

If you answered yes to any of those questions, you should burn your voter registration card because you are part of the problem, not part of the solution; too stupid and irrational to participate in selecting our nation's leadership. Please provide your explanation in a comment.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHxb_vZe7Ao

Reject Cordoba House!

In this video, David Wood reveals some things we need to know. He quotes the Qur'an 3:28 and Ibn Kathir's Tafsir which you should verify for yourself.

Historical references such as the Church of St. John in Damascus being replaced by a Mosque are more difficult to track down. But visit this Catholic Encyclopedia article and scroll down to Fall of Constantinople, to the second half of the second paragraph, where we find this.

Most of the churches, like In this video, David Wood reveals some things we need to know. He quotes the Qur'an 3:28 and Ibn Kathir's Tafsir which you should verify for yourself.

Historical references such as the Church of St. John in Damascus being replaced by a Mosque are more difficult to track down. But visit this Catholic Encyclopedia article and scroll down to Fall of Constantinople, to the second half of the second paragraph, where we find this.

Most of the churches, like St. Sophia, were gradually converted into mosques. This was the fate of SS. Sergius and Bacchus — a beautiful monument built by Justinian, commonly called "the little St. Sophia"; of the church of the monastery of Khora, whose splendid mosaics and pictures, mostly of the fourteenth century, are among the principal curiosities of the city; of the churches of the celebrated Pantocrator and Studium monasteries, etc. Other churches were demolished and replaced by various buildings; thus the church of the Holy Apostles gave way to the great mosque built by the conquering Sultan Mohammed II. The imperial tombs in this church were violated; some of their gigantic red porphyry sarcophagi were taken to the church of St. Irene. The latter is the only church taken from the Greeks that has not been changed into a mosque or demolished; it became, and is yet an arsenal, or rather a museum of ancient weapons.

Further confirmation is found in this WikiIslam article, which quotes Robert Spencer from Front Page Magazine.

After a period of Byzantine resurgence, in 1004, the sixth Fatimid Caliph, Abu ‘Ali al-Mansur al-Hakim (985-1021) turned violently against the faith of his Christian mother and uncles (two of whom were Patriarchs) and ordered the destruction of churches, the burning of crosses, and the seizure of church property. He moved against the Jews with similar ferocity. Over the next ten years thirty thousand churches were destroyed, and untold numbers of Christians converted to Islam simply to save their lives. In 1009, al-Hakim gave his most spectacular anti-Christian order: he commanded that the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem be destroyed, along with several other churches (including the Church of the Resurrection). The Church of the Holy Sepulcher, rebuilt by the Byzantines in the seventh century after the Persians burned an earlier version, marks the traditional site of Christ’s burial. Bizarrely, the church had served as the model for the Al-Aqsa Mosque. The Caliph al-Hakim commanded that the tomb inside be cut down to the bedrock. He ordered Christians to wear heavy crosses around their necks (and Jews heavy blocks of wood in the shape of a calf). He piled on other humiliating decrees, culminating in the order that they accept Islam or leave his dominions.

Yet further confirmation is found in the Arab Occupation of Sicily article at WikiIslam.

Once the Arabs overran Sicily they set about the Islamification of Sicily through the destruction of churches and ertection of Mosques over the sites, they changed the composition of the population with the hundreds of thousand of Muslim immigrants who destroyed a civilization that had lasted from the 8th century before Christ had contributed to the creation of the identity of the West.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxFzFIDbKpg&feature=player_embedded

Muslims kill, conquer and supplant churches with Mosques as a sign of supremacy. Why in Hell should we tolerate that? For what good reason should we tolerate the erection of an Islamic symbol of supremacism two blocks from the ruins of the World Trade Center?

Would construction of a Synagogue near the Mosque shot up by Baruch Goldstein contribute to reconciliation and mutual understanding between Jews and Muslims? Would the construction of a Cathedral at the Burlington Coat Factory contribute to reconciliation & mutual understanding? How then will a Mosque be of any such benefit? We are being fed irrational slogans instead of logical answers.

It is time to wake up, wise up, rise up and shout: "No more Mosques!!".

Thanks and a tip of the hat to CitizenWarrior, who wants us to make this video go viral.

St. Sophia, were gradually converted into mosques. This was the fate of SS. Sergius and Bacchus — a beautiful monument built by Justinian, commonly called "the little St. Sophia"; of the church of the monastery of Khora, whose splendid mosaics and pictures, mostly of the fourteenth century, are among the principal curiosities of the city; of the churches of the celebrated Pantocrator and Studium monasteries, etc. Other churches were demolished and replaced by various buildings; thus the church of the Holy Apostles gave way to the great mosque built by the conquering Sultan Mohammed II. The imperial tombs in this church were violated; some of their gigantic red porphyry sarcophagi were taken to the church of St. Irene. The latter is the only church taken from the Greeks that has not been changed into a mosque or demolished; it became, and is yet an arsenal, or rather a museum of ancient weapons.

Further confirmation is found in this WikiIslam article, which quotes Robert Spencer from Front Page Magazine.

After a period of Byzantine resurgence, in 1004, the sixth Fatimid Caliph, Abu ‘Ali al-Mansur al-Hakim (985-1021) turned violently against the faith of his Christian mother and uncles (two of whom were Patriarchs) and ordered the destruction of churches, the burning of crosses, and the seizure of church property. He moved against the Jews with similar ferocity. Over the next ten years thirty thousand churches were destroyed, and untold numbers of Christians converted to Islam simply to save their lives. In 1009, al-Hakim gave his most spectacular anti-Christian order: he commanded that the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem be destroyed, along with several other churches (including the Church of the Resurrection). The Church of the Holy Sepulcher, rebuilt by the Byzantines in the seventh century after the Persians burned an earlier version, marks the traditional site of Christ’s burial. Bizarrely, the church had served as the model for the Al-Aqsa Mosque. The Caliph al-Hakim commanded that the tomb inside be cut down to the bedrock. He ordered Christians to wear heavy crosses around their necks (and Jews heavy blocks of wood in the shape of a calf). He piled on other humiliating decrees, culminating in the order that they accept Islam or leave his dominions.

Yet further confirmation is found in the Arab Occupation of Sicily article at WikiIslam.

Once the Arabs overran Sicily they set about the Islamification of Sicily through the destruction of churches and ertection of Mosques over the sites, they changed the composition of the population with the hundreds of thousand of Muslim immigrants who destroyed a civilization that had lasted from the 8th century before Christ had contributed to the creation of the identity of the West.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxFzFIDbKpg&feature=player_embedded

Muslims kill, conquer and supplant churches with Mosques as a sign of supremacy. Why in Hell should we tolerate that? For what good reason should we tolerate the erection of an Islamic symbol of supremacism two blocks from the ruins of the World Trade Center?

Would construction of a Synagogue near the Mosque shot up by Baruch Goldstein contribute to reconciliation and mutual understanding between Jews and Muslims? Would the construction of a Cathedral at the Burlington Coat Factory contribute to reconciliation & mutual understanding? How then will a Mosque be of any such benefit? We are being fed irrational slogans instead of logical answers.

It is time to wake up, wise up, rise up and shout: "No more Mosques!!".

Thanks and a tip of the hat to CitizenWarrior, who wants us to make this video go viral.

Obamination: a Muslim Outed

I received an email from a fellow blogger. As soon as I opened it, I clicked the second link and became disgusted.

The Enemies Within... watch the video

See also "I am a Muslim," Obama Tells Egyptian Foreign Minister Gheit
Islamic Coup on the White House at Atlas Shrugs

I visited Atlas Shrugs and discovered a long blog post which quoted an article which alleges that President Obama told Egypt's Foreign Minister that he remains a Musim, in sympathy with the Muslim agenda. The President allegedly asked for patience on the part of Muslims until he gets certain domestic agenda items cleared up, then he would put the screws to Israel. Here is the red hot quote.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said he had a one-on-one meeting with Obama, in which President Obama told him that he was still a Muslim, the son of a Muslim father, the stepson of Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers in Kenya are Muslims, and that he was sympathetic towards the Muslim agenda.

`Atlas Shrugs listed two sources for the quote: Web Today, in which the quote is the 6^th item in an enumerated list and Israel Today, in which it appears on page 12, in an article entitled Obama and the Muslim Agenda. The two sources are essentially identical.


Several possibilities come to mind immediately.

1. The quote might be forged. Assuming that the initial source is Arabic language media, it would be difficult to track down and verify.
2. The quote might be valid, but Aboul Gheit might have lied. Why? Was he trying to get President Obama in domestic hot water? Was he trying to boost his own status? Or was he seeking to reduce international pressure applied to an ally?
3. Obama said it, Aboul Gheit repeated it, without considering the possible consequences or assuming that we would never hear of it.

I rate our chances of determining the truth with any real resolve as extremely poor. We need to evaluate this quote in the light of previously obtained evidence. Atlas Shrugs follows up with a long list of statements and events which point toward the most disturbing conclusion.

Recently, someone posted on Facebook a link to this video, which assembles several critical Obama quotes which point toward the obvious conclusion.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XE9mZCRX2mg

So what?

If President Obama is a closet Muslim, then he exploited a false claim of Christian conversion in order to win votes. In that case, nothing he says or does can be trusted. Did we elect a Nazi to lead us in the second world war? Why not, what would be wrong with that? Did we elect a Communist to lead us in the cold war? How is electing a Muslim after we were attacked by Muslims, motivated by the doctrines of Islam and chanting takbir as they slit the throats of flight crews any different? Our elected leaders can not bring themselves to acknowledge the fact that Islam is at war against us. Instead, they arrogantly deny the obvious. The Islamic agenda is total world conquest. Can we entrust our national security to someone in sympathy with that agenda?

If President Obama is a Christian, did he or did he not tell the Foreign Minister of Egypt that he is a Muslim? If he did, why did he lie, risking exposure and resulting anger and resentment among Muslims who he is trying to co-opt as supporters? If not, why did Aboul Gheit lie about it?


The following blog post was first published October 14 '08. I reproduce it now because it contains vital logic which has no less validity now than it had when first published.

Obama: Muslim or Christian; What’s the Difference?

Is he or ain’t he? Only Barack Hussein Obama knows for sure. Whats the difference?

If he is a genuine convert to Christianity, the threats he poses are limited to the consequences of his:

• Communist ideology
• alliances:
  • terrorists
    • Ayers
    • Khalidi
  • racists
    • Wright
  • racketeers
  • vote fraud practitioners
    • Acorn
• inexperience
• incompetence.

If his conversion from Islam to Christianity was a scam perpetrated for political expediency, then electing him is, in effect installing an enemy agent as Commander in Chief. Abysmal ignorance of the doctrines of Islam recorded in the Qur’an & Hadith prevents many members of the American Electorate from comprehending the adverse consequences of electing a Muslim to high office.

22:41. Those (Muslim rulers) who, if We give them power in the land, (they) order for Iqamat-as-Salât. [i.e. to perform the five compulsory congregational Salât (prayers) (the males in mosques)], to pay the Zakât and they enjoin Al-Ma’rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm orders one to do), and forbid Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism and all that Islâm has forbidden) [i.e. they make the Qur'ân as the law of their country in all the spheres of life]. And with Allâh rests the end of (all) matters (of creatures).

The phrases highlighted in red above basically mean that a Muslim who obtains power will impose Sharia. The translator’s comment, highlighted in purple, confirms that fact. Do you really want to give that power to the enemy? A Muslim President would pack the court system with Muslims & Dhimmis, life time appointments that can not be rescinded.

24:55. Allâh has promised those among you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession to (the present rulers) in the earth, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will grant them the authority to practise their religion, that which He has chosen for them (i.e. Islâm). And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they (believers) worship Me and do not associate anything (in worship) with Me. But whoever disbelieved after this, they are the Fâsiqûn (rebellious, disobedient to Allâh).

(And those who believe and do righteous good deeds,) meaning, their hearts were truthful and their limbs obedient with the righteous acts they were commanded, [The Reward of Righteous Believers]

Righteous good deeds: code words for Jihad. What righteous acts were they commanded to perform? 8:39, 9:29. They intend to take power, by force or by stealth; why should we give it to them? Why should we yield our hard won liberties? How will we ever recover our hard won liberties when the enemy has taken control of our armed forces?

12:40. “You do not worship besides Him but only names which you have named (forged), you and your fathers, for which Allâh has sent down no authority. The command (or the judgement) is for none but Allâh. He has commanded that you worship none but Him (i.e. His Monotheism), that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not.

Only Islam’s demon has the right to rule. Legislation contrary to his Qur’an or Moe’s sunnah is not allowed.

33:36 It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.

Allah rules. His Messenger and his Caliphs decide and that is the end of the matter. That is not how our Constitution works. Why do you want to risk losing our Constitution? Why are you willing to risk imposition of Islamic theocratic tyranny?

Under Islamic law, any child born to a Muslim father is Muslim. Renouncing Islam and converting to a real religion is a capital offense. Apostates must be killed if they do not recant & revert. Why then do Muslims; even Islamic terrorists, want Barack Hussein Obama to be elected? Why aren’t they issuing and attempting to carry out fatwas against him? Obviously, they believe that his conversion was a sham. Obviously, they believe that his policies will be favorable to them.

They may be right. We can’t take that chance. If Barack Hussein Obama truly abandoned Islam and converted to Christianity, let him curse and condemn the damnable doctrines of Islam which sanctify & mandate aggressive conquest against Pagans & ‘people of the book’, genocide & terrorism.

If he is a closet Muslim, he won’t abjure those doctrines because he believes them. In that case, we don’t want him. If he is a Christian, but unwilling to offend Muslims by telling the truth about their curse worthy doctrines & practices, then he has no salt or savor, and is unworthy of high office.

In either case, Barack Hussein Obama must be rejected because he can not be trusted with the high office he seeks.

The following blog post was first published January 12 '08. It challenged Senator Barack Hussein Obama, then a candidate for the democrat Presidential nomination, to abjure the damnable doctrines which make Islam intolerable. To the best of my knowledge, he has never responded to this challenge.

Specifically Senator

According to Newsmax, Senator Barack Obama declares himself to be a Christian, not a Muslim.

“I’ve been to the same church — the same Christian church — for almost 20 years,” Obama said, stressing the word Christian and drawing cheers from the faithful in reply. “I was sworn in with my hand on the family Bible. Whenever I’m in the United States Senate, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. So if you get some silly e-mail . . . send it back to whoever sent it and tell them this is all crazy. Educate.”

Senator, do you, as a Christian, endorse the Nicene Creed, specifically the clauses reproduced below?

[...]And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven[...]

Do you specifically & explicitly reject & renounce the following listed Islamic doctrines concerning Jesus Christ?

1. Jesus was not crucified, did not die and was not resurrected:
   

   4:157. And because of their saying (in boast), “We killed Messiah ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allâh,” – but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of ‘Iesa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) ]:

   4:158. But Allâh raised him ['Iesa (Jesus)] up (with his body and soul) unto Himself (and he is in the heavens). And Allâh is Ever All­Powerful, All­Wise.

2. Jesus is not the son of God.
   

   4:159. And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allâh and a human being], before his ['Iesa (Jesus) or a Jew's or a Christian's] death (at the time of the appearance of the angel of death). And on the Day of Resurrection, he ['Iesa (Jesus)] will be a witness against them.

   23:91. No son (or offspring or children) did Allâh beget, nor is there any ilâh (god) along with Him; (if there had been many gods), behold, each god would have taken away what he had created, and some would have tried to overcome others! Glorified be Allâh above all that they attribute to Him!

3. Jesus is inferior to Muhammad.
   

   Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 3:
   [...]Jesus will say, ‘I am not fit for this undertaking, go to Muhammad the Slave of Allah whose past and future sins were forgiven by Allah.’[...]

Do you specifically & explicitly reject & renounce the following listed Islamic doctrines concerning conquest, terrorism & genocide?

1. Muslims are obligated to fight, Jihad is mandatory, not optional.
   

   2:216. Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.

2. Muslims are commanded to fight Pagans until only Allah is worshiped.
   

   8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.

3. Muslims are commanded to fight ”people of the book” until they are subjugated and pay extortion.
   

   9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

4. Our lives and property are not sacred to Muslims until we become Muslims.
   

   Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
   Narrated Anas bin Malik:
   Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.“[...]

5. Muslims obtain salvation; escape from Hellfire and obtain admission to Paradise by participating in Jihad.
   

   61:10. O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment.

   61:11. That you believe in Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know!

   61:12. (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of ‘Adn ­ Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success.

6. Muhammad’s admission to Paradise was dependent on genocide: making a great slaughter.
   

   8:67. It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allâh desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.

7. Allah sanctified, commanded and Muhammad practiced and bragged about terrorism.
   

   3:151. We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they joined others in worship with Allâh, for which He had sent no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong­doers).

   8:12. (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”

   33:26. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.

   Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:

   Narrated Abu Huraira:

   Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings,C and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy)
   [...]

When we assemble the evidence of pro-Islamic sentiment on Obama's part, the statements he has made, his policies, and the report of his alleged statement to Aboul Gheit, the balance swings heavily to the side of Mekkan candidate. Because Obama refuses to abjure the damnable doctrines which sanctify jihad against us, we are forced to assume the obvious. In this case, we have no recourse but to demand his immediate resignation as Major General Paul Vallely has done.

While the retired General calls for a new election, I believe that Article 2, Section 1 as amended by the Amendments 20 & 25 appear to rule out that option. I regard such a resignation as highly unlikely and a special election impossible. Our recourse is to purge the House & Senate of persons likely to approve Obama's agenda. We can begin that process November 2, '10. by replacing the House and one third of the Senate.

Lieberman Attacks First Amendment

Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010

Cnet reports that Senator Joe Lieberman has announced a 197 page bill (PDF) which would give the President broad power over the internet.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010’’.

First, "cyberspace" is a concept invented to describe a network of interconnected computers. There is no such place. You clicked a link, which was translated into a number, which connected your computer to a server which downloaded a file which you are reading. The internet is basically a telephone switching system that transfers digital data instead of voices.

The servers and infrastructure connecting them are privately owned. They are not national assets, they are private assets.

"For all of its 'user-friendly' allure, the Internet can also be a dangerous place with electronic pipelines that run directly into everything from our personal bank accounts to key infrastructure to government and industrial secrets," he said. "Our economic security, national security and public safety are now all at risk from new kinds of enemies--cyber-warriors, cyber-spies, cyber-terrorists and cyber-criminals."

Anyone who is rational and informed will have firewalls, anti-virus software and other protection against hijacking his computer or network. Only a damn fool would put vital security information in a readily accessible database.

Common sense dictates that ladder logic systems vital to safety and productivity, whether it be cnc tools, water pumps, chemical mixing, refineries or electric grids not be accessible to everyone with a modem. You put them on a private network isolated from the internet if you have any sense. And you use the best security software available.

Because some Chink or Ruski is pinging the Pentagon we should shut down the whole internet? Prevent all access to blogs, web sites, search engines, VOIP, etc. when cutting off or firewalling one node is sufficient to solve the problem? Lieberman & co. are either incompetent or dishonest. In either case, they should be removed from office in their next election cycle.

Has anyone considered the possibility that routers, hardware firewalls and servers should be designed and built domestically, not somewhere in Asia where the staff may include Communists, Muslims or common criminals whose interests are inimical to ours? Where is the firmware being written, and by whom?

The President may issue a
13 declaration of a national cyber emergency to covered
14 critical infrastructure. Any declaration under this
15 section shall specify the covered critical infrastruc-
16 ture subject to the national cyber emergency.

‘‘(A) immediately direct the owners and
2 operators of covered critical infrastructure sub3
ject to the declaration under paragraph (1) to
4 implement response plans required under sec-
5 tion 248(b)(2)(C);

It is too broad and too bureaucratic. Exactly what is in the response plans? Would that include cutting off access to the Drudge Report & World Net Daily? Obama would like nothing better than to silence his critics. The First Amendment is intended to prevent that sort of usurpation.

We have a First Amendment because the founders remembered the Stamp Act. They knew that the right to publish and distribute pamphlets & broadsides was essential to maintaining an informed electorate. In modern times, new technology is performing the same essential function and must be protected for the same reason.

Now is the time to visit http://www.congress.org/ and tell your Representative & Senators to vote no on the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010 and any similar proposal to seize power over the internet.

We are being Screwed!

The Free Enterprise Nation reports that President Obama signed Executive Order 13495 January 30' 09. I do not recall any prior information about this order.

Examine the President's rationale.

When a service contract expires, and a follow-on contract is awarded for the same service, at the same location, the successor contractor or its subcontractors often hires the majority of the predecessor's employees. On some occasions, however, a successor contractor or its subcontractors hires a new work force, thus displacing the predecessor's employees.

The Federal Government's procurement interests in economy and efficiency are served when the successor contractor hires the predecessor's employees. A carryover work force reduces disruption to the delivery of services during the period of transition between contractors and provides the Federal Government the benefits of an experienced and trained work force that is familiar with the Federal Government's personnel, facilities, and requirements.

Paying more for services because of union extortion is not consistent with economy & efficiency. When government and unions gang up on us, the government wastes money, paying higher than market costs for goods and services, while the wages and benefits extorted by unions create an economic imbalance, reducing our buying power.

In effect, President Obama is greasing the palms of the union bosses who helped to finance his election campaign. Union members pay dues, which are used to elect their democrat patrons as well as provide luxurious wages and perks for the union bosses. The bottom line: corruption; political patronage at its worst.

Freedom of association includes the freedom not to associate. When the government coerces union membership, it steals a precious right as well as money from its victims. it also solidifies its grasp on power. That is the intent of the "The Employee Free Choice Act", which greases the skids for coerced union membership.

We must bear these issues in mind when we go to the polls, both in the primaries and November second. Let this be a warning to you; be careful when voting and make no mistakes. Investigate the candidate's associates, read their writings, listen to their speeches and check their criminal records. Find out who is financing their campaigns. Know who you are voting for!

Brits: Ignorant, Gullible Morons

A British tv station sent undercover agents into British Mosques to record what happens there. Channel 4, after seeing and hearing the preaching in "moderate" Mosques, highly praised as bastions of peaceful multiculturalism by the British government, still falls pray to the false dichotomy of radicalism and moderation.

They listened to preachers, they watched dvds, they visited web sites. They said that hatred, jihad, and everything bad about Islam comes from Saudi Wahhabism. Did it ever occur to those morons that Saudi Arabia is the origin of Islam? Did it ever occur to them to read the Qur'an & hadith to see what Islam really is? Of course not. Instead, they believe the false narrative of the "religion of peace" even after discovering that Muslims say one thing in public and another in private when they think there are no kuffar present.

This informative video has a 48 minute run time. It is a sample of what is preached in every Mosque. That preaching is derived from the Qur'an & hadith. For the short course, containing numerous quotes from Islam's canon of scripture, tradition, exegeses & jurisprudence, read What's Wrong With Islam/Muslims? For a good study on Jihad, read Jihad: The Islamic Doctrine of Permanent War. If you are deeply curious and willing to read a 1000 page book, turn to The Prophet of Doom.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2515587181120245843&hl=en#Please



After watching the video, download this ebook compiled from 13 fact packed blog posts: Know Thine Enemy.chm. It contains copious quotes from the Qur'an & hadith, each linked to source so that you can verify it and explore the context.

Papal Malarkey

9 News carried an article about Pope Benedict XVI calling for an end to violence in the Mid East. These quotes were gleaned from that article.

"Christians have a special contribution to make in the area of justice and peace by courageously denouncing violence, no matter what its origin, and suggest solutions which can only be achieved through dialogue.

Denouncing violence "no matter what its origin" is problematic to me because it implies condemnation of Israel's self defense. That position inverts morality, common sense and international law.

"The Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is creating difficulties in everyday life, inhibiting freedom of movement, the economy and religious life," with access to holy sites dependent on military permission.

Once again, the Pope, like so many other authority figures, inverts history and morality. Israel is occupied, not occupying. Jews have a 4000 year history on that land. Muslims invaded it in 638 and snatched it again in 1948. The malignant Muslim narrative is offensive to a thinking mind. It is no more acceptable when parroted by the Pope.

Jews and Christians are barred from the Temple Mount most of the week, able to visit for a few hours on a few days, never on holidays. They are not allowed to pray there. Most Muslims have far more access to that site. When rioting occurs, young Muslims are barred from the site, for security reasons.

Moreover, "certain Christian fundamentalist theologies used sacred scripture to justify Israel's occupation of Palestine, making the position of Christian Arabs an even more sensitive issue".

Christian Arabs are dhimmis, subject to extortion, expropriation, assault and murder. They are oppressed by Muslims, not by Israel. Once again, the Pope parrots the malignant narrative of occupation. Israel was occupied by the Byzantine Empire when Caliph Umar invaded. Israel is Jewish, not Muslim land. The Ottoman Empire fought on the wrong side of the first world war and lost the desert. Get over it already!