Female Genital Mutilation and Islamic Social Norms


I realize there are Muslims that have adopted Western norms particularly in Western nations. Nonetheless, unless a Westernized Muslim is willing to condemn Quranic, Hadith, Sira or Shariah practices that are contrary to Western Culture, Western norms and Western Laws (and from my perspective – U.S. Constitutional Law) those Muslims are underserving of the benefits of residing in the West.

Yeah I know –  Multiculturalists who care little of the traditions the West has provided are beginning to experience their blood boiling. I live in America thus I am not Leftist Multicultural thought and speech laws – at least not subject for now. Americans keep voting American Constitutional Laws for American Courts.

 

JRH 2/17/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account:

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

****************************

Female Genital Mutilation and Islamic Social Norms

 

By Paul Sutliff

February 15, 2020

American Thinker

 

On January 30th of this year, a 12-year-old girl in Egypt died as a result of her parents having Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) performed on her. Egypt has had a law outlawing the practice since 2008. The parents have been charged.  This law was written to protect females because Islamic social norms permit and encourage this practice.

 

According to Ian Askew, World Health Organization Director for the Department of Reproductive Health and Research:

 

FGM describes all procedures that involve the partial or total removal of external genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.  It has no health benefits.

 

More than 200 million girls and women alive today are living with FGM and many are at risk of suffering the associated negative health consequences as a result.

 

These include death, severe bleeding and problems urinating.  Longer-term consequences range from cysts and infections to complications in childbirth and increased risk of newborn deaths.

 

FGM is a grave violation of the human rights of girls and women.

 

Another term used for FGM is female circumcision.  Some countries prefer the term FGC, as it is seen as “more neutral.”  (The “C” being a reference to “cutting.”)  This “more neutral” term allows their medical personnel to package FGM into the “birth package.”  Ebony Ridell Bamber, the head of advocacy and policy at Orchid Project, a UK-based NGO working towards ending FGM, states that.  “It really contributes to legitimizing and entrenching the practice even further.”

 

In Islam, legitimization comes when shariah, Islamic law, endorses and promotes a practice.  Under shariah, female circumcision is required of Muslim females. This is documented in Reliance of the Traveller:

 

e4.3   Circumcision is obligatory (O: for both men and women.  For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar. Bazr) of the clitoris (n: not the clitoris itself, as some mistakenly assert).  (A: Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna, while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.)”

 

Islamic scholars have been found using this piece to declare to non-Muslims that shariah does not agree with FGM, going so far as to claim it is unIslamic if carried out to the extreme and totally removing the clitoris:

 

Female circumcision, known pejoratively in its extreme form as female genital mutilation or cutting, is not prescribed in the Quran and there are no authentic prophetic traditions recommending the practice.  The basis in Islamic law is that it is not permissible to cause bodily harm and any such practice of female circumcision proven to be harmful would be unlawful.

 

This is very deceptive.  Let’s look at what the abbreviations mean in the above section of shariah:

 

A: …  comment by Sheikh ‘Abd al-Wakil Durubi

Ar.     Arabic

n: …  remark by the translator

O: …  excerpt from the commentary of Sheikh ‘Umar Barakat

 

Taking the commentary of the translator out, the passage now reads:

 

e4. 3    Circumcision is obligatory (O: for both men and women.  For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar.  Bazr) of the clitoris.

 

Many other hadiths also back up the obligation for FGM under Shariah.  For example:

 

  • Jami` at-Tirmidhi Vol. 1 Book 1 #109

 

Aishah narrated that: the Prophet said: “When the circumcised meets the circumcised then Ghusl [full-body ritual purification] is required.”

 

 

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Said ibn al- Musayyab that Umar ibn al-Khattab and Uthman ibn Affan and A’isha, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used to say, “When the circumcised part touches the circumcised part, ghusl is obligatory.”

 

  • Sahih al-Bukhari 6599, 6600

 

Abu Huraira: Allah’s Messenger said, “No child is born but has the Islamic Faith, but its parents turn it into a Jew or a Christian.  It is as you help the animals give birth.  Do you find among their offspring a mutilated one before you mutilate them yourself.”

 

[Burka (or is it Niqab) clad Muslim gals]

 

To say that FGM only happens in third-world countries ignores the sad and sorry truth that several countries have passed laws forbidding this cruelty to their children. Egypt passed a law against FGM in 2008 and was amended in 2016. But by 2015, a “government survey discovered that 87% of Egyptian women and girls aged between 15 and 49 have been mutilated, or as the Egyptian government put it, “circumcised.”

 

February 6th was the International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation. This annual day of awareness was commemorated this year by the German news source DW.com’s article, “Female genital mutilation feels ‘like living in a dead body’ by Shadia Abdelmoneim, which describes how a midwife performed FGM on her without her consent after the birth of her third child in Sudan:

 

It led to a lengthy period of shock thereafter where she found it difficult to trust anybody, but Shadia also vividly recalls the moment she realized what had happened.

 

“I wanted to go to the toilet, but something wasn’t right.  I couldn’t walk and was in considerable pain.  When I saw what she had done, I was shocked.  She’d cut everything open and then sewn it closed.  I had no idea what to do.”

 

Shadia, already fighting against female genital mutilation and for women’s rights as an activist in Sudan, was in her mid 30s at the time.  She started living in a constant state of fear for her three daughters; she could barely let them out of her sight.

 

“How could women do something like that to one another, how?” she asks, her eyes welling up with tears.  “Being circumcised is like living in a dead body.”

 

Dr.  Cornelia Strunz, who works at the Desert Flower Center, met Shadia when she came to the center for help, said Shadia needed surgery to help her live with this mutilation. According to Dr.  Strunz, there are many possible problems that result from FGM.

 

Many women have problems emptying their bladder after FGM.  Menstrual blood can’t drain properly.  For some, sex becomes practically impossible.  Women can also develop fistulas — connections between two body parts which should not exist at all in normal circumstances.  One example would be a link between the vagina and rectum, leading to them passing stools through the vagina.  Obviously, that’s not very easy to live with.

 

Social norms that allow for FGM conflict with several social norms of Western civilization.  It denies a women’s rights to have control over her own body, as it is a requirement under shariah.  It destroys a woman’s ability to enjoy partaking in sexual activity when the woman marries.  This makes the act a duty and not a pleasure. The act itself violates the Hippocratic Oath “to do no harm.” In countries where FGM is banned, parents/guardians who have this done to their own daughters are denying the validity of laws made by men.

++++++++++++++++++

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

______________________

Paul Sutliff is a federally recognized expert on Civilization Jihad. His blog can be found at https://paulsutliff.blogspot.com/. You can request him as a speaker at http://paulsutliff.com. Paul’s books are on Amazon.

 

© American Thinker 2020

 

The Netherlands: The Geert Wilders Show Trial Continues


Most European Union (EU) nations operate under a Parliamentary political system rather than a Federal political system as in the USA. As such the Parliamentary system in the Netherlands is now being exposed in doing its version of a Trump-frame against Party for Freedom (Dutch acronym – PVV. Interesting irony on Wikipedia PVV info: the English Wikipedia listing is quite negative while the Dutch language Wikipedia [I used Google Translate] is more informational and balanced) leader Geert Wilders. WHY? Wilders is anti-Multiculturalist and anti-Muslim immigration all to preserve Western Culture.

 

It is extremely apparent Netherlands (and EU) power elites fear a drain-the-swamp avalanche if Wilders ever wins enough of a Parliamentary election to be the Netherlands Prime Minister.

 

The Gatestone Institute authored by Soeren Kern reports on exposé of Netherlands government corruption leveled against Wilders by Amsterdam-based newspaper De Volkskrant.

 

JRH 2/8/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

****************************

The Netherlands: The Geert Wilders Show Trial Continues

 

By Soeren Kern

February 8, 2020 at 5:00 am

Gatestone Institute

  • The emails indicate that Prime Minister Mark Rutte himself was involved in the decision to prosecute Wilders.

 

  • “Minister Van der Steur has deliberately withheld those documents, as is apparent from these documents. Moreover, it appears that another Justice Minister, Minister Opstelten, lied…” — Geert Wilders, February 5, 2020

 

  • “Mr. Presiding Judge, the Minister of Justice interfered in detail with my conviction. The documents even state that the Ministry of Justice instructed the public prosecutor — you will find the word ‘instruct’ in the documents….” — Geert Wilders, February 5, 2020

 

  • “And every day that this trial continues and you do not punish the conspiring prosecution, and the Ministry of Justice for their lies and haggling with the principles of an independent, fair and balanced trial, by declaring them inadmissible, every day this trial continues is a black day in the history of Dutch justice.” — Geert Wilders, February 5, 2020

 

  • “In the Wilders case, we certainly do not have to rely on the judge to agree with Wilders and to reach the conclusion that there has been a political trial, which is therefore not legally valid…. Wilders case appears to have been pre-cooked in the cabinet itself…. [Prime Minister] Rutte himself was involved…. The lying and spinning must stop somewhere…. This rule of law, in which judges and prosecutors receive instructions by the politicians on how to act, is rotten from within.” – Joost Niemöller, Dutch Journalist, Ongehoordnederland.nl, February 5, 2020

Newly released documents show that senior members of the Dutch government — including the former prime minister and justice minister — applied political pressure on public prosecutors to indict Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom for “hate speech.” Pictured: Wilders (left) sits next to current Prime Minister Mark Rutte at a meeting of political party leaders at the Dutch House of Representatives on March 16, 2017 in The Hague. (Photo by Carl Court/Getty Images)

 

Newly released documents show that senior members of the Dutch government — including the prime minister and two former justice ministers — applied political pressure on public prosecutors to indict Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV), for hate speech for comments he made about Islam and Moroccan immigrants.

 

The documents, which the government turned over to the Amsterdam-based newspaper De Volkskrant in compliance with a Freedom of Information request, appear to confirm long-standing allegations by Wilders that the government’s decade-long legal war against him is far from a principled pursuit of justice, and instead politically motivated aimed at silencing his criticism of multiculturalism and mass migration from the Muslim world.

 

On February 3, De Volkskrant reported that the government documents — numbering nearly 500 pages — show that as early as 2008, then-Justice Minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin was “intensively involved” in the decision to prosecute Wilders.

 

According to De Volkskrant, the Public Prosecution Service (Openbaar Ministerie, OM) found nothing illegal about Wilders statements, but Hirsch Ballin pressed the OM on three separate occasions to change its assessment.

 

In June 2008, the OM dismissed more than 40 criminal complaints against Wilders on the grounds that his statements were made “in the context of political debate” and therefore “not of a punishable nature.”

 

In January 2009, the Amsterdam Appeals Court, the second-highest legal authority in the Netherlands, overturned the OM’s decision and ruled that Wilders could be tried for inciting hatred. Wilders said that it was a “black day for myself and for freedom of speech.”

 

The first trial against Wilders began on October 4, 2010. He was accused of insulting religious and ethnic groups and inciting hatred and discrimination for describing Islam as fascist and comparing the Koran to Adolf Hitler’s book Mein Kampf. Wilders argued that his statements were directed at Islam as an ideology and not at individual Muslim believers.

 

The trial collapsed on October 22, 2010, after it emerged that Tom Schalken, one of the judges in the case, had tried to sway a potential witness.

 

The retrial began on February 6, 2011 with three new judges. Wilders said that his trial was about preserving freedom of expression in the West.

 

On June 23, 2011, Wilders was acquitted of all charges. Judge Marcel van Oosten ruled that the statements by Wilders, while “gross and denigrating,” did not meet the standard of hate speech and as such were “acceptable within the context of public debate.”

 

Despite the acquittal, the government’s harassment of Wilders continued. Internal government emails recently published by RTL Nieuws show that Hirsch Ballin’s successor, Justice Minister Ivo Opstelten, repeatedly pressured the OM to bring a new case against Wilders. Opstelten, his aides and the prosecutor repeatedly consulted with each other before the decision to prosecute Wilders a second time was made in the fall of 2014. The OM has always denied that it was subject to outside political interference; the emails show that the OM denials were untruthful. An email sent by the lead prosecutor, Wouter Bos, on October 8, 2014, warned: “This must not leak!”

 

Other government emails show that the decision to bring a new case against Wilders was discussed as early as March 2014 in the Council of Ministers, the executive council of Dutch government, formed by all the ministers, including the prime minister. The emails indicate that Prime Minister Mark Rutte himself was involved in the decision to prosecute Wilders.

 

On March 18, 2016, Wilders went on trial again for allegedly inciting hatred against Moroccan immigrants. Prosecutors said that in March 2014, Wilders, while campaigning in The Hague, asked a crowd of supporters if they wanted more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands. The crowd said fewer. Wilders responded: “We’ll take care of that.”

 

Prosecution spokeswoman Ilse de Heer said that Wilders “targeted a specific race, which is considered a crime.” Wilders countered that his comments referred to Moroccan criminals, not to Moroccans in general, and that, in any event, Moroccans are not a race.

 

On December 9, 2016, Wilders was found guilty of inciting discrimination. The court, however, imposed no form of punishment; it said that the verdict was sufficient penalty. The Public Prosecutor demanded a fine of €5,000 ($5,500). Both Wilders and the Prosecutor appealed.

 

Since then, Wilders has been entangled in a protracted legal process that shows no signs of ending anytime soon. In an appeal hearing on February 5, 2020, Wilders voiced his anger over the political nature of the case against him:

 

“Presiding Judge, members of the court: The shamelessness of the Public Prosecution Office knows no boundaries. In a report we received yesterday and heard about today, they claim — one-and-a-half days after they received the documents from the Ministry of Justice — that nothing is wrong, that nothing has been found that indicates political influence.

 

“Rarely have I seen attorney generals who are so damaging to the rule of law, who don’t care about a fair trial. They are blinded by their hatred for me and the PPV. These kinds of people, like those two attorney generals, ensure that the trust of ordinary people, the common man and woman in the Netherlands, in the public prosecutor and the judiciary has fallen to a low point.

 

“The Public Prosecutor says that there is nothing wrong. Shame on you, attorney generals. What we all know now is enough to immediately end this political process, this charade….

 

“We already knew, Mr. Presiding Judge and members of the court, that officials from the Ministry of Justice, under the responsibility of former Justice Minister Ivo Opstelten, had adjusted press releases from the public prosecutor. That it was Minister Opstelten himself who wanted two press releases. That his officials had made a legal analysis of this case. And shared this with the public prosecutor.

 

“We already knew that they had helped the public prosecutor refute the defenses of the defense. That, for example, the phrase, ‘we will arrange that’ was brought to the attention of the public prosecutor by the Ministry of Justice. That they wanted to see the requisites in advance to provide comments.

 

“And now there are 475 pieces again. And indeed, we have not been able to read all of them, I mean, we could hardly read any of the pieces. But if I only look at what the media writes about it, such as Volkskrant or RTL journalist Pieter Klein, then only more shocking things have come to the surface.

 

“It even appears now that it [the case] has been discussed in the Council of Ministers, Mr. Presiding Judge. In the Council of Ministers. How much more political does it get?

 

“The documents show that a senior official of the Ministry of General Affairs of Prime Minister Rutte informed a senior official of Ministry of Justice of Minister Opstelten that the Prime Minister expects the Minister of Justice to be able to say something meaningful during the Council of Ministers of March 21, 2014 about whether the prosecution of Wilders is promising.

 

“How promising it is! Promising: according to the dictionary, I looked it up, that also means likely, successful. It has a positive connotation. The Council of Ministers, Mr. Presiding Judge. This concerns an opposition leader in the House of Representatives. That is shameful, but that is, unfortunately, not unique, because we also know from the documents that we received yesterday that it was — in relation to the Wilders 1 trial, but I still want to have mentioned it, to indicate what they are capable of — that it was then Justice Minister Hirsch Ballin who requested legal advice three times because he did not like the earlier advice that it was impossible to prosecute Wilders. He repeated his requests for advice until he received the advice he wanted.

 

“Back to this trial. Apart from the fact that it was discussed in the Council of Ministers — words cannot express, it does not become much more political and corrupt — former [Justice] Minister Van der Steur, the documents show, deliberately and personally stopped the publication, on the basis of the Dutch Freedom of Information Act (WOB), of an official message about my persecution. Minister Van der Steur stopped that.

 

“According to the documents, the decision on the WOB request was delayed until after the decision of the Court of First Instance. Until after my conviction. Imagine that. Mafia practices. Pure political influence of the worst kind. A minister who deliberately withholds relevant and possibly exculpatory documents until after the conviction. Words really cannot express…

 

“If we had received those documents earlier and also all the other documents requested on that basis, and now also obtained with the permission of your court, then perhaps it might not have come to a conviction at all…then the court might not have decided on a conviction in the first instance.

 

“Minister Van der Steur has deliberately withheld those documents, as is apparent from these documents. Moreover, it appears that another Justice Minister, Minister Opstelten, lied when he said during his interrogation by the commissioner, that outside the Council of Ministers — you can find it literally in the reports — he never spoke about this matter with other ministers.

 

“The documents that we received yesterday show that he did indeed talk to other ministers about this outside the Council of Ministers, namely with Interior Minister Ronald Plasterk.

 

“Mr. Presiding Judge, the Minister of Justice interfered in detail with my conviction. The documents even state that the Ministry of Justice instructed the public prosecutor — you will find the word ‘instruct’ in the documents — when and at what time they had to call me on October 9, 2014, to say that I was a suspect. For a phone call to me, saying that I was a suspect, the Public Prosecutor’s Office was instructed by the Ministry of Justice when and at what time and on what day that had to happen.

 

“My case has been dealt with in detail. And this whole trial, just like the Wilders 1 trial, is permeated with political influence. From phone calls, up to the Council of Ministers, and to ministers who withheld or delayed documents, an opposition leader from the national parliament has been prosecuted for ten years that way.

 

“Politics have always been involved, from civil servants to ministers and the Council of Ministers. Every day that this trial continues and you do not punish the conspiring prosecution, and the Ministry of Justice for their lies and haggling with the principles of an independent, fair and balanced trial, by declaring them inadmissible, every day this trial continues is a black day in the history of Dutch justice.

 

“This trial will have to stop today. I have said it many times. To be honest, I find it incomprehensible that this has not been decided long ago by declaring the prosecution inadmissible. If in the unfortunate event, even after today, you want to continue with this trial again, then indeed, and you have just said that, Mr. Presiding Judge, we need ample time to read all those documents and possibly based on those documents, also call new witnesses, like Minister Van der Steur. Like the prime minister. Like all the people involved.

 

“It is clear from these documents that they are more involved than we already knew. And see the minutes, the records, of the Council of Ministers as well. It appears to have been discussed. It has been said by the General Affairs official against the Justice official: ‘[Prime Minister Mark] Rutte wants to say something about the chances of this trial, Ivo [Opstelten].’ And Ivo went to the Council of Ministers on March 21. This has always been denied. Denied during the interrogations. Now it appears to have just happened. I want to see those documents from the Council of Ministers. I want to talk to people about it. It is not just about someone who steals a roll of licorice. It is about the opposition leader in the Dutch parliament whose persecution has been influenced up to the Council of Ministers.

 

“I want to hear the truth. I want to hear more than the truth about the political influence in this trial so that this trial is taken off the table as quickly as possible.

 

Veteran Dutch journalist Joost Niemöller wrote:

 

“On February 3, just before another hearing in the endless criminal case against Wilders, a bulk of internal documents were dropped by Justice Minister Ferdinand Grapperhaus which relate to the official and political involvement in this trial. These documents were intended for the House of Representatives and are now public.

 

“If the Chamber takes its task seriously, it must investigate the political nature of this lawsuit. That is emphatically not an investigation into the trial itself — after all, we have a separation of powers here — but an investigation into the political role behind the continuation of this trial….

 

“In the Wilders case, we certainly do not have to rely on the judge to agree with Wilders and to reach the conclusion that there has been a political trial, which is therefore not legally valid…. After the internal documents released, the issue has become even more flammable.

 

“The Wilders case appears to have been pre-cooked in the cabinet itself…. [Prime Minister] Rutte himself was involved…. The lying and spinning must stop somewhere.

 

“The anger of Wilders in court was only too understandable, and all too justified. It is the anger of more and more Dutch people. Even in the mainstream media it is now recognized that this political pre-cooking goes beyond all limits.

 

“This is the umpteenth example in which democracy is excluded by the judiciary, because the judiciary and the OM have become an extension of politics.

 

“This point is increasingly emphasized by, among others, Forum for Democracy leader Thierry Baudet, whose hypocritical opponents accuse him of rejecting the rule of law.

 

“This rule of law, in which judges and prosecutors receive instructions by the politicians on how to act, is rotten from within.”

 

Wilders’ trial will continue on March 23. Four additional hearings are scheduled for April. It remains unclear when his trial will end.

+++++++++++++++++

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

______________________

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. Follow Soeren Kern on Twitter and Facebook

 

© 2020 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute. [Blog Editor: Full disclosure – I did not seek permission and post will be removed if Gatestone Institute requests so.]

 

Donate to Gatestone Institute

 

United Islamists of America


America, the Land of Constitutional Law, AGAIN is being threatened from within by a stealth Islam flying under the radar largely due to the American Left’s obsession getting rid of duly elected President Trump.

 

Here is some info on an Islamic infiltration into America who would use the very First Amendment to destroy America that Islam would eradicate in favor of Sharia and Islamic laws inspired by the Quran, Hadith and Sira. Middle East Forum’s (Meforum) Islamist Watch has some details of some anti-American Muslims promoting anti-American Islamic ideology.

 

JRH 2/6/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

 

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

************************

United Islamists of America

 

By David Swindle

A version posted at American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD)

February 5, 2020

Islamist Watch

 

Clerics of two theocratic movements – Arabia’s Salafis and South Asia’s Deobandis – have spent over a century denouncing each other’s theologies, only pausing, occasionally, for tactical alliances. Over the past few years, however, ecumenical attitudes have begun to change among Western Islamist clerics. As an increasing number of modernist preachers from both movements have stepped forward to establish new forward-facing organizations, cautious longer-term partnerships between the clerical components of the two movements have begun to emerge – providing us with a glimpse of American Islamism in the years to come.

 

This new-found inclusiveness was recently evident in September 2019, when a Deobandi Islamist seminary, the Institute of Knowledge (IOK) hosted its “Ilmspiration” Conference in Anaheim, California. The purpose of the day-long event was to bring together 14 Islamist scholars and imams from the IOK and two other likeminded, leading institutions: the Qalam Institute, a wildly popular Deobandi religious training organization led by Abdul Nasir Jangda; and the Yaqeen Institute for Islamic Research, a project of Omar Suleiman, a prominent Salafi-trained cleric.

 

Omar Suleiman (holding microphone) and other panelists at the IOK’s September 2019 conference.

 

What makes these schools and their leaders so dangerous? Whether Deobandi or Salafi, both movements are adherents to the broader political idea of Islamism, which seeks to impose an Islamic state run under Islamic law. These clerics provide much of the arguments, propaganda, and most importantly, the theology, to persuade Muslims into believing in the supremacy of a medieval religious legal system. This ideology sows the seeds of terrorism both at home and abroad.

 

In their methods, the new social media-savvy generation of Deobandi and Salafi clerics in the West are very different from the insular, ascetic preachers of the previous generation; but not in their core beliefs. Qalam’s Deobandi leader Abdul Nasir Jangda, who commands a social media following of hundreds of thousands, defends female sex slavery and advocates the death penalty for apostasy. Meanwhile, Yaqeen’s Suleiman, a media darling for his involvement in progressives’ protests against Trump administration policies, warns young women they may be killed by a “jealous dad” if they commit adultery.

 

So what influence will these organizations exert on American Islam over the next few years? And how will these once hostile sects work together?

 

In a packed, segregated ballroom – filled with hijab-clad women on the left, men on the right, and families in the middle, the founders of IOK, Qalam, and Yaqeen described their institutions’ goals and methods.

 

Suleiman went first – introducing Yaqeen as a voice of “authentic” American Islam and claiming that his organization’s goal is “to be a think tank with a megaphone.” This “megaphone,” Suleiman explained, was working to change Google search results – using search engine optimization (SEO) tricks to direct readers to Yaqeen’s research, videos, and infographics. On such search inquiries as “Islam and Apostasy,” “Was Islam spread by the sword?” and “honor killings in Islam,” Suleiman bragged that Yaqeen is now the top result after Wikipedia. He also noted Yaqeen’s ability to influence mainstream media, from the Dallas Morning News to CNN.

 

In other words, Yaqeen is not just about influencing the public’s perception of Islam; it is attempting to impose Yaqeen’s very particular strain of Islam on both the American public and American Muslims.

 

In fact, Suleiman promised “that all of the organizations in the Muslim community” can use his material for free – from children in weekend schools and teens in private Islamic schools, to adults watching on YouTube and entire congregations making use of his “masjid [mosque] resource kits… so the whole masjid can be empowered.” Yaqeen is working to ensure the next generation of American Muslims adheres to a united Islamist creed: “We’re also piloting Islamic school curriculum at 20 different schools right now and it’s going to be free, inshallah, for all Islamic schools to use, Sunday schools or otherwise.”

 

Jangda went next, explaining Qalam’s goal is to educate the Muslim ummah. “Every single person should have access to the education and the understanding of Islam,” he said, before laying out the broad range of training courses Qalam offered: a seminary for full-time students, “intensives” that last a few weeks, online classes for part-time students, and, for those on-the-go, podcasts – to which 8 million have already listened.

 

Abdul Nasir Jangda, a modernist Deobandi cleric and leader of the Qalam Institute.

 

In an [sic] pledge familiar to a Salafi audience, the Deobandi cleric spoke of teaching the form of Islam first heard by audiences of Islam’s early leaders, and expressed his hope that Qalam’s “authentic” Islam will consequently be passed on “from generation to generation.”

 

None addressed the rather important fact that Suleiman’s “authentic” Islam differs on questions of jurisprudence to Jangda’s “authentic” Islam. More important for both, it appeared, is the concept of a united Muslim ummah [global community] – a vital condition of Islamism. In fact, one of the few precursors to the new-found Salafi-Deobandi partnerships in the U.S. can be found in Haitham Al-Haddad, a British cleric who – despite the theological disparities – claims to representant both Salafi and Deobandi ideologies, for the sake of a “united ummah.”

 

Nomaan Baig, the IOK’s founder and director, went next, thanking his “brothers” Jangda and Suleiman and praising their institutions. Current IOK programs include a K-10 school, pilgrimage services, a Saturday school and after-school programs, and a successful series of podcasts. Echoing the others’ belief in the supremacy of the ummah, he declared that his own efforts at the IOK are “only doable and possible because of our collaboration.” In other words: only by putting theological differences aside can Islamism succeed.

 

And so with this understanding of the three groups’ differing areas of emphasis and target audiences, the utility of their collaboration becomes clear. As a united Islamist front, the three organizations create a chain of custody: Yaqeen creates the materials for schools and mosques; the IOK then teaches this material at schools and graduate programs, while Qalam works with young adults and future clerics.

 

The collaboration and its future prospects went so well that near the end of the day, Baig said: “So imam Omar suggested, and Shayk Abdul Nasir and I conferred that inshallah, we’re going to try and make this an annual thing here in Southern California.” Baig described the groups’ strategy as “‘complementation.’ We complement one another… because our propagation is that knowledge.”

 

Such ‘complementation’ would have been extremely unusual just a few decades ago. Deobandis and Salafis follow different madhahib [schools of jurisprudence]. The founding Deobandi seminary in India urges its students to read books of “deviant” Salafis in order to refute them. In the United States, websites sympathetic to Deobandis are devoted to challenging and denouncing the Al Maghrib Institute, a Salafi religious training organization with which Suleiman has long been involved. Salafi clerics and preachers, meanwhile, denounce Deobandis as “deviants.” Suleiman’s own teacher, the Salafi cleric Salah As-Sawy, criticizes Sufism (in which the Deobandi school is technically rooted), while Salafi activists have established dozens of social media pages and websites to “speak against this SUFI demonic cult who misguide innocent muslimeen.”

 

It is also important to note that these Deobandi institutions are relatively new – Qalam and the IOK did not exist some years ago, because Deobandi institutions were almost only found in American mosques and madaris [traditional seminaries]. Qalam and IOK are the result of a wave of new modernist Deobandis, likely taking their cue from the modernist Salafis who have rejected the political and theological isolation of the past, instead embracing social media, pan-Islamist activism and even some social justice rhetoric. Omar Suleiman (with his 318,000 Twitter followers) is perhaps the most notable example.

 

Suleiman does not just ignore the theological divisions of the past; he deliberately obscures his own affiliations, once writing, “Don’t let people box you into a group because they’re too narrow minded to think outside of their own cultish mind barriers.”

 

“When you talk to [sic] much about politics and social justice, you’ll be deemed ‘Ikhwani.’ [Muslim Brotherhood] When you stress the importance of the Sunnah too much and show aversion to innovation, you’ll be deemed ‘Salafi’ or ‘Wahhabi.’ And when you speak too much about spirituality and how the Ummah is in need of the hearts being rectified as much as it’s [sic] outwardly affairs, you’re a ‘Sufi.'”

 

Suleiman encourages this new generation of Muslims to “[S]leep peacefully while others waste their days and nights trying to ‘figure you out.'” At the IOK conference, what was once merely talk of a united ummah is no longer speculation, but a working model. Islamic division is being forgotten for the sake of Islamist unity.

 

And the impact of this alliance? As the last session of the conference began after the three leaders introduced their organizations, the moderator noted: “Inshallah, before we begin I just wanted to make one quick announcement, alhamdullilah, our registration numbers indicate one thing here today: that there are more students here than adults.”

++++++++++++++++++

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

___________________________

David M. Swindle is a fellow for Islamist Watch and the Southern California associate of the Counter-Islamist Grid. He also works as the Director of Research for The Israel Group. Follow him on Twitter @DaveSwindle

 

©1994-2020 The Middle East Forum

 

About Islamist Watch

 

Launched in 2006, Islamist Watch is a project of the Middle East Forum. We work to combat the ideas and institutions of lawful Islamism in the United States and throughout the West. Arguing that “radical Islam is the problem, moderate Islam is the solution,” we seek to expose the Islamist organizations that currently dominate the debate, while identifying and promoting the work of moderate Muslims. Islamist Watch specifically does not deal with counterterrorism but works to establish that lawful Islamism is itself a threat.

 

The Threat of Lawful Islamism

 

Islamists ultimately seek hegemonic control via a worldwide caliphate that applies strict Islamic law in full. Terrorism is one method to advance this project but it is not the only approach. Indeed, the activities of lawful Islamists will arguably prove a more effective tactic in the long term. While the public intuitively understands the threat of terrorism and is mobilized by it, and while states have well-developed institutions (law enforcement, intelligence agencies, the military, the justice system) to protect and fight against it, the activities of lawful – or non-violent – Islamists appear less alarming and institutions do not exist to counter them.

 

Non-violent extremists play an important role in the radicalization of Muslim communities. Although non-violent extremists may not always directly advocate violence, they offer a worldview in which violence against non-Muslims is ultimately justified. Islamists provide young Muslims with the theological and political justifications for terrorism. This READ THE REST

 

Examine Islam


Don’t be Fooled by Supremacism, Lies and False Peace

 

John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© January 25, 2020

 

If you’ve ever Islamic revered writings such as the Quran, Hadith, Sira and various Muslim theologians commenting on the big revered three AND you are not an adherent of Islam, YOU ARE AWARE ISLAM IS EVIL toward all things non-Islamic.

 

Even though those revered writings designate Jews and Christians as People of the Book (because a Muslim dare not say Holy Bible), it is written of them THAT failure to submit to the superiority of Islam is death.

 

I’m a Christian that refuses to relegate my faith to an inferior position submitting to Muslim lies about Jesus Christ the Son of God Crucified to death on a Cross and arisen three days later to His Glorified life fully human and fully God. Christian beliefs labeled as blasphemy in Islam.

 

 

It has been quite some time since I have posted on Islam exposing that belief system as deficient, contrary and downright anti-Christian. And so I have been saving some posts from other blogs and websites exposing a nefarious Islam (primarily from Sheaholliman’s Weblog) which I will cross post here (probably with a little spellcheck applied).

 

If you are Facebook poster be careful. Sharing may land you in Facebook Jail. As you will read in an Editor’s note, I’m serving restricted time in Facebook Jail until April 18. I’m restricted to only Groups I moderate, but I got a feeling a full restriction is in my future for I also will not submit to Fascistbook Censors.

 

JRH 1/25/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

 

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protestor restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

*******************

VIDEO: What is the Quran?

Posted by Islam Critiqued

17.1K subscribers – Jan 17, 2019

 

Adapted, in part, from Bannister, An Oral-Formulaic Study of the Qur’an.

 

Citations are all in the pinned comment.

 

For more on differences between the accounts, see here: https://youtu.be/MMvGyNBCoXo

 

Email me at: islamcritiqued@gmail.com

 

What is the Quran? Is it the word of Allah? Or is the Quran the word of…

 

The Mishnah?

2 Enoch?

3 Enoch?

Testament of Solomon?

Apocalypse of Abraham?

Book of Jubilees? Testament of Levi?

Life of Adam and Eve?

The Book of the Cave of Treasures?

The Gospel of Bartholomew?

+++++++++++++++++

“Hating and Loving” for Islam

 

By Raymond Ibrahim

01/17/2020

Originally FrontPageMag.com

RaymondIbrahim.com

 

During a New Year’s Eve Islamic terror attack that took place in Russia minutes before the clock struck midnight, two Muslim men—Akhmed Imagozhev, 22 and Mikail Miziyev, 18—drove their car into and stabbed to death two police officers, one a married father of four.  Other officers subsequently shot one of the jihadis dead, while hospitalizing the other.

 

Akhmed Imagozhev, 22 and Mikail Miziyev, 18

 

An image of the two Muslim men posing with knives was later found on social media (right).  Beneath it appears the words, “love and hatred based on Tawhid!”

 

This is hardly the first time this ostensibly oxymoronic phrase appears in connection with Islamic acts of terror.  After launching a successful attack that killed two policemen in the Kashmir Valley, the militant commander of Kashmir’s Hizb al-Mujahidin—“the Party of Jihadis”—justified the murders by saying,  “We love and hate for the sake of Allah.”

 

In this otherwise cryptic motto lie the roots of Islam’s conflict with the rest of the world.  “Loving and hating” is one of several translations of the Islamic doctrine of al-wala’ wa’l-bara’ (which since 2006 I have generally translated as “Loyalty and Enmity”).

 

The wala’ portion—“love,” “loyalty,” etc.—requires Muslims always to aid and support fellow Muslims (including jihadis, for example through funds or zakat).  As one medieval Muslim authority explained, the believer “is obligated to befriend a believer—even if he is oppressive and violent toward you — while he must be hostile to the infidel—even if he is liberal and kind to you” (The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 64 ).   This is a clear reflection of Koran 48:29: “Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves.”

 

But it is the bara’—the “hate,” the “enmity”—that manifests itself so regularly that even those in the West who are not necessarily acquainted with the particulars of Muslim doctrine sense it.  For instance, in November 2015, after a series of deadly Islamic terror strikes in the West, then presidential candidate Donald Trump said, “I think Islam hates us.  There’s something there that — there’s a tremendous hatred there. There’s a tremendous hatred. We have to get to the bottom of it. There’s an unbelievable hatred of us.”

 

This “tremendous” and “unbelievable hatred” is not a product of grievances, political factors, or even an “extremist” interpretation of Islam; rather, it is a direct byproduct of mainstream Islamic teaching.  Koran 60:4 is the cornerstone verse of this doctrine and speaks for itself.  As Osama bin Laden once wrote:

 

As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High’s Word: “We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us—till you believe in Allah alone” [Koran 60:4]. So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility—that is, battle—ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed [i.e., a dhimmi], or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy!… Such, then, is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred—directed from the Muslim to the infidel—is the foundation of our religion.  (The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 43).

 

Similarly, the Islamic State confessed to the West in the context of Koran 60: 4 that “We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers.”  As for any and all political “grievances,” these are “secondary” reasons for the jihad, ISIS said:

 

The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay jizyah and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you.

 

Koran 58:22 goes as far as to praise Muslims who kill their own non-Muslim family members: “You shall find none who believe in Allah and the Last Day on friendly terms with those who oppose Allah and His Messenger—even if they be their fathers, their sons, their brothers, or their nearest kindred.”

 

According to Ibn Kathir’s mainstream commentary on the Koran, this verse refers to a number of Muslims who slaughtered their own non-Muslim kin (one slew his non-Muslim father, another his non-Muslim brother, a third—Abu Bakr, the first revered caliph of Islamic history—tried to slay his non-Muslim son, and Omar, the second righteous caliph, slaughtered his relatives).   Ibn Kathir adds that Allah was immensely pleased by their unwavering zeal for his cause and rewarded them with paradise. (The Al Qaeda Reader75-76).

 

In fact, verses that support the divisive doctrine of al-wala’ wa’l-bara’ [Blog Editor: an excellent post on this doctrine HERE] permeate the Koran (see also 4:89, 4:144, 5:51, 5:54, 6:40, 9:23, and 60:1).  There is one caveat, captured by Koran 3:28: when Muslims are in a position of weakness, they may pretend to befriend non-Muslims, as long as the hate carries on in their hearts (such is taqiyya; see herehere, and here for examples; for other Islamic sanctioned forms of deception, read about tawriya, and taysir).

 

Little wonder, then, that America’s supposed best Muslim friends and allies—such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar—have issued fatwas calling on all Muslims to “oppose and hate whomever Allah commands us to oppose and hate, including the Jews, the Christians, and other mushrikin [non-Muslims], until they believe in Allah alone and abide by his laws, which he sent down to his Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings upon him.”

 

Indeed, because enmity for non-Muslims is so ironclad in the Koran, mainstream Islamic teaching holds that Muslim men must even hate—and show that they hate—their non-Muslim wives, for no other reason than that they are “infidels.”

 

If Muslims must hate those closest to them—including fathers, sons, brothers, and wives—simply because they are non-Muslims, is there any surprise that so many Muslims hate foreign “infidels” who live oceans away—such as Americans, who are further portrayed throughout the Muslim world as trying to undermine Islam?

 

In short, jihad—or terrorism, war on non-Muslims for no less a reason than that they are non-Muslims—is simply the physical realization of an overlooked concept that precedes it: Islam’s unequivocal command for Muslims to hate non-Muslims.

 

© 2020 · RaymondIbrahim.com All rights reserved

++++++++++++++++++++++

VIDEO:  Quran, Alexander and Studies in Surah 18

 

Posted by Islam Critiqued

17.1K subscribers – Sep 7, 2019

 

In this video we: destroy the “Islamic Awareness” article related to this topic, demonstrate the Quran relies on the Alexander Myth, respond to more anticipated objections from Muslims (using Maududi), and explore some of the tangled mess of traditions elsewhere in Surah 18 and beyond. In doing so, we issue a strong challenge to Muslims regarding their theology of the Quran.

++++++++++++++++++

VIDEO: Quran, Mysticism and the Ignorance of Allah

 

 

Posted by Islam Critiqued

17.1K subscribers Aug 30, 2019

 

In this video we demonstrate the sloppiness with which the Quran mixes various genres of tradition, historical and ahistorical. Patreon here: http://www.patreon.com/islamcritiqued. Email here: islamcritiqued@gmail.com

++++++++++++++++++++

VIDEO: Significant Changes to the Quran: Surah 33

 

Posted by Islam Critiqued

17.1K subscribers – Dec 20, 2019

 

Adapted from: David S. Powers, “Muhammad Is Not the Father of Any of Your Men: The Making of the Last Prophet”

+++++++++++++++++++

VIDEO: Why I Left Islam & Became Christian

 

 

Posted by Mohamad Faridi

4.83K subscribers – Dec 3, 2018

 

Around the world, people who leave the faith of Islam face state persecution, imprisonment, torture, and even execution, as well as violence, death threats, and ostracization from their own communities.

 

Many ex-Muslims risk so-called honor killing, forced marriage, kidnap, and communal violence at the hands of their families for “bringing shame” on their community. In Western countries, ex-Muslims are often thrown out of the family and face isolation and exclusion.

 

Mohamad grew up in a devout Muslim home, obediently following her parents’ orders to practice the rituals of Islam. But God was calling her to freedom and love. He was calling her to true faith. He was calling her to give up everything.

 

His Testimony is a remarkable spiritual journey from Islam to Christianity. It is also the untold story of how he ran from her father’s threats to find refuge in America. Most of all, it is the story of a young man who made life-changing sacrifices to follow Jesus—and who inspires us to do the same.

 

https://dnmi.org/

 

https://www.facebook.com/MohamadAminFaridi

 

My Book: https://www.amazon.com/Forsaking-Fathers-Religion-Mohamad-Faridi-ebook/dp/B06WVGPDH2/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

++++++++++++++++++++++

Sacred Deception – Taqiyya – Political Islam

 

Posted by obbop

January 23, 2020

Western Civilization in Peril

Originally from Political Islam (11/14/14)

Taqiya-ISLAMIC DECEPTION

 

VIDEO: Bill Warner, PhD: Sacred Deception — Taqiyya

 

“I’d like to talk to you about what I find a fascinating topic that is the topic of Islamic ethics, but in particular, a part of Islamic ethics which is called sacred deception or Taqiyya.  Let me give you a few ethical rules that come from the Hadith: a Muslim does not cheat another Muslim in business a Muslim doesn’t kill another Muslim a Muslim doesn’t touch another Muslim’s wife and a Muslim doesn’t lie to another Muslim.

 

You notice something here? That’s right. You and I are left out because you see Islam is not a symmetric ethical system. The golden rule is symmetric. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” That is, there’s a balance here; the other and yourself are seen as equal. But in Islam if you’re a Kafir, you’re never equal to the Muslim. Islam does not have a golden rule. The Kafir is always inferior.

 

Now then, let’s talk about lying and deception. First let’s start with the fact that Allah has 99 names and one of those 99 names is he is the best of deceivers. But Allah is also the best of plotters and schemers so given that, it isn’t too surprising that we find in the Koran 16:106 “Those who disbelieve in Allah after having believed, who open up their hearts to disbelief will feel the wrath of Allah and have a terrible punishment.” In other words, apostates can be killed or otherwise punished. But it goes further. “But there is no punishment for anyone who is compelled to deny Allah in words but whose heart is faithful.” So in other words, a Muslim can lie about Islam if it serves Islam. And one of the ways he can serve Islam is that the Muslim is not discriminated against.

 

Here we have another in Koran 3:28: “Believers should not take Kafirs (unbelievers) as friends in preference to other believers. Who ever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah.” (In other words, if you’re a real friend [to a Kafir], you’re no longer friend of Allah). “ . . . unless you but guard yourself against them [Kafirs], taking precautions.” What this is interpreted to mean is that a Muslim can act friendly but he’s not actually the friend. That’s what is wrong. In other words, a Muslim may never give preference to a Kafir over a Muslim. There are, by the way, no less than 12 verses which say that a Muslim is not the friend of the Kafir.

 

Now let’s turn to the Hadith. “Mohammed: ‘Who will kill Ka’b bin Ashraf who has offended Allah and his prophet?’ A Muslim: ‘I will Mohammed. Would you have me do so?’‘ Yes. ’‘In order to kill him, I will need to deceive him. May I do that?’ Mohammed: ‘Yes.’” So, the Muslim deceived Ka’b bin Ashraf and he did kill him. What is this? This is the Sunna of Mohammed; it is possible to lie to the Kafir as long as it advances Islam. This is the nature of Taqiyya.

 

Now there is another way in which a Muslim can lie. There’s a hadith, a fairly well-known hadith, in which there are three reasons for Muslims to lie. One is jihad, that is the struggle against the Kafir. So a Muslim can lie to you anytime he needs to advance Islam. The other is a Muslim a lie to another Muslim if it will make the situation better. And a husband and wife may lie to each other as long as it smooths the relationships in the household. So deception is part of Islam. Allah is a deceiver. Mohammed was a deceiver, and therefore, every Muslim can be a deceiver. It is so special that it has a name, Taqiyya. So the next time you’re hearing something about Islam that just doesn’t sound right, and it comes from the mouth of a Muslim, you’re right. It’s not right. It’s a lie. It is Taqiyyah.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Guide to Islam And Islamic Extremism

 

By Timothy Benton

Jan 23, 2020

0Censor

 

0Censor Guide to Islam And Islamic Extremism

 

What is Islamic Extremism

 

Islamic extremism is a term that will cause many of us to have nightmares, imagining some person in our dreams with a mask and a turban, screaming Islamic phrases out as they jump with no fear into a crowd of people and blow themselves up. But what is Islamic extremism?

 

I imagine what standards you are viewing this against would change or alter your perception of what is extremist or not, so to keep things simple, how about we stay within Western Based perceptions. These are rather simple, an Islamic extremist is anyone that feels their religion gives them the right to try to dictate to people in the West what our interactions not only with them should be, but when forceful suggestions don’t work violence is acceptable.

 

What is the difference between Islam and the other Abrahamic faiths

 

Before I get too much into this, I need all to understand the differences between the faiths. While Jews believe that their faith is held sacred, the more orthodox may turn ornery if they feel you are infringing on their right to practice their faith, but as a rule, they would never dream of trying to force others to convert, they just want to be left alone. Judaism has made conversion hard to prevent people from converting for frivolous reasons. The violence one can read in the time of the early advent of Judaism, such as the Exodus, the conquering of the land wiping out of the people, this is not pertinent to Judaism today, the violent parts are rejected universally.

 

Christianity while more an outgoing faith in the way of proselytizing, the true teachings of the faith teach that this must be done with love, violence is rejected, forgiveness is to be handed out freely. Before anyone says that Christianity was very violent in the past, you are correct, but this was not due to the teachings, this was due to the politicization of the faith.

 

Islam

 

Screen Capture-mosque

 

But Islam is different, and please, don’t take this as saying that all Muslims are violent, in fact, that majority of Muslims are peace-loving people who as a rule have no problems living with people of other faiths. But this is where the similarities end, Islam was founded on violence, it teaches in its core teachings that violence is acceptable, in fact, will be needed in the end to force all to submit to  the faith; if you are truly going to delve deep into the faith, there is little you can do to get away from this.

 

But what is Islam? At its most basic component, you have to look at what Islam means, it means submission. Submission to whom? It is submission to Allah, and this was directed and taught by what they consider as the highest prophet, Mohammad. Mohammad in his teachings that were recorded in the Quran left little to choice (he never wrote the Quran, he was illiterate, others recorded what they heard him say), he openly stated he was the final word on all, what he stated did change over time. Early verses of Islam more peaceful in nature, later in life Mohammad was far from peaceful, these teachings take precedence over all others, thus the more peaceful verses when it was better to live in peace due to a lack of power  are superceded later with verses telling them to be not peaceful, naturally a Muslim will not ever offer up this information, instead will continue to quote the peaceful verses even though they know they gave way to the later ones.

 

Unlike Judaism and Christianity, both which did have parts that dictated how to treat others,  with the Jewish law you have parts that dictated how a Jew should live, it never gives mention to how a none Jew should live their life. Judaism wanted their people to live separate, not make demands on the rest of the world to satisfy their faith. Christianity as well tells its people to give to G-d what is his, to man what is his, and live your life within a way that is permitted within the system, that is unless the system is in direct violation of your faith (you saw this with martyrs in Rome in the advent of Christianity).

 

But Islam does not make this distinction, it tells its rulers how to rule, what their outlook should be towards others. Any land conquered under the name of Islam is held in holy trust (that has always been the core of the problem with Israel, not over some imaginary right to heritage as the “Palestinians” love to claim). To this day materials in Islamic nations speak of the part of Spain by its Islamic name, Libya’s Gaddiffi made a statement once about taking back over holy land in Spain, they were going to do so not by war, rather by using the Europeans own political correctness against them; sadly this is looking more and more probable as time goes on.

 

In Islam Sharia is the law of the land, all laws, even in more secular nations like Egypt are still very much influenced by Sharia. A good example is if you go to the most moderate of Islamic majority of states, such an Egypt or Indonesia, it is illegal for one to convert an Islamic person out of their faith, but it is 100% legal for any Islamic person to convert or proselytize one from another faith to Islam. Even divorce in Indonesia is controlled by the Islamic faith. In their 1974 Marriage Law they have laws for each faith to marry and divorce, they set up the different customs to handle divorce, but Muslims only have unwritten customary (adat) law and  Muslim religious law.

 

Another problem is honesty. Judaism and Christianity teach you should be honest, not lie, but Islam teaches it is perfectly acceptable to lie your head off, so long as it promotes Islam or is protecting you in some way. And this is not just my understanding, Islam teaches this rather plainly.

 

Holy Koran with isolated. Verse of the koran.

Quran

 

Quran (16:106) – Establishes that there are circumstances that can “compel” a Muslim to tell a lie.

 

Quran (3:28) – This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to “guard themselves” against danger, meaning that there are times when a Muslim may appear friendly to non-Muslims, even though they should not feel friendly.

 

Quran (9:3)“…Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters…” The dissolution of oaths is with pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong but were evicted anyway.  (The next verse refers only to those who have a personal agreement with Muhammad as individuals – see Ibn Kathir vol 4, p 49)

 

Quran (66:2)“Allah has already ordained for you the dissolution of your oaths…”

 

Quran (40:28) – A man is introduced as a believer, but one who had to “hide his faith” among those who are not believers.

 

Quran (2:225)“Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts”

 

Quran (3:54)“And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers.” The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means ‘deceit’. If Allah is supremely deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)

 

This is a problem when dealing with Muslims, more so when doing this with nation states. They are taught that they can lie if it aids them, they can make treaties with none believers, these should only be used as a means to build back up strength so you can attack again. I have told many, if you hear one thing but see another, I would never go by what I hear, rather what I see.

 

Treatment of none Islamic people in Muslim Majority Nations

 

ISIS Terror (victims prepared for beheading)

 

In many places they either don’t allow other faiths to live in their land (Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, EAU), or if they do they have to live in a subservient role to Islam, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, and the rest of the Arab world. In the past, all people not Muslim had to always stay in a submissive way, had to pay Jizyah {Jizhya} (الجزية) this was a tax all unbelievers were supposed to pay for not being Muslim. This was not so much intended as protection money, in the way of extortion, it was meant to humiliate, to show that they were beneath the Muslim’s, as such they were obligated to pay this, so they could live. Here is what the Quran says about it:

 

Quran 9:29 [Blog Editor: My Word Doc would not acquire the Arabic characters for the below translation. To read the original you will go to the LINK then scroll to this point.]

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel subdued.

 

What effect does Islamic Migration have

 

Dr. Peter Hammond, a researcher that has spent his life studying Islamic migration, the effect on the surrounding population, the interaction of the Islamic migrants on the general population, made a rather startling and troubling find concerning their demands on the nation and the people. In his book Slavery, Terrorism and Islam he breaks down Islam’s interactions with the society around them as they grow, rather than give my own quotes, I will quote him:

 

When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to ‘the reasonable’ Muslim demands for their ‘religious rights,’ they also get the other components under the table. Here’s how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007)).

 

As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

 

United States — Muslim 1.0%
Australia — Muslim 1.5%
Canada — Muslim 1.9%
China — Muslim 1%-2%
Italy — Muslim 1.5%
Norway — Muslim 1.8%

 

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:

 

Denmark — Muslim 2%
Germany — Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%
Spain — Muslim 4%
Thailand — Muslim 4.6%

 

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.

 

They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply. (United States ).

 

France — Muslim 8%
Philippines — Muslim 5%
Sweden — Muslim 5%
Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad &Tobago — Muslim 5.8%

 

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

 

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions ( Paris –car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats ( Amsterdam – Mohammed cartoons).

 

Guyana — Muslim 10%
India — Muslim 13.4%
Israel — Muslim 16%
Kenya — Muslim 10%
Russia — Muslim 10-15%

 

After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:

 

Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%

 

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare:

 

Bosnia — Muslim 40%
Chad — Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%

 

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:

 

Albania — Muslim 60%
Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%
Qatar — Muslim 77.5%
Sudan — Muslim 70%

 

After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:

 

Bangladesh — Muslim 83%
Egypt — Muslim 90%
Gaza — Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%

Iran — Muslim 98%
Iraq — Muslim 97%
Jordan — Muslim 92%
Morocco — Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan — Muslim 97%
Palestine — Muslim 99%
Syria — Muslim 90%
Tajikistan — Muslim 90%
Turkey — Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%

 

100% will usher in the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ — the Islamic House of Peace — there’s supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:

 

Afghanistan — Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%
Somalia — Muslim 100%
Yemen — Muslim 99.9%

 

Of course, that’s not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.

 

I think one of the best quotes I have seen concerning this came from Leon Uris:

 

‘Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; and the tribe against the world and all of us against the infidel. – Leon Uris, ‘The Haj’

 

Conclusion

 

Western-Muslim-parents

 

So are all Muslims bad? Of course not, they are far from it, the problem we have today is the press is so intent on covering for all Muslims, they either ignore or disregard the bad ones in their midst. In other cases they try to say incorrectly that groups like ISIS are not true Muslims, I would beg to differ, they are actually doing nothing that Mohammad himself did not do.

 

In other cases they give such low expectations, when places like Saudi Arabia say that women now have more value than livestock, the left, and feminist groups for their part,  explode in their praise of them for their enlightened outlook.

 

Sadly these are the same feminist and women rights activist that seems to think what they stand for has no bearing with Islamic women or for Western Women victimized by Muslim males. Rather than stick up for the Western woman being attacked, sexually molested and raped by Muslim migrants, they attack them, saying it is somehow their fault, maybe they should have dressed better (we all know if it was a rape from a Western male, they would never dream of making this claim, nor would they blame the woman for such a heinous act).

 

Islamic Terrorism USA

 

You see this in the press, rather than say there is a terrible problem with Islam, they blame it on the economy, lack of jobs, western ideology being forced on these people. And while doing this they ignore there are two forces at work within Islam in the present, one is looking to bring it back to its more radical ways when it was at its height of power, they dream of recreating a Caliphate again.

 

The press ignores this, makes excuses for them, or says look at the peaceful Muslims, what about them? The bottom line is like with many groups, the peaceful ones are irrelevant, they do nothing to change the narrative of the radicals, thus giving them power by their silence, the ones that do speak are quickly attacked or dispatched. In other cases people who speak out are ostracized by the whole, they are seen as somehow being traitors to Islam.

 

In the same way that you had peaceful loving Germans in WW2, peaceful loving Chinese under Mao, and equally loving peaceful people under Stalin, they did not drive the narrative, their silence gave power to the minority, end the end they were irrelevant to what was driving the narrative in those countries.

 

By not exposing this you give power to the radicals and make the voices of the peace and change even more irrelevant. In the cold war, we did not say look at how peaceful the majority of the Russians were, we took groups that wanted to bring freedom to the Soviet system, recognized and gave them both support and resources to do something, they soon became many and changed the system from within. We need to do the same with Islam, stop empowering tyrants and radical dictators, we need to start aiding the ones trying to drag Islam into the 21 century.

 

President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi – Egypt

 

You do have heroic people within the Islamic community, Egypt’s ruler openly called for a dialog to bring Islam into the modern age, to reject the violent bent seen in the Koran. Sadly most of the press was silent, the Western powers, for the most part, ignored this, under Obama instead we have catered to the more violent, then ignoring the radicals, calling them JV or amateurish; while the US has changed this outlook under Trump, seems he is more willing to push to call out the radicals, to be fair he is also willing to embrace the ones that started most of this last wave of radicalness, the Saudi’s.

 

But then even within a society as closed off and radical as Saudi Arabia is, we see cracks in that growing within that society as they try to move more towards getting away from their radical ideology. Today there are calls for women to drive, openly having a dialog with Israel, actually allowing Jews within their nation and having leaders go to Israel. The Saudi’s and other more orthodox Islamic states seem to be changing, but then there are pulls from nations like Iran that are pushing to bring more fundamentalism, just what they see as the proper way.

 

Islam can pull itself from the past, but if it does not, we need to be ready to call it out for this, not make excuses for them. We need to see support, aid and giving open alliance to leaders that are pushing for a more modern view of Islam, openly call out the ones that aren’t, and in nations like Saudi Arabia and the other nations around them, we need to let them be on notice, now more is the West going to turn a blind eye towards spreading of radicalism, but we will be quick to notice and praise when they make moves to stop it.

 

  1. Indonesia Department of Information, Introduction to Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1 of the Year 1974 on Marriage 5 (Nov. 1975),  supra note 1, at 5. See also INDONESIAN LAW 1949-1989: A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF FOREIGN-LANGUAGE MATERIALS WITH BRIEF COMMENTARIES ON LAW 167 (S. Pompe ed., 1992). https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Ministry_of_Communication_and_Informatics_(Indonesia).html

 

I know some will say that there is no support for this, if you feel this way, please go to this article that looks at polling around the world and in the Middle East, it is very enlightening.

 

0Censor.com Site owned and operated by Benton Media Corp.

+++++++++++++++++++

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protestor restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

_________________________

Examine Islam

Don’t be Fooled by Supremacism, Lies and False Peace

John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© January 25, 2020

 

Tucker Carlson Nails It! All You Need to Know About GOP Governors Who Turned on Trump!


Ann Corcoran endorses Tucker Carlson’s 1/3/20 broadcast as an expose of treasonous GOP Governors welcoming American-hating Muslim refugees. BUT Tucker begins with speaking of American enemy Iranian general Qasem Soleimani being killed by an American air strike.

 

Tucker doesn’t question that Soleimani was an evil Islamic terrorist, but openly wonders if Iranian retaliation will lead to open war between the USA and Iran. I for one am weary of American invasions; HOWEVER I am all in to bomb the crap out of anything that provides an economic/military benefit for the Iranian regime. Take out oil, nuclear and military capacities with American technology less soldiers’ boots. AND keep on crippling the regime until a surrender or collapse.

 

The GOP Governors ignoring a majority of American wishes on refugees while siding with Dem Multiculturalists begins at about the 30 minute mark of a 39:33 length video. EIGHTEEN GOP Governors giving go ahead for American-hating Muslim Refugees in so-called Christian Charities are making a buck.

 

Other topics: China, 2nd Amendment stops Church shooting in Texas, Homelessness in San Francisco and Boeing financial woes.

 

JRH 1/4/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

 

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

***************************

Tucker Carlson Nails It! All You Need to Know About GOP Governors Who Turned on Trump!

 

By Ann Corcoran

1/4/2020

Frauds, Crooks and Criminals

 

In just a little over 5 minutes last night Tucker Carlson in a segment on the US Refugee Admissions Program and the President’s efforts to reform it, explains exactly what we have been saying for weeks in dozens of posts.

 

Especially interesting is the focus on phony Christian charity as Carlson’s millions of viewers learn that it is federal contractors masquerading as charitable religious groups that have successfully lobbied Republican governors—18 so far—to thumb their noses at Trump and ask for more refugees for their states!

 

It is vitally important that you send this far and wide. Hat tip: Brenda.

 

The segment begins here:

 

VIDEO: Tucker Carlson Tonight 1/3/20 FULL | Tucker Carlson Fox News January 3, 2020 [GOP Governor/Muslim Refugee segment begins about 30 minute mark]

 

 

[Posted by valdilene pessoa

44.2K subscribers – Jan 3, 2020]

 

Don’t miss my post yesterday about CAIR sending wet kisses to Maryland Governor Larry Hogan when he became the 18th governor to say his state welcomes more poverty from the Middle East, Africa and Asia.

+++++++++++++++

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

__________________________

About Frauds, Crooks and Criminals

 

During the next two years Americans will be bombarded by the media with news about the joys of diversity and the economic boom ‘New Americans’ are bringing to the US.

 

However, it’s important that the voting public sees the full picture.

 

Yes, there are deserving immigrants arriving in America, and then there are those who are frauds, crooks and criminals.

 

And, of course, there are American criminals as well.

 

I’ll mention some of those too. In fact, I will have to because most law enforcement and the media rarely report the immigration status of crooks and criminals!

 

Ann Corcoran

 

UN, UK Treating Persecuted Christians as “Enemies”


How long will Christians in America and however many Christians left in Multiculturalist Europe remain silent as Christians are exterminated in Muslim dominated lands AND the same persecuted Christians refused asylum in a safer (BUT not safe as long as there is Muslim influence) West? EVEN the Western Press ignores persecuted Christians as one has to go to alternative news sources to learn the UN and UK dominated by intolerant Islamic influences goes along with exterminating Christianity.

 

JRH 12/26/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some healthy coffee.

 

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

****************************

UN, UK Treating Persecuted Christians as “Enemies”

 

By  Raymond Ibrahim

12/26/2019

Originally posted at Gatestone Institute

RaymondIbrahim.com

 

Ibrahim photo – gbm

 

The United Nations Refugee Agency appears to be committed to blocking persecuted Christians from receiving any assistance.  According to a recent CBN News report:

 

Christian Syrian refugees … have been blocked from getting help from the United Nations Refugee Agency, the UNHCR, by Muslim UN officials in Jordan.

 

One of the refugees, Hasan, a Syrian convert to Christianity, told us in a phone call that Muslim UN camp officials “knew that we were Muslims and became Christians and they dealt with us with persecution and mockery. They didn’t let us into the office. They ignored our request.”

 

Hasan and his family are now in hiding, afraid that they will be arrested by Jordanian police, or even killed. Converting to Christianity is a serious crime in Jordan.

 

According to Timothy, a Jordanian Muslim who converted to Christianity, “All of the United Nations officials [apparently in Jordan], most of them, 99 percent, they are Muslims, and they were treating us as enemies.”

 

Addressing this issue, Paul Diamond, a British human rights lawyer, recently elaborated:

 

You have this absurd situation where the scheme is set up to help Syrian refugees and the people most in need, Christians who have been “genocided,” they can’t even get into the U.N. camps to get the food. If you enter and say I am a Christian or convert, the Muslim U.N. guards will block you [from] getting in and laugh at you and mock you and even threaten you…. [saying]  “You shouldn’t have converted. You’re an idiot for converting. You get what you get,” words to that effect.

 

The next obstacle those few Christians who make it past U.N. refugee camps face are the immigration centers of Western nations themselves.  For example, the discrimination is apparently so obvious in the United Kingdom that Lord George Carey is suing the U.K.’s Home Office for allegedly being “institutionally biased” against Christian refugees and therefore complicit in what he calls “the steady crucifixion of Middle East Christians.”

 

He is hardly the only one making such charges.  One independent report said that when it comes to offering asylum, the UK “appears to discriminate in favour of Muslims” instead of Christians. Statistics seemed to confirm this allegation:  “out of 4,850 Syrian refugees accepted for resettlement by the Home Office in 2017, only eleven were Christian, representing just 0.2% of all Syrian refugees accepted by the UK.”

 

Due to such figures, Lord David Alton of Liverpool, a life peer in the House of Lords, wrote to Home Secretary Sajid Javid, who then headed the Home Office:

 

It is widely accepted that Christians, who constituted around 10 per cent of Syria’s pre-war population, were specifically targeted by jihadi rebels and continue to be at risk….  As last year’s statistics more than amply demonstrate, this [ratio imbalance between Muslim and Christian refugees taken in] is not a statistical blip. It shows a pattern of discrimination that the Government has a legal duty to take concrete steps to address.

 

Such imbalances appear even stranger on the realization that the Islamic State, which precipitated the refugee crisis, is itself a Sunni organization that only targets non-Sunnis—primarily Christians, Yazidis, and Shia—all minority groups that the U.S. has acknowledged experienced a “genocide.”

 

Two of the strangest individual cases of anti-Christian bias were reported earlier this year, when the U.K. denied asylum to persecuted Christians by bizarrely citing the Bible and Islam.  Both Christians, a man and a woman, were former Muslims separately seeking asylum from the Islamic Republic of Iran, the ninth worst persecutor of Christians, particularly former Muslims.

 

In his rejection letter from the UK’s Home Office, the Iranian man was told that several biblical passages were “inconsistent” with his claim to have converted to Christianity after discovering it was a “peaceful” faith.  The letter cited biblical excerpts—including from Exodus, Leviticus, and Matthew—as supposed proof that the Bible is violent; it said Revelation was “filled with imagery of revenge, destruction, death and violence.”  The rejection letter then concluded: “These examples are inconsistent with your claim that you converted to Christianity after discovering it is a ‘peaceful’ religion, as opposed to Islam which contains violence, rage and revenge.”

 

In the second case, an Iranian female asylum seeker was sarcastically informed in her rejection letter that “You affirmed in your AIR [Asylum Interview Record] that Jesus is your saviour, but then claimed that He would not be able to save you from the Iranian regime. It is therefore considered that you have no conviction in your faith and your belief in Jesus is half-hearted.”

 

Discussing her experiences, the rejected woman said: “When I was in Iran I converted to Christianity and the situation changed and the government were [sic] looking for me and I had to flee from Iran….  In my country if someone converts to Christianity their punishment is death or execution.”  Concerning the asylum process, she said that whenever she responded to her Home Office interviewer, “he was either chuckling or maybe just kind of mocking when he was talking to me….  [H]e asked me why Jesus didn’t help you from the Iranian regime or Iranian authorities.”

 

Similarly, when Sister Ban Madleen, a Christian nun who was chased out of Iraq by the Islamic State, wanted to visit her sick sister in the U.K., she was denied a visa—twice.  A number of other Christian orderlies were also denied visas, including another nun with a PhD in Biblical Theology from Oxford; another nun denied for not having a personal bank account; and a Catholic priest denied for not being married.

 

In another case, Britain’s Home Office not only denied entry to three Christian leaders—archbishops celebrated for their heroic efforts to aid persecuted Christians in Syria and Iraq who had been invited to attend the consecration of the U.K.’s first Syriac Cathedral, an event attended by Prince Charles—but also mockingly told them there was “no room at the inn.”

 

Considering that persecuted Christian minorities—including priests and nuns—are denied visas, one may conclude that the Home Office is extremely stringent concerning its asylum requirements.  However, this notion is quickly dispelled on the realization that the Home Office regularly grants visas and refugee status to extremist Muslims (not to mention one has yet to hear about Muslim asylum seekers being denied because the Koran is too violent, or because they do not have enough faith in Muhammad).

 

For example,  despite having no papers on him—and despite telling the Home Office that “he had been trained as an ISIS soldier”—Ahmed Hassan was still granted asylum two years before he launched a terrorist attack on a London train station that left 30 injured in September 2017.  The Home Office also allowed a foreign Muslim cleric to enter and lecture in London, even though he advocates decapitating, burning, and/or throwing homosexuals from cliffs.  According to another report, “British teenagers are being forced to marry abroad and are raped and impregnated while the Home Office ‘turns a blind eye’ by handing visas to their [mostly Muslim] husbands.”

 

The case of Asia Bibi—a Christian wife and mother of five who spent the last decade of her life on death row in Pakistan for challenging the authority of Muhammad—best sheds light on the immigration situation in the UK.  After she was finally acquitted in November, 2018, Muslims rioted throughout Pakistan; in one march, more than 11,000 Muslims demanded her instant and public hanging.

 

As Pakistanis make for the majority of the U.K.’s significant Muslim population—Sajid Javid, then head of the Home Office, is himself Pakistani—when they got wind that the U.K. might offer Asia Bibi asylum, they too rioted.   As a result, then Prime Minister Theresa May personally blocked Bibi’s asylum application, “despite UK playing host to [Muslim] hijackers, extremists and rapists,” to quote from one headline.  In other words, Britain was openly allowing “asylum policy to be dictated to by a Pakistan mob,” reported the Guardian, “after it was confirmed it urged the Home Office not to grant Asia Bibi political asylum in the UK…”

 

On the other hand, the Home Office allowed a Pakistani cleric who celebrated the slaughter of a politician because he had defended Asia Bibi—a cleric deemed so extreme as to be banned from his native Pakistan—to enter and lecture in U.K. mosques.

 

Discussing how “visas were granted [by the Home Office] in July [2016] to two Pakistani Islamic leaders who have called for the killing of Christians accused of blasphemy,” Dr. Martin Parsons, a human rights activist, expressed his frustration: “It’s unbelievable that these persecuted Christians who come from the cradle of Christianity are being told there is no room at the inn, when the UK is offering a welcome to Islamists who persecute Christians.”

 

In short, Muslim influence against Christians is not only at work in U.N. refugee camps, as recent evidence indicates, but in the U.K’s immigration policy as well: Christian “infidels” need not apply, whereas radical Muslims are welcomed with open arms.

++++++++++++++++++++

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

__________________________________

© 2019 · RaymondIbrahim.com

 

About Raymond Ibrahim

 

RAYMOND IBRAHIM is a widely published author, public speaker, and Middle East and Islam specialist.  His books include Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West (Da Capo, 2018), Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (Regnery, 2013), and The Al Qaeda Reader (Doubleday, 2007).

 

 

Ibrahim’s dual-background—born and raised in the U.S. by Egyptian parents born and raised in the Middle East—has provided him with unique advantages, from equal fluency in English and Arabic, to an equal understanding of the Western and Middle Eastern mindsets, positioning him to explain the latter to the former. His interest in Islamic civilization was first piqued when he began visiting the Middle East as a child in the 1970s. Interacting and conversing with the locals throughout the decades has provided him with an intimate appreciation for that part of the world, complementing his academic training.

 

After a brief athletic career—including winning the 1993 NPC Los Angeles Bodybuilding Championship as a teenager—Raymond went on to receive his B.A. and M.A. (both in History, focusing on the ancient and medieval Near East, with dual-minors in Philosophy and Literature) from California State University, Fresno. There he studied closely with noted military-historian Victor Davis Hanson. He also took graduate courses at Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies—including classes on the history, politics, and economics of the Arab world—and studied Medieval Islam and Semitic languages at Catholic University of America. His M.A. thesis examined an early military encounter between Islam and Byzantium based on arcane Arabic and Greek texts.

 

READ ENTIRETY

 

Will You Obey God or Will You Obey the Government? Frightening Challenges to Americans’ Conscience


I read this CBN article rapidly and did not notice President Trump’s name in it. BUT the theme of this article is the very reason the Dems, the RINOs and various forms of Leftists want Trump gone by any means necessary. The theme is Biblical-minded Christians are being placed in a position to choose between their Biblical Christian conscience and the ever increasing government mandate to de-Christianize American culture. President Trump is an obstacle to this Leftist de-Christianizing transformation.

 

For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be [a]carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the [b]carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. –Romans 8: 5-8 NKJV

 

JRH 12/13/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy coffee.

 

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

********************************

Will You Obey God or Will You Obey the Government? Frightening Challenges to Americans’ Conscience

 

By Paul Strand

December 11, 2019

CBN News

 

SCOTUS building

 

WASHINGTON – Religious liberty today faces more challenges than ever.  If you pay attention to the headlines, you know these are dangerous days. The battleground is often in the courtroom, where a frequent defender of religious liberty there sees new reasons for hope.

 

Becket Fund for Religious Liberty Senior Counsel Luke Goodrich points out every human has a conscience, and the government shouldn’t be messing with it.

 

“It’s that inner voice that urges us to choose the good and reject evil,” Goodrich told CBN News.

 

Big-Time Battler for Conscience Rights

 

He has fought for the right of conscience several times before the US Supreme Court, and writes about huge challenges to it in his new book titled Free to Believe: The Battle Over Religious Liberty in America.

 

“When the government comes in and forces us to violate our conscience, it’s forcing us to go against our human nature and violating a fundamental human right,” Goodrich said.

 

But as America moves toward a post-Christian era, issues long felt by believers and their conscience as wrong are now exalted.  Therefore any opposition to them is condemned as rank discrimination.

 

‘Will You Obey God or Will You Obey the Government?’

 

Goodrich explained, “We have experienced a major cultural shift in the last 10 to 20 years where traditional Christian beliefs about truth, about human life, about human sexuality…they used to be fairly broadly accepted or at least uncontroversial, but now those long-standing Christian beliefs are actually viewed as a threat.”

 

He added, “We’re seeing all kinds of new religious liberty conflicts and Christians really being put to the choice: will you obey God or will you obey the government?”

 

The biggest current battleground: homosexual and transgender rights.

 

“If you’re a Bible-believing Christian and you hold a traditional view on sex and marriage, then the rapid advance of gay rights is certainly the most significant religious liberty threat today.  And we’re seeing conflicts in multiple areas all across the country,” Goodrich noted.

 

The government long ago said you can’t discriminate based on someone’s race or sex. If the Supreme Court this term rules “sex” includes sexual orientation or transgender status, it could mean real trouble for those with biblical views on human sexuality.

 

Jack Phillips x Thousands

 

You could likely multiply by the thousands new legal problems of the kind suffered by Christian baker Jack Phillips, who refused to make a cake celebrating gay marriage and ended up in a legal battle over his conscience rights for years.

 

“Thousands of religious organizations will face new lawsuits and new liability simply for acting on their long-standing beliefs about human sexuality,” Goodrich predicted.

 

At one point, supporters promised same-sex marriage wouldn’t harm anyone. Well, depending on how the high court rules, Goodrich pointed out those same people could go all out, claws bared, to get their opponents.

 

“There’s a strong effort right now, particularly among progressives, to brand traditional Christian beliefs about marriage as a form of bigotry, and then use the power of the state to punish those religious beliefs and practices,” he said.

 

Bigotry or Believing in What’s Actually Best?

 

On the other hand, Frank Wright of D. James Kennedy Ministries maintains believers back only one-man, one-woman marriage because it’s healthy for families.

 

“The Bible says it because it’s for our welfare. It’s what enables families to flourish,” Wright told CBN News. “The secular research going back decades is irrefutable. Children do better when they have a mom and a dad.  And they are safer, they are more economically secure, they have less bad outcomes in life in terms of drugs and crime and all these things. It’s God’s design because it’s what’s best for us.”

 

He’s sad that homosexuals and their allies view the conservative support of one-man, one-woman marriage as bigotry and hatred.

 

Wright explained, “If they were to come to me and say ‘Why do you hate me?’ I would explain to them that I don’t. ‘You and I see this issue totally differently.  I don’t hate you.  Why should I hate you?   And why should you hate me because we disagree?'”

 

How Culture Views ‘Good’ Religion vs. ‘Bad’ Religion

 

Goodrich believes some of this comes from how modern society views religion.

 

“I think our culture is not really hostile to religion per se, but rather draws a distinction between good religion and bad religion,” he explained.

 

Goodrich added the culture sees so-called “good religion” as, “Fairly relativistic. You keep it private. You don’t make absolute truth claims and you don’t make any intense moral claims.”

 

On the other hand, this same culture sees bad religion as one that makes moral judgments among other things.

 

“Makes absolute truth claims. It doesn’t stay confined to the four walls of the home or the church, and it gets out there,” he said. “It evangelizes. It claims truth and it actually makes moral judgments.  And that kind of religion really today is deemed to be bad, and folks are much more willing to use government power to punish those sorts of belief.”

 

Forced to do the Transgenders’ Bidding

 

As for the transgender issue, the Obama administration mandated that doctors and hospitals provide surgery for men who wanted to be turned into women and women into men.

 

Goodrich explained the government was ordering doctors to perform those surgeries, “Even when it violated their religious beliefs and their medical judgment.  And if they didn’t do that, they would be deemed to be discriminating and would be subject to government penalties.”

 

Abortion is another battleground where supporters try to demonize those who can’t and won’t back it.

 

Those Against Abortion Labeled as Discriminators

 

“If you as a Christian, whether you’re a doctor or an employer, if you oppose abortion, you’re somehow denying health care to women and discriminating against women,” Goodrich explained.

 

This Becket lawyer fought for both the Little Sisters of the Poor and Hobby Lobby’s pro-life stand before the Supreme Court.

 

“The government was trying to force them to provide abortion-causing drugs in their health insurance plans or in their businesses, even when their conscience told them ‘you cannot participate in an abortion,'” Goodrich said of his clients.

 

Many Dark Clouds, But a Silver Lining

 

The high court ruled in favor of both, and Goodrich says believers can take hope in how often their conscience rights win in court.

 

“There are some real difficulties ahead, and we should take stock of where we’re at and be realistic. But at the same time, there’s a lot of reason for hope.  We have a 90 percent win rate and we’re undefeated at the US Supreme Court,” Goodrich said.

 

He warned, however, Christians need to prepare for defeats and learn how to show Christ’s love even to a culture that’s turning more and more against them.

 

How the Bible Can Guide Us in Such a Time

 

“Much of scripture is written to Christians who are facing suffering and persecution for their faith.  And as Christians, we need to recall those teachings and let those influence us,” Goodrich argued. “And it’s not just about winning or fighting a culture war.  It’s actually more about being like Christ in the midst of these conflicts.”

 

What this attorney hopes for is a government that just leaves religion alone as much as possible.

 

For instance, in public schools, it shouldn’t force students to pray, but can allow a time where they can pray if they want. It shouldn’t build a cross on government property, but it can let those there stand. It shouldn’t oppose religion OR promote it. It should just let it be.

+++++++++++++++++

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

____________________

© 2019 The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., A nonprofit 501 (c)(3) Charitable Organization.

 

SUPPORT CBN News