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

 

Islamic Theo-Political Lying


Lie Like Mo toon

John R. Houk

© May 1, 2016

 

Nick Snyder, Sr. had an interesting comment to Jim Kouri’s post “GOWDY TO OBAMA: START PROTECTING AMERICANS FROM CRIMINAL ALIENS” found at LinkedIn’s Group – Return of the Republic. Nick is actually responding to an observation commented by Bev Farrar:

 

Didn’t Obama use the Bible when Roberts gave the oath of office incorrectly and then go into a private room to take the oath again. I’ve often wondered if his hand was on the Bible this time or some other book.

 

Nick’s thoughts on Obama’s oath of Office:

 

Nick (“Old Nikko”) Snyder, Sr. The answer Bev is…
The islamic practice of “Muruna” — using “flexibility” to blend in with the enemy or the surroundings.

Muslims practice muruna in the same way a chameleon changes colors to avoid detection. Muslims show no discernible signs when they are being deceitful because there is no feeling of guilt. In their minds they are doing exactly what Allah wants them to do to advance Islam.

Obama was simply being a “good muslim” when taking his oath, no matter which book he wore his oath upon.

This is not to be confused with Takiyya or Tawriya… which are respectively: dissimulation and concealing.

There is also Kitman, which is characterized by someone telling only part of the truth.

All in all, Obama [piss be upon him] has used all of these – and to good effect on most American Sheeple. They have accepted, and believe his lies in any and all forms.

The rest of us see him for what and who he is… and what danger he represents to this nation.

 

I’ve known about Taqiyya and Kitman for some time now. The Islamic transliterations of Tawriya and Muruna are new to me. So I thought I’d do a little Googling on the four Muslim terms which all have to do with fashion or another of lying or deception in Islam. Thus this post will not really be at all original but an old fashion copy and paste exercise to make Americans and Westerners aware of the practices institutionalized in Islamic theo-political ideology to spread their cult across the globe to the detriment of free people everywhere.

 

I am taking four websites from different post years not necessarily in order. I’m going to begin with the terms I am most unfamiliar with – Muruna and Tawriya. Then follow that with the two terms I am familiar with – Kitman and Taqiyya. (Take note there are various transliterations from Arabic to English and that is the reason one may see different spellings for the same word.)

 

Muruna

 

Islam Watch – 7/31/12 04:02

Muruna means using “flexibility” to blend in with the enemy or the surroundings. The justification for this kind of deception is a somewhat bizarre interpretation of Surah 2:106, which says, “If we abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We will replace it by a better one or similar.” Thus, Muslims may forget some of the commands in the Quran, as long as they are pursuing a better command. Muslims striving to advance Islam, therefore, can deviate from their Islamic laws in order to cause non-Muslims to lower their guard and place their trust in their Muslim counterpart.

At times, Muslims practice muruna in the same way a chameleon changes colors to avoid detection. Muslims will sometimes shave off their beards, wear western clothing, or even drink alcohol to blend in with non-Muslims. Nothing is more valuable these days to the Islamists than a blue-eyed Caucasian Muslim willing to engage in terrorism.

Another common way of using muruna is for a Muslim to marry a non-Muslim or to behave like a non-Muslim so their true agenda will not be suspected. The 9/11 hijackers visited strip clubs and bars during …

FaithFreedom.org – 3/20/13

“Flexibility”.

Means blending in with the enemy or the surroundings. The justification for this kind of deception is a somewhat bizarre interpretation of Surah 2:106, which says, “If we abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We will replace it by a better one or similar.” Thus, Muslims may forget some of the commands in the Quran, as long as they are pursuing a better command. Muslims striving to advance Islam, therefore, can deviate from their Islamic laws in order to cause non-Muslims to lower their guard. At times, Muslims practice muruna in the same way a chameleon changes colours – to avoid detection. Muslims will sometimes shave off their beards, wear western clothing, or even drink alcohol to blend in with non-Muslims. …

Conservative Tribune – 10/10/14 7:06pm

Muruna is perhaps the biggest deception practiced by Muslims, as it allows them to be “flexible” regarding the commands of their faith in order to properly blend in with the society around them.  Muruna permits Muslims to shave their beards, wear Western clothing, listen to Western music, and even drink alcohol.

All of these deceptions go against specific commandments, as well as the overarching commandment against lying itself, that are found in the Koran.  But they are allowed so long as their use contributes to a greater goal or serves a greater commandment within the Koran, like spreading Islam among the infidels.

Americans who hold in high regard the founding principles and ideals of our country need to learn these terms, and …

ClashDaily.com – 4/1/15

Muruna is using “flexibility” to blend in with the enemy or the surroundings. Based upon: Surah 2:106, which says, “If we abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We will replace it by a better one or similar.” Therefore, Muslims have permission to “forget” some of the commands in the Quran, as long as they are pursuing a better command. Muslims striving to advance Islam, therefore, can diverge from their Islamic laws in order to cause non-Muslims to drop their guard and place their trust in their Muslim counterpart (this has been extremely successful in the West).

Illustration: Muslims practice Muruna in the same way a chameleon changes colors to avoid detection. They will sometimes shave off their beards, wear western clothing, or drink alcohol to blend in with non-Muslims. And Western converts are a great tool…there’s nothing more useful to Islamists than a blue-eyed, blonde-haired Caucasian Muslim willing to engage in terrorism.

Should we really be surprised about Islam’s deceit when the Quran boasts about Allah being the “master of machinations” (Sura 13:42), and “proficient at his scheming” (Sura 8:30)?

This can prove to be one of the most valuable lessons we learn …

 

Tawriya

 

Islam Watch

Tawriya is defined as concealing, and it could be called “creative lying”. It is OK to break the intent of the oath, as long as you don’t break the letter of the oath. (Reliance of the Traveler, sections o19.1 and o19.5) …

FaithFreedom.org

Deliberate ambiguity.

What this means is that it is OK to break the intent of the oath, as long as you don’t break the letter of the oath. (see Reliance of the Traveler, sections o19.1 and o19.5) …

Thus, as we can see, Muslims are empowered to lie, tell half-truths and dissemble about Islam and its doctrines (provided their “heart is comfortable with faith”) if doing so will give Islam an advantage – such as “defending” Islam/Mohammed, denying its/his more unpleasant attributes, or – as in the case above – giving a positive “spin” to Islam to make it more palatable to a non-Muslim audience.

This is why, to make any study of Islam, or to stand a chance of holding a valid opinion, it is vital to go back to the original documents.

But here, too, lies a problem. According to Islam, only the Arabic Koran is really the Quran itself – that is …

Conservative Tribune

Tawriya allows Muslims to “creatively lie” by being purposely ambiguous about the real meaning of what they are saying.

ClashDaily.com

Tawriya is defined as camouflage, and it’s also referred to as “creative lying”. Based upon (Reliance of the Traveller, sections o19.1 and o19.5) “It is acceptable to break the intent of the oath, as long as you don’t break the letter of the oath.”

Illustration: Suppose someone protests that Surah 1 of the Quran demeans Christians and Jews, because it is a request Muslims make to Allah 17 times a day to keep them from the path of “those with whom God is angry” and “those who have lost their way”. A Muslim might respond, “Surah 1 never mentions Jews or Christians.” He is practicing Tawriya, because while Surah 1 does not mention Jews and Christians by name, he clearly knows that the words “those” refer to Jews and Christians.

 

Kitman

 

Islam Watch

Kitman is characterized by someone telling only part of the truth. The most common example of this is when a Muslim says that jihad really refers to an internal, spiritual struggle. He is not telling “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”, as witnesses are sworn to do in U.S. courts. Often, kitman results in a gross distortion of the truth. In the example given, the Quran uses jihad and its derivatives 59 times. Of those, only 16 (27%) could be considered “internal” with no object as the target of the struggle based on the context of the surah.

Another common form of kitman is to quote only the few peaceful passages from the Quran, knowing full-well that that passage was later abrogated by a more militant, contradictory verse. Here is an example:

“There is no compulsion in religion” (Surah 2:256) Early Medina

FaithFreedom.org

This is Taqiyya’s “little brother”. Kitman is just providing incomplete information.

A widely used example of kitman is when Muslims say:

whoever slays a soul, it is as though he slew all men” to show how highly Islam values human life (!).

However, put these verse fragments together with the start of the verse and the part omitted from the middle and the meaning changes:

For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soulunless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the landit is as though he slew all men”. (K5:32)

Now we can clearly see that this statement refers to the Jews alone (the people most reviled by Islam) and so does not apply to Muslims at all. Further …

Conservative Tribune

Kitman is a term that means Muslims are permitted to tell half-truths, or partial truths, while concealing the greater whole truth.  Discussion of “jihad” as being only an “inner” or “spiritual” struggle is an example of Kitman, as technically it is true that jihad refers to a spiritual struggle, but conceals the very real physical struggle that is also encompassed by jihad.

ClashDaily.com

Kitman is characterized by someone telling only part of the truth.

Illustration: When a Muslim says that jihad really refers to an internal, spiritual struggle, he is telling half the truth. Often, Kitman results in a glaring distortion of the truth. In the example given, the Quran uses jihad and its derivatives 59 times. Of those, only 16 could be considered “internal” with no object as the target of the struggle based on the framework of the Surah.

Another common form of Kitman is to quote only the few peaceful passages from the Quran, knowing full-well that that passage was later abrogated by a more militant, conflicting verse.

NOTE: It must be understood that there are two categories of Quranic verses: Pre-Medina (Meccan) and Post-Medina (Medinan). The Meccan or peaceful verses were written when Muhammed was trying to persuade followers in Mecca, from the Pagans, Jews and Christians. The Medinan verses were written after Muhammed was rejected as prophet by Jews and Christians. These are the violent verses which replaced the peaceful ones.

Here are examples that …

 

Taqiyya

 

Islam Watch

Takiyya is defined as dissimulation about ones Muslim identity. It comes from the verse in the Quran that says, “Let believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful – he that does has nothing to hope for from Allah – except in self-defense (illaa an-tattaqu minhum tuqah) (Surah 3:28). This “self-defense” justifies dissimulation. Islamic Sharia Law provides, “When it is possible to achieve an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible, and lying isobligatory if the goal is obligatory.” (Reliance of the Traveler, Para r8.2) Examples include lying to protect Islam or a Muslim.

FaithFreedom.org

Strictly, Taqiyya is a Shi’a doctrine, but Sunni Islam has its equivalent “Muda’rat”. For some reason, in the West (at least amongst non-Muslims), the doctrine is more widely known as Taqiyya.

“This is the Islamic practice of “precautionary dissimulation” [i.e. lying] whereby believers may conceal their Muslim faith when under threat, persecution or compulsion.” (Oxford Dictionary of Islam).

“The word “al-Taqiyya” literally means: “Concealing or disguising one’s beliefs, convictions [not just religious], ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies at a time of eminent danger, whether now or later in time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury.”” (Abdul Hamid Siddiqui)

Comment: Thus, if you think you may be in danger physically or mentally at some point in the future from telling the truth, you are allowed to lie.

“al-Taqiyya is the uttering of the tongue, while the heart is comfortable with faith.” (Ibn AbbasComment: What this means is that you can say something “un-Islamic”, or lie, provided you retain Islamic belief.

Hadith: Muslim #6303: Reported Umm Kulthum she heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A liar is not one who tries …

Conservative Tribune

Taqiyya allows Muslims to lie and/or conceal their true faith, feelings, thoughts, plans, and character, for the purpose of protecting themselves.  It is fully based on the Koran and is agreed to and practiced by all major sects of Islam.

“When it is possible to achieve an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible, and lying is obligatory if the goal is obligatory.” (Reliance of the Traveler, Para r8.2)

ClashDaily.com

Taqiyya is defined as concealment about ones Muslim identity. Based upon (Surah 3:28) “Let believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful– he that does has nothing to hope for from Allah– except in self-defense (illaa an-tattaqu minhum tuqah).” “Self-defense” is justification for concealment.  Also based upon Islamic Sharia Law (Reliance of the Traveler, Para r8.2), “When it is possible to achieve an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible, and lying is obligatory if the goal is obligatory.”

Illustration: This would include lying to protect Islam or Muslims.

 

JRH 5/1/16

Please Support NCCR

 

No Muslim Moral Obligation to Keep Agreements to Kafir & Spouse


Counterjihad anonymous writer and expert on interpreting Islamic writing – Dajjal – commented on the NCCR post “I’m with Dr. Carson on Constitution and Islam”. Dajjal points out in the comment that a Muslim has no moral obligation to keep any agreement with a non-Muslim or a woman.

JRH 9/29/15

Please Support NCCR

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

No Muslim Moral Obligation to Keep Agreements to Kafir & Spouse

[Editor’s Title]

By Dajjal

Edited by John R. Houk

September 23, 2015 at 2:48 AM

Dr. Carson did not propose legislation to bar Muslims from the Presidency. He explained why he would not vote for one. His explanation fell short. In a later interview, which I heard Tuesday on Hannity’s radio show, Carson admitted that he only read part of the Koran.

When a Muslim makes a promise to his wife, Allah has already permitted the dissolution of his oath.

http://qurancomplex.gov.sa/Quran/Targama/Targama.asp?nSora=66&l=eng&nAya=%202# 66_2

 

http://qurancomplex.gov.sa/Quran/Targama/Targama.asp?nSora=2&l=eng&nAya=225#2_225

 

“Whoever makes an oath and then sees that something else would be better than it, should do kaffara for his oath and do what is better.”

http://www.quranexplorer.com/Hadith/English/Hadith/malik/000.000.022.6.11.html [Blog Editor: As of 9/29/15 1:15 PM CT this message appears – 404 – File or directory not found.]

 

http://www.quranexplorer.com/Hadith/English/Hadith/bukhari/008.076.618.html [Blog Editor: As of 9/29/15 1:15 PM CT this message appears – 404 – File or directory not found.]

9:3. And a declaration from Allâh and His Messenger to mankind on the greatest day (the 10th of Dhul-Hijjah – the 12th month of Islâmic calendar) that Allâh is free from (all) obligations to the Mushrikûn (see V.2:105) and so is His Messenger. So if you (Mushrikûn) repent, it is better for you, but if you turn away, then know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allâh. And give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful torment to those who disbelieve.

http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/9/3/default.htm

A Muslim is allowed to break a promise to his wife and Moe & Allah are free of obligations made to the pagans of Mekkah. Got a clue yet? A Muslim’s oath is worth as much as used toilet paper. When he promised to defend and protect the Constitution, Obamination was spewing shit: he had mental reservation and purpose of deception. Why then should we trust any other Muslim?

The root word of religion means “to bind”. What does Islam bind Muslims to do?
War against us!

http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/8/39/default.htm
http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/9/29/default.htm
http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/9/123/default.htm

 

Got a clue yet? Moe is the role model for ‘slimes to emulate.

http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/33/21/default.htm

What did Moe do for them to mimic? He waged war, took, raped and enslaved captives and committed genocide.

http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/33/21/default.htm

 

http://www.quranexplorer.com/Hadith/English/Hadith/bukhari/004.052.143.html

 

http://www.quranexplorer.com/Hadith/English/Hadith/bukhari/004.052.280.html

 

Got a clue yet?

Challenge to LibTards:

Should any of the following be elected President? If not, why not??

Klansman of the KKK

Nazi

Made Mafiosa

Challenge to Nihad Awad, obnoxious A*s**ole:

Shari’ah requires that the Caliph be a Muslim, Infidels are disqualified. Subordinate rulers must be Muslims, Infidels are disqualified. Judges must be Muslim, infidels are disqualified. An infidel has no right to authority, even over other infidels. Have you ever considered reciprocity?

http://www.shariahthethreat.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/reliance_of_the_traveller.pdf#page=658

 

http://www.http://islamicbulletin.org/free_downloads/resources/reliance2_complete22.pdf#page=569 [Blog Editor: As of 1:48 pm on 9/29/15 my browser could not locate link. Here is an IslamicBulletin.org link to the entire Reliance of the Traveller]

 

http://www.shariahthethreat.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/reliance_of_the_traveller.pdf#page=648

Now therefore I direct you to dissolve CAIR and go directly to Hell. Tax exempt organizations are not permitted to interfere in elections, you violated our law.

______________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

 

© Dajjal

Unfooled Grassroots Movements will Save America


WeThePeople-Constitution-Flag

 

John R. Houk

© February 2, 2015

 

A movement that began in Germany is beginning to spread across Europe. That movement reflects a grassroots mentality of becoming fed-up with Muslims practicing Sharia and of a significant amount of Muslims following the literal exhortations of Islamic holy writings in the Quran, Hadith and Sira. The movement acquired the acronym PEGIDA in its German nation of origin. The English translation for this acronym is “Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West”.

 

This PEGIDA movement in Europe is widely condemned as Right Wing racism against Muslims by Europe’s ruling elites. The ruling elite is devoted to multiculturalism hence they stick to the opinion that Muslim violence exacted in the name of Allah and Mohammed is not Islam. The reality is though, if you ignore all the Islamic denials, and actually read the Quran, Hadith, Sira and other respected Islamic treatises such as the Reliance of the Traveller (yup the two “Ls” are correct in this case) you discover Islam – unlike most religions – actually calls for violence as an act of submission to Islam and Allah.

 

In recent days the grassroots PEGIDA movement has ran into some difficulties that even true Conservatives have to wag their heads. That difficulty relates to its German founder Lutz Bachmann dressing up as Adolf Hitler and then taking a selfie. Hitler and Nazi junk is illegal in Germany not to mention Jews do not find any humor – if that was Bachmann’s intent – in Hitler portrayals. Indeed European nations have hate-crime laws that our American Constitution would render as a ridiculous infringement of Free Speech. I understand that Bachmann is currently being investigated for breaking a hate-crime law in Germany. The consequence – Bachmann resigned as the leader of PEGIDA which has followed by a host of German PEGIDA leaders also resigning.

 

I am guessing that there are some extremist elements that have violent racist views that have migrated into the PEGIDA movement. I understand that pseudo-Nazi creeps in Germany and European Nazi-sympathizers are making a stealth comeback. My opinion is that the obvious rise of virulent antisemitism is evidence of a resurgence of Nazi/Fascist sentiments but one could also add Muslims subscribing to the commands of Islamic holy writings has made additional antisemitism more noticeable.

 

Europe’s Left-leaning multicultural political elites is quick and correct to condemn the rise of Nazi/Fascist racism yet those same elite are idiotic to look at Muslim violence against Free Speech, against exposing the real Islam and against Jews as if that Muslim violence has nothing to do with Islam. That is simply cultural suicide.

 

Yedioth (or Yediot) Ahronoth (or Ahronot) may be one of the most read of Israel’s news media if not the most read. As an American I prefer to call that media outlet by its internet url “Ynet”. That’s on the old American pronunciation. From what I have read Ynet is centrist on Israel’s political scale with some agendas on the Right and some on the Left. Where I discerned this assessment at 972Mag.com that points out Ynet is tends to lean to the Right on security and military issues but is apparently anti-Netanyahu.

 

I give you this assessment because I ran into an insightful Ynet interview with a PEGIDA spokesman relating to the movement and PEGIDA’s critics. I need you to see this interview then afterwards I will some thoughts on PEGIDA and the need for such a grassroots movement to explode in America before a Muslim violence issue becomes as warped in America as it is in Europe.

 

In exclusive Ynetnews interview, spokesperson of anti-Islamization grassroots initiative addresses Jewish world’s concerns about the movement, says ‘we want Jews and Israelis to feel safe in Europe.’

 

BERLIN – Christian Mayerhoff, a spokesperson for PEGIDA, the grassroots initiative which started in Dresden, Germany in autumn of 2014 and now coordinates anti-Islamist protests in 10 European countries, sat down for an exclusive interview with Ynetnews in Berlin this week in a bid to address the Jewish world’s concerns about his movement.

 

Mr. Mayerhoff, Chancellor Angela Merkel warned Germans in her New Year’s televised address that people at PEGIDA protests are filled with “hatred” in their hearts. What is your reaction to this statement?

 

“We think Frau Merkel wants the world to believe she hold the high moral ground. But this is not true. Her government sells weapons to dictators in the Middle East, such as tanks to Saudi Arabia. Her government closes an eye to the infiltration of German mosques and German cities with Islamist preachers and Islamist propaganda material. What is happening today is totally unacceptable.”

 

PEGIDA claims that Germany and Europe are threatened by Islamization. What do you mean by this?

 

“We mean that there are in many European countries rapidly growing Muslim parallel societies. This is in itself not bad. What is negative and dangerous is that these communities contribute disproportionately to social problems such as vandalism, unemployment, crime and terrorism.

 

“Before we allow these communities to grow further, we should make their members are integrated into mainstream society just like immigrant communities of Eastern Europeans, East Asians and South Americans.”

 

Fears of Islamist activities in Europe were heightened by the latest terror attacks in Paris. Has the response of the German authorities satisfied you?

 

“No it hasn’t. De Maizière, our interior minister, came out saying that these attacks have nothing to do with Islam. This makes him lose all credibility. It’s like saying that Nazism had nothing to do with Germany.”

 

But PEGIDA has been labeled a pro-Nazi, xenophobic and racist movement by mainstream German media. Even Josef Schuster, president of the Central Committee of Jews in Germany, stated that you are pyromaniacs.

 

“We are no Nazis. Personally I was active in left-wing human rights movements in my youth during the early 1990s. After 9/11 I started learning about Islam and Islamism and this changed my opinion about multiculturalism and political correctness. In PEGIDA there are leftists, centrists and conservatives. In the city of Kassel our committee includes a Croatian, a Jew and a secularized Muslim…

 

“But personally, I sympathize with Mr. Schuster. In Germany and Europe, Jews are nowadays harassed and attacked for no reason. If the leaders of Jewish communities said something fair about PEGIDA, it would be used as a pretext by Islamists to escalate their anti-Semitic campaigns.”

 

What anti-Semitic campaigns are you talking about?

 

“Sociologists and pollsters who monitor Muslim communities in Europe regularly reveal that anti-Semitism is rampant, especially among young religious Muslims. In mosque sermons preaching against Jews is a Friday pastime.

 

“For example, last summer in Berlin, Sheikh Abu Bilal Ismail openly called for Jews to be exterminated. He was not incarcerated. This indulgence is suicidal.”

 

Yet Germany’s intellectuals also attack PEGIDA and repeatedly sign public statements to repudiate your agenda. Doesn’t this generalized hostility concern you?

 

“Writers and artists love to sign appeals. They should sign more appeals against ISIS and Boko Haram instead of being obsessed about PEGIDA. They attack us and do not bother to read our demands. Readers should visit us on Facebook and decide for themselves if we are more dangerous than the Islamists in Europe.”

 

But what are your demands concretely?

 

“We support a better treatment of real asylum seekers and the repatriation of fake asylum seekers. We call for a more selective immigration policy in Germany and the European Union along the lines of what works well in Canada, Switzerland and Australia. We demand zero tolerance against religious extremism and against all calls to murder in the name of God.”

 

But don’t you think you are targeting Islam and ignoring the dangers of Christian and Jewish fundamentalism?

 

“All religions should respect the law in Europe. We do not see Europe priests or rabbis calling for believers of other faiths to be murdered.”

 

But all Muslim religious leaders and community leaders in Europe condemned the terror attacks in Paris.

 

“That is not enough. Muslim leaders must stop tolerating imams in their midst who preach violent jihad. We don’t care if it’s jihad in Europe, jihad in Syria or jihad in Palestine. To condemn killing in the name of God must be a basic value.”

 

But who is PEGIDA to demand that Muslims teach a 1,400-year old religion in a way that suits your political agenda?

 

“I am not a Muslim and PEGIDA cannot tell Muslim how to read the Quran. As Europeans we do have the right to demand that all religions in our continent respect the law. To teach that it is good to kill in the name of God is unacceptable and must be seriously punished.”

 

Does PEGIDA have a message for Muslims?

 

“Europe is a generous host. Muslims who respect our laws and ethical values are welcome. Muslims who hate Western values and support violent jihad should not come here. Muslims who are against Islamism are of course welcome at PEGIDA.”

 

Do you have a message for Jews?

 

“We want Jews and Israelis to feel safe in Europe. We want you to be able to show your faith on Europe’s streets openly. We must stand united against Islamism and jihadism.”

 

How does it feel to speak on behalf of the most despised political movement in Germany?

 

“It is very frustrating. The demonization of PEGIDA is evidence that the elites in Germany are completely out of touch with reality.” (PEGIDA spokesman: We are no Nazis; Moritz Josef Schulman; Ynetnews.com; 1/24/15 09:37)

 

So it seems you have a choice. Do you believe European (or more specifically in this case – German) ruling political elites or do you believe the grassroots motivation for protesting against counter-culture Islamization in Europe? You can probably guess I’ll lean with PEGIDA motivation.

 

PEGIDA denies:

 

o   Nazism

 

o   Antisemitism

 

o   AND even any hatred of Muslims

 

There is a qualifier though with Muslims. That qualifier is simple. If Muslims refuse to assimilate into the acceptance of a host nation’s rule of law than those Muslims should not be allowed to immigrate to a Western nation or if that Muslim already lives in a Western nation and agitates for counter-culture Islamic Sharia Law to trump the rule of law they should be deported as a non-citizen or if such a literalist Quranic Muslim is a citizen by naturalizing or birth they should be invited to leave to a culture more acceptable to their Islamic beliefs.

                                     

America’s Tea Party Movement has ran into the same Left Wing vilification in attempts to brainwash Americans that the Tea Party are a bunch of Right Wing and racist-hatred-filled thugs that undermine America’s tolerance and Constitution.

 

Of course that is a load of Leftist propaganda. Is it possible that extremist Right Wing racist have hooked up with the Tea Party? Of course it is. Is this representative of the mainstay of the grassroots activists of the Tea Party Movement? That’s a big negative good buddy.

 

Of course the Left Leaning American Mainstream Media has been reluctant to tell Americans that extremist Leftist elements have either infiltrated or have attended Tea Party rallies to agitate or engage in false reporting to tell Americans the propaganda lies.

 

Then there is the Mainstream romanticized Leftist Occupy Wall Street Movement. In the Occupy Wall Street most active days there are a host of headlines of Occupiers being arrested for violence, murder, rape and terrorism. The numbers are in the high hundreds to the low thousands. You can check out the numerous Occupy headlines and included summaries at NRO.

 

Then there are the Ferguson riots in which Democrats and Black Activist race-baiters were practically calling for the lynching of Officer Darren Wilson – a Caucasian – for shooting to death 18 year old Michael Brown – a Black Man. Again the Left lean Mainstream Media without knowing the facts painted Officer Wilson as a Black-hating racist that used unnecessary force to shoot a poor unarmed Black teenager.

 

After a Grand Jury and even Holder’s DOJ investigation cleared Wilson the agitators STILL wanted Officer Wilson’s head metaphorically.

 

Between the incidents in which a gigantic male of the age of majority roughed up a store clerk for some cigs then proceeding to walk belligerently down the middle of the street which caught Officer Wilson’s attention an arrest was attempted. Brown resisted arrest violently smacking Officer Wilson in the face and attempting to unholster Wilson’s weapon. In the scuffle Wilson managed to prevent Brown from obtaining his weapon. Brown then began to flee. Wilson told Brown to stop. Rather than surrender, Brown charged Wilson like a rabid Rhino which resulted in Wilson discharging several shots at Brown. It is my perception that Wilson took a head shot when the previous body shots failed to stop the charge. It is an absolute myth that Brown got on his knees with his back to Wilson with his hands raised in surrender. THAT NEVER HAPPENED!

 

Not willing to wait for the truth, race baiters agitated. And the good citizens of Ferguson went on looting rampages engaging in property damage and theft from Ferguson stores.

 

Dear God in Heaven contrast these typical Leftist inspired protests with the goings on with Tea Party Movement rallies. Left = Violent Rage. Conservative Right Tea Party = Peaceful yet displeased Patriotism.

 

Going Back to PEGIDA

 

The United States of America needs a Tea Party style PEGIDA Movement to demonstrate American displeasure with culture-failing-to-assimilate immigrants – Muslims and Latin Americans – making America their home. This is especially the case with Muslims that are pre-disposed to Sharia-literal-Quran wielding immigrants who would rather agitate the downfall of Constitutional America than assimilate to the E Pluribus Unum melting pot that has made America one culture rather than a disunited diverse multiple cultures.

 

Abraham Lincoln’s House Divided Speech did not win him his Senate run against Stephen Douglas; however the speech made Lincoln’s name go viral in however that happened in 1858 and thrust him to be the first Republican President in the 1860 election.

 

Lincoln’s House Divided Speech context was a nation divided between a no-slave North and a slave South will not survive. Either nation will become one or the other but both cannot coincide together. That was wisdom that kept are nation morally united rather than immorally united in slavery.

 

The Left Wing Multiculturalist paradigm cannot coincide with an America united by the Founding Fathers document we call the Constitution. Either Multiculturalism will fracture America’s Union into various nations only united in their region or the Constitution will be fought for to our Union the United States of America. Multicultural fracturing will turn a once strong America where immigrant dreams had hope, into diverse multiple independent States trying to preserve the heritage of their region. The ONLY way this Union remains these United States is the best Constitution the rule of law has experienced in history.

 

House Divide Speech

 

Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Convention.

 

If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could then better judge what to do, and how to do it.

 

We are now far into the fifth year, since a policy was initiated, with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation.

 

Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only, not ceased, but has constantly augmented.

 

In my opinion, it will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached, and passed.

 

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

 

I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.

 

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

 

It will become all one thing or all the other.

 

Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as newNorth as well as South.

 

(House Divided Speech; Abraham Lincoln; June 16, 1858; AbrahamLincolnOnline.org)

 

A grassroots PEGIDA Movement is as needed in the USA to preserve the American Union under the U.S. Constitution as is the Tea Party Movement needed to remind Americans that this nation’s Founding principles are on taxation ONLY with representation and Less Government rather than a nearing autocratic huge government the Democrats and American Leftists are leading toward.

 

JRH 2/2/15

Please Support NCCR

A Dajjal Compilation of Informative Comments


Evil Mo

Editor John R. Houk
© January 28, 2015
© Dajjal
I have three comments worthy of an independent post from the pseudonymous Dajjal. The thing is I have lost patience in posting each one separately.  Ergo I have taken the liberty to provide a title to each comment which includes an introduction that I intended in separate posts.
Dajjal is a very knowledgeable Counterjihad writer. Indeed he has a resource he has compiled entitled the Crusader’s Armory. If you want to spend a little time educating yourself on the evils of Islam from Dajjal’s perspective you should go to that site and check it out.
In the meantime here is a compilation of Dajjal comments that were originally posted to my NCCR blog.
JRH 1/28/15

Please Support NCCR

***********************
Dajjal makes a comment to Justin O. Smith’s “Free Speech and Muslim Rage” on my NCCR blog. Dajjal sets the environment to comprehend any Muslim rage using the Quran, Hadith and Sunnah. So when a Muslim Apologist or Left Wing advocate tells you that is not what most Muslims believe know that is poppycock. Dajjal gets his information from Islamic sources that are revered.
JRH 1/26/15
**********************
Full Comprehension of Muslim Rage
(Title by Editor)
By Dajjal
Original Comment: 1/18/15 10:52 PM
Comment to: ‘Free Speech and Muslim Rage
Reblogged this on Freedom Ain’t Free & Take Our Country Back and commented:
Full comprehension of Islamic rage over exposure of Moe’s foibles requires some background information.
The tribal society where Islam was invented and expanded is based on honor and shame. Moe’s real name was Kauthar; he bestowed the undeserved honorific “Muhammad” upon himself. Moe had no witnesses; his epileptic fits were observed, but nobody else saw or heard Jibril talking to him. Islam stands or falls on Moe’s character. If you discredit Moe, you destroy the foundation of Islam.
We see pictures of raging mobs in Asia & Arabia because passions are intense in their tribal culture. They accept Islam as Moe preached it: a gift from Allah, the ultimate truth & justice. They are totally invested in it. If Islam is dishonored, they are dishonored.
Moe knew that Islam is CamelS**t. That fatal fact makes it weak and vulnerable to questioning and criticism. He took great pains to minimize those threats.
5:101. O you who believe! Ask not about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. But if you ask about them while the Qur’ân is being revealed, they will be made plain to you. Allâh has forgiven that, and Allâh is Oft­ Forgiving, Most Forbearing.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 2, Book 24, Number 555:
Narrated Ash-sha’bi:
The clerk of Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba narrated, “Muawiya wrote to Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba: Write to me something which you have heard from the Prophet (p.b.u.h.).” So Al-Mughira wrote: I heard the Prophet saying, “Allah has hated for you three things:
1. Vain talks, (useless talk) that you talk too much or about others.
2. Wasting of wealth (by extravagance)
3. And asking too many questions (in disputed religious matters) or asking others for something (except in great need). (See Hadith No. 591, Vol. Ill)
Because of that sensitivity, Allah found it necessary to pass revelations defending his Messenger. In reality, Moe was issuing situational scripture, posing as Allah in retort to critics.
12.111. Indeed in their stories, there is a lesson for men of understanding. It (the Qur’an) is not a forged statement but a confirmation of the Allâh’s existing Books [the Taurât (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel) and other Scriptures of Allâh] and a detailed explanation of everything and a guide and a Mercy for the people who believe.
52:29. Therefore, remind and preach (mankind, O Muhammad of Islâmic Monotheism). By the Grace of Allâh, you are neither a soothsayer, nor a madman.
52:30. Or do they say: “(Muhammad is) a poet! We await for him some calamity by time.!”
52:31. Say (O Muhammad to them): “Wait! I am with you, among the waiters!”
52:32. Do their minds command them this [i.e. to tell a lie against you (Muhammad)] or are they people exceeding the bounds (i.e. from Belief in Allâh to disbelief).
52:33. Or do they say: “He (Muhammad) has forged it (this Qur’ân)?” Nay! They believe not!
52:34. Let them then produce a recital like unto it (the Qur’ân) if they are truthful.
81:22. And (O people) your companion (Muhammad ()) is not a madman;
81:23. And indeed he (Muhammad) saw him [Jibrael (Gabriel)] in the clear horizon (towards the east).
81:24. And he (Muhammad ()) withholds not a knowledge of the unseen.
81:25. And it (the Qur’ân) is not the word of the outcast Shaitân (Satan).
So intense was the sensitivity to criticism that Moe ordered his companions to murder several critics including Kab Ashraf, Asma bint Marwan and Umm Qirfa. Read about it in his biography.
Murder of Umm Qirfa
Murder of Asma bint Marwan
Assassination of Kab Ashraf pg. 368
Dissing Allah or Moe entails apostasy, which carries the death penalty for Muslims. The same punishment is applied to infidels under Shari’ah.

 

o8.1 Apostasy: penalty

 

 

o11.10 mentions something impermissible
o9.14 alternatives for captured male
Last week, Obanination’s hired Liar said that Obamination would attempt to suppress publication of any article about Jihadism deemed likely to provoke Muslims to attack our troops who are in harm’s way. That threat must be recognized as a direct infringement on the first amendment’s free speech clause.
Since the first Barbary War, this nation has been under attack or threat of attack from Muslims. We must be free to discuss that threat and its basis in Islamic scripture, exegesis, sunnah & jurisprudence. If we cannot fully and truthfully discuss those matters, our liberties will be lost sooner rather than later.
_________________________
Edited by John R. Houk
© Dajjal
+++++++++++++++++
Expose the Evil Core of Islam
(Title by Editor)
By Dajjal
Unlike Europe, America enshrines freedom of expression in our Constitution. We therefore have a right to expose the evil core of Islam. Before reading this excellent post, I read another at Jihad Watch, and replied as follows to another comment:
3:32. Say (O Muhammad): “Obey Allâh and the Messenger (Muhammad).” But if they turn away, then Allâh does not like the disbelievers.
33:21. Indeed in the Messenger of Allâh (Muhammad) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allâh and the Last Day and remembers Allâh much.
9:38. O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that when you are asked to march forth in the Cause of Allâh (i.e. Jihâd) you cling heavily to the earth? Are you pleased with the life of this world rather than the Hereafter? But little is the enjoyment of the life of this world as compared with the Hereafter.
9:39. If you march not forth, He will punish you with a painful torment and will replace you by another people, and you cannot harm Him at all, and Allâh is Able to do all things.
9:123. O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the Al-Muttaqûn (the pious – see V.2:2).
Islam commands obedience to Allah and emulation of Moe. Allah commanded Jihad under penalty of eternal damnation, local disbelievers first. Moe conquered the local Jewish settlements in the Hijaz.
How then can we be expected to respect and tolerate Islam? We must amend our organic law to state flatly: “No person enslaved by Allah and under orders therefrom to attack, rape, plunder and enslave those of us nearest them shall enter or reside within the borders of the United States of America and no Islamic institution shall remain or be established within those borders. The manifesting, practice & propagation of Islam are felonies punishable by de-naturalization and expulsion.” [Bold Text by Editor]
_________________________
Edited by John R. Houk
Text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.
© Dajjal
+++++++++++++++++++
Islam is Inseverable
(Title by Editor)
By Dajjal
Compiled from Comments beginning January 25, 2015 at 4:53 PM
Comment to post ‘Islam: A Diseased Ideology
Islam cannot be contained, it is contagious, spread sexually and by military force as well as dawah. It can also be contracted voluntarily, from books and the internet.
“until they are all dead or they no longer seek to spread Islam by the sword and go forth to make war no more.”
Each Muslim can have up to four wives and keep them constantly knocked up. Due to the large population base, they breed faster than we could kill them with conventional weapons if we had the political will to exterminate them, which we do not.
“its leaders have stubbornly refused to modify, humanize and reform Islam and reconcile Islam with the modern, civilized world.”
Reformation: false expectation. It ain’t possible!!!
Reform Reform Islam??!!Islam!!
Published by Kab Ashraf
Calls for reforming Islam are generally oriented towards image, not substance. The speech by Egypt’s President Al-Sisi on new year’s day is no exception. I reproduce below… [You Can Read the Rest at the Scribed Link or view my valiant effort of the embed below.]

Reform Reform Islam??!!Islam!!

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/252004497/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&show_recommendations=true

“problem within Islam that awaits rectifying”
Islam is the problem: it is mercenary and martial by design and beyond any hope of reform.
“why do the leaders of the United States and the European Union insist on bringing hundreds of thousands more Muslims into our nations, when the greater percentage of them seek our destruction and the end of our liberty?”
They are TRAITORS, not leaders; part of the problem, not the solution. They seek to destroy our system and replace it with Communism; they view Muslims as allies in that Communist revolution.
“irrational, angry Islamofascists”
Muslims; normative, nothing extraordinary.
“without a peep of protest squeaking out from any of the so-called “moderate” Muslims”
Muslims who abjure Islam sign their death warrants thereby. See Reliance O8.0–7.
”Islamic component of terrorism”
Islam is inseverable; terrorism is an intrinsic component which cannot be ignored, abandoned or removed. I refer doubters, deniers & dissenters to 2.85 and this list of ayat & ahadith: 3:151, 8:12,39,57,60,65,67, 9:5,29,38, 39,111,120,123, 33:26,27, 47:4,49:15, 59:2,13, 61:10-13; Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220.
Reblogged this on Freedom Ain’t Free & Take Our Country Back and commented:
See my comments on the original post. [Blog Editor: which is this post I believe.]
In the present case, I found several important points to drive home and took them on immediately and serially as I discovered them.
The part I missed was “diseased ideology”. Islam is not infected, distorted, perverted, twisted nor hijacked. It is Islam: contrived for Moe’s personal empowerment & emolument through the perpetuation of war. It is what it is by design. It cannot be cured, repaired, restored or rendered anodyne. For clues, turn in the Koran to Surah Al-Anfal (8) and in Khan’s translation of Bukhari, to The Book of Khumus (53).
_____________________
Edited by John R. Houk
Although the old ‘spellcheck’ tried to capitalize the first letter in some sentences I left those alone because they were within quotes. Text or links enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.
© Dajjal

Islam is Islam


radical-muslim-moderate-muslim

Intro to ‘Islam is Islam’

Edited by John R. Houk

By Dajjal

Intro Date: January 18, 2015

 

Dajjal also left a very apt comment pertaining to the NCCR cross post written by Danny Jeffrey “JEWS, NETANYAHU, FRANCE, ISLAM AND THE AGENDA”. Dajjal’s comment begins with a quote from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

 

Radical Islam is an enemy to us all”.

 

Frankly I was curious of the full context of the quote. I found several locations but here’s the context of all Netanyahu said in relation to participating to that unity march against terrorism in Paris from Israel Hayom:

 

“These are the values upon which modern France was built and these are the values that are worth fighting for,” Netanyahu said.

 

“Justice and truth are with us. And here is the truth: Radical Islam is an enemy to us all. Not Islam, not regular extremists, but radical Islam. The enemy has many names — Islamic State, Hamas, al-Qaida, Nusra, Hezbollah — but all are branches of the same poisonous tree.

 

“It is not by chance that radical Islam has wanted to destroy Israel since its founding. This is because it is the only democracy in the Middle East. Here is another truth: Radical Islam does not hate the West because of Israel, rather it hates Israel because Israel is an organic part of the West. It justly sees Israel as an island of democracy and Western tolerance in a sea of extremism and violence that it wishes to impose on the Middle East and the entire world.

 

“Those who massacred Jews at a synagogue in Jerusalem and those who massacred Jews and journalists in Paris belong to the same murderous terrorist movement — they must be condemned and fought against equally.” (Netanyahu in Paris: Radical Islam is an enemy to us all; By Mati Tuchfeld, Israel Hayom Staff and Reuters; Israel Hayom; 1/12/15)

 

In Danny Jeffrey’s essay he said he had a great disdain for politicians but admired Benjamin Netanyahu. Dajjal in this comment also shares a great disdain for politicians but rather than admiring Netanyahu, Dajjal criticizes the Prime Minister for using the term “Radical Islam”.

 

Dajjal’s comment then goes on to correctly explain that Islam is Islam. That there is no Moderate or Radical in Islam. Dajjal’s argument is really quite effective; however if you the full context of Netanyahu’s speech he was doing what good politicians do. Netanyahu’s comment was aimed at the Palestine Authority President Mahmoud Abbas who spews hate toward Jews and Israel as well as paints a picture of reconciliation with Muslim Brotherhood lackey in Hamas that currently rules the Gaza Strip.

 

Now with that all in mind read Dajjal’s very effect case that Islam is Islam.

 

JRH 1/18/15

Please Support NCCR

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

Islam is Islam

[Title by Editor derived from Comment content]

 

By Dajjal

January 15, 2015 at 8:22 PM

 

Reblogged this on Freedom Ain’t Free & Take Our Country Back and commented:

Netanyahu in Paris: “Radical Islam is an enemy to us all”: ‘Radical Islam’. Politicians piss me off; Netanyahu is no exception as regular readers of my blog know. Islam is Islam: what Moe preached and practiced as recorded in the Qur’an & Sunnah. Appending adjectives to Islam malignantly postulates a false ‘moderate’ Islam. Nothing of the sort exists. Islam amassed an empire stretching from China to Portugal by the sword, in compliance with the imperatives contained in Surah Al-Anfal & At-Taubah which are codified in Reliance of the Traveller o9.8 & 9.9 in reverse order of sequence. At Jumah Salat, Muslims recite Surah Al-Baqarah 2.286 as a supererogatory prayer, asking Allah to grant them victory over us. Allah & Moe murdered, burned orchards and built a well-deserved reputation for barbarian repine to terrify those they sought to conquer without a fight. Doubters & dissenters: it’s documented in this pdf file: https://www.scribd.com/doc/101297086/Terrorism.

 

Which of the terrorists involved in recent attacks in Beslan, Madrid, London, New York, Mumbai and Paris was not a Muslim? In whose name did they perform those acts; what did they say when shooting and detonating? What do they say when slitting the throat of hadi at Eid? Blog Editor info-clarification: Sacrificing a hadi during Eid] Cameron, Hollande, Merkel, Ban Ki-moon, Shrub, Clinton, Carter & Obamination cannot get a clue, can you? We have provided a few, take hold of them and share them.

 

The terrorism problem does not have any moderate term solution that does not involve expelling and excluding Muslims. The Jihad problem has no long term solution that does not involve extinction. That is because Muslims believe that they will go to Paradise if they attempt to conquer us or to Hell if they hold back. They will not cease attacking until they cease to believe in Allah, his imperatives, threat and promise. Push them back far enough from our borders so that their weapons cannot reach us. Prevent them from mating nuclear warheads with ICBMs.

 

 

Inviting Abbas or any other Muslim to an anti-terror/pro-free expression rally is the moral equivalent of inviting Kermit Gosnell [Blog Editor: Gosnell was a murdering abortionist actually convicted of killing live babies. Pre-conviction description of Gosnell’s abortion practice] to an anti-abortion rally.

 

 

[Blog Editor: The last paragraph was added on January 15, 2015 at 8:26 PM]

___________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Content within brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Dajjal

The U.S. State Department: Out of Touch with Reality


United Against Terrorism - Sharia heavy Muslim manual

ACT for America promotes an Andrew C. McCarthy article from NRO that exposes the U.S. State Department endorsing a Muslim manual supposedly meant to be an anti-terrorist perspective from Canadian Moderate Muslims. The hypocrisy that McCarthy exposes is that the Muslim manual promotes all that is harsh and extreme pertaining to Islam’s Sharia Law.

 

JRH 10/15/14

Please Support NCCR

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

The U.S. State Department: Out of Touch with Reality

 

Sent by ACT for America

Sent: 10/13/2014 7:57 AM

 

The U.S. State Department: Out of Touch with America, Out of Touch with Reality

 

The U.S. State Department once again demonstrates that it fails to grasp the true nature of the threat from Islamic jihad by endorsing a Canadian publication produced by Islamist organizations—even after the Canadian Mounted Police rejected the very same manual.

State Department Endorses Canadian Islamist Manual that Describes Jihad as ‘Noble’

 

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

State Department Endorses Canadian Islamist Manual that Describes Jihad as ‘Noble’

 

By Andrew C. McCarthy

OCTOBER 8, 2014 2:29 PM

National Review Online

 

At the Washington Free Beacon, Adam Kredo reports that the State Department has issued a tweet endorsing a manual that promotes sharia and admonishes investigators not to use terms like “jihad,” which it describes as “a noble concept” in Islam.

 

The manual, United Against Terrorism, is said by its sponsors – the Islamic Social Services Association (ISSA) and the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) – to combat the radicalization of young Muslims. Yet, after being consulted during the manual’s writing, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police rejected the final product due to its “adversarial tone.”

 

That’s putting it mildly. Upon reading the book, Toronto Star columnist Anthony Furey observes that it frowns on “liberal values,” forbidding such things as the intermingling of the sexes in civil society and the marriage of a Muslim woman to a non-Muslim, while promoting the treatment of adultery and premarital sex as crimes for which “punishments are harsh.”

 

The manual admonishes that “Terrorism is not jihad. Jihad is a noble concept in Islam.” It further discourages Muslims from cooperating with law enforcement officials, even if the police are seeking information about Islamic radicals – the very “extremists” the manual ostensibly sets itself against. It also derides investigative measures designed to gather intelligence against terrorists.

 

Yet, the U.S. State Department lauded the manual yesterday, tweeting: “Canada: handbook to help parents understand extremists, combat recruitment [with a link to the manual.]”

 

As Mr. Kredo notes, the State Department’s approbation struck some Twitter users as curious. It should not have. The State Department, throughout the tenures of Secretaries Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, has been second only to the White House itself in championing the Muslim Brotherhood, whose promotion of sharia and project to forbid notice of the Islamic doctrinal roots of Islamic terrorism are amply reflected in the manual.

 

The airbrushing of jihad is also familiar. It is the same spin I discussed here in 2010 when then-White House counterterrorism czar (and now-CIA director) John Brennan claimed that we must not “describe our enemy as ‘jihadists’” because “jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam” that merely means “to purify oneself or one’s community.”

 

In point of fact, according to the authoritative sharia manual Reliance of the Traveller, which has been endorsed by scholars at al-Azhar University in Cairo (the seat of Sunni scholarship since the tenth century) and by the International Institute of Islamic Thought (the Muslim Brotherhood’s think-tank), “Jihad means to war against non-Muslims.” As Answering Islam’s Yoel Natan has recounted, jihad is referred to in 164 verses of the Koran, almost exclusively in terms of combat.

 

Moreover, if – even as jihadists are rampaging – you want to indulge the Brennan/Obama administration fantasy that jihad has evolved, Brennan’s anodyne rendering of the concept is hopelessly flawed. I explained why in the 2010 column:

 

Jihad is, always and everywhere, the mission to implement, spread, or defend sharia, the Islamic legal code. It is not exclusively violent; an army doesn’t need to be violent if its enemies are willing to give ground. But jihad only “means to purify oneself or one’s community” in a very narrow sense. It is not the syrupy quest to become a better person but the command to become a better Muslim; it is not the smiley-face mission to “purify” one’s community of crime but the command to cleanse one’s community of non-Islamic influences.

 

The inextricable bond between jihad and sharia is also easily explained. In Muslim doctrine, sharia is deemed the necessary precondition for Islamicizing a society. Islam’s designs are hegemonic: Even in its less threatening iterations, it is taken as a given that believers must call all of humanity to the faith. What separates the true moderates from the faux moderates and the terrorists are the lengths to which one is willing to go in carrying out that injunction. That it is an injunction, however, is not open to debate.

 

Our political leaders can continue to trivialize jihad as if it were some benign struggle to brush after every meal. They can continue to ignore the core tenets that make sharia antithetical to a free, self-determining society. But they can’t do that and do the only job we need them to do: protect our lives and our liberties.

 

Again, if the State Department, the administration, and the Beltway political class are going to keep looking at Islamists –i.e., Islamic supremacists who promote sharia – as part of the counterterrorism solution rather than a big part of the anti-American, anti-Western liberalism problem, we are never going to get out of our own way.

_______________________

The U.S. State Department: Out of Touch with Reality

 

ACT for America is a 501(c)(4) issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure. Donations to ACT for America are not tax deductible.
_____________________

State Department Endorses Canadian Islamist Manual that Describes Jihad as ‘Noble’

 

© National Review Online 2014. All Rights Reserved.

Shafiq and Dr. Shafiq – Moderate Muslims?


Mohammed Shafiq

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mohammed Shafiq

 

                                                                                                                                                                

                                                                                                                                Dr. Muhammad Shafiq  

 

John R. Houk

© September 19, 2014

 

Let’s look at Mohammed Shafiq the CEO of the Muslim British youth group Ramadhan Foundation. I was a bit confused because I read an article about a speaker at St John’s Church on Humboldt Street who had given a speech on ISIS. The St John’s speaker was listed as Dr. Mohammed Shafiq. I suspect the writer was referring to Dr. Muhammad Shafiq a Muslim Professor and Executive Director at Nazareth College with the Center for Interfaith Studies and Dialogue (CISD). I will get to Dr. Shafiq in a moment in relation to the ISIS speech at St John’s.

 

Now Mohammed Shafiq of the Ramadhan Foundation is considered by Muslim apologists and Left Wing multiculturalists to be a Moderate Muslim that denounces Islamic extremism. Indeed he has the death threats to back up credentials as a Moderate. Evidently the Somalian terrorist group al-Shabaab that was influential in the public beheading of British soldier Lee Rigby on the streets of London in broad daylight issued the death threat to Shafiq via video. Al-Shabaab was perturbed for Mohammed Shafiq condemning the barbarity of Rigby’s beheading.

 

So that makes Shafiq the image of a good Muslim that we non-Muslim Westerners like to hear about, right? Hmm… Has anyone heard the claim that a good Muslim believes that the pseudo-prophet Mohammed was the perfect man in Islam? In order to be a good Muslim one is to struggle to emulate the perfect man pseudo-prophet Mohammed.

 

Somehow Muslims seem to be only aware of the tolerant merciful Mohammed in his early days in Mecca prior to fleeing to Medina in what has become known as the hijra. Something seemed to have warped Mo’s mind in Medina because evolved from a monotheistic cult religious leader to a robbing bandit and finally to a vindictive conquering army leader killing and assassinating enemies with a special vengeance reserved for Jews. Thus emulating the perfect man (graphic 22 minute slide show) becomes problematic for me.

 

I sense that Mohammed Shafiq desires to be a good Moderate Muslim, but when push comes to shove, defending the principles of Islam overrules the Western image of a good Muslim and is replaced by the Islamic image of a good Muslim.

 

When there was a sex scandal involving numerous Muslim men enslaving young female sex-slaves in Shafiq’s British hometown of Rochdale:

 

Together Against Grooming (Tag) was organised in the wake of the convictions of Muslim men in British courts for a series of horrific cases, including in Derby, Rochdale, Telford, Bradford and Oxford, where on Thursday five men were jailed for life and two others received long sentences for the sexual abuse of girls. (Muslim youth leader says more must be done to fight grooming; By Haroon Siddique; The Guardian; 9/28/13 15.01 EDT)

 

The Muslim youth leader in title is Mohammed Shafiq. Shafiq in this article was shown to praising a Muslim sermon that denounced this purist Muslim treatment of young white British sex-slave gals. But at the same time Shafiq takes a walk on the racist side yet not mentioning Islam. From Debbie Schlussel:

 

At least one Muslim has the guts to tell the truth about his people, though he falsely couches it in purely ethnic, rather than religious terms:

 

‘There is a particular problem with groups of Pakistani men who think white girls are worthless,’ said Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Ramadhan Foundation. ‘They think they can use and abuse these girls in this abhorrent sort of way and then discard them.’ (UK Muslims Gang Raped White Girls b/c They Weren’t Muslim; Islamic Studies Teacher @ Mosque; By Debbie Schlussel; DebbieSchlussel.com; 5/9/12 2:56 pm)

 

To get a grasp of the emulation of the pseudo-prophet became a cultural rift in the UK this is a rather horrid description of what these British white sex-slaves went through:

 

The girls were repeatedly raped, often by groups of men several men at a time, and some were subjected to “torture sex” tortured, the jury heard. The three-and-a-half month trial at the Old Bailey exposed a series of failings by Thames Valley Police and Oxford social services. Despite being told on several occasions by the girls and their parents about their abuse, the two organisations failed to act until 2010.

 

One of the defendants, Mohammed Karrar – who was accused of branding an 11-year-old, forcing her a girl of 12 to have an abortion when she was 12 and subjecting her to gang rapes – initially refused to come up from his cell.

 

The mother of Girl C – who told the Guardian she had begged social services staff to rescue her from the gang – said that her daughter’s abusers had threatened to cut the girl’s face off. and promised to slit the throats of her family members. She said that they had been forced to leave their home after the men had threatened to decapitate family members. (Oxford child sex abuse ring ‘threatened to cut off victim’s face’; By Alexandra Topping; The Guardian; 6/26/13 11.50 EDT)

 

Then to cap it off, Mohammed Shafiq became upset over some quite innocuous comments from fellow Moderate Muslim and fellow British Liberal Democrat member when in an interview/question & answer session flippantly ignored a couple of teen kids portraying Jesus and Mohammed respectively on their T-shirts.

 

Abishek Phadnis och Chris Moos

 

Here’s the scenario:

 

In 2013, two students from the London School of Economics (LSE), a major UK university in central London, set up their stall at the annual freshers’ fair (an event bringing together representatives of various clubs and societies to advertise to new students) for the LSE Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society to which they belong.

 

At the fair, Chris Moos and Abishek Phadnis each wore a ‘Jesus and Mo’ t-shirt – shirts featuring a cartoon from the Jesus and Mo series (www.jesusandmo.net) which satirises Jesus and Mohammed.

 

Chris and Abishek were immediately ordered to remove the shirts because wearing them apparently amounted to “harassment”. When they refused to do so, their stall was surrounded by uniformed security who threatened to remove them from university premises by force.

 

Later, the university apologised to the two students.

 

In January of this year, guests on the BBC Sunday morning show “The Big Questions” discussed causing offence to religious sensibilities. Chris and Abishek were invited to offer their views. When presenter Nicky Campbell questioned them on the t-shirt affair, Chris and Abishek opened their jackets to reveal the offending garments. The BBC camera operators made sure we did not get a clear view however.

 

Also on the programme was Maajid Nawaz. Nawaz is a former Islamist and member of Hizb ut-Tahrir who spent time in an Egyptian jail and now heads the anti-extremism think-tank the Quilliam Foundation, which hit the headlines in 2013 having begun work with the former English Defence League leader Tommy Robinson. Nawaz is also a Parliamentary candidate for the Liberal Democrat Party.

 

To demonstrate that he, a believing Muslim, was not offended by the depictions of Mohammed displayed in the Jesus and Mo series, Nawaz tweeted a copy of the cartoon saying that it did not upset him. (Blasphemy returns to Britain; By Anne Marie Waters; Dispatch International; 2/18/14)

 

Just so we are on the same page here. Maajid Nawaz a former Radical Muslim turned Moderate who has associated with Counterjihad enthusiast Tommy Robinson (who is often accused wrongfully of being a neo-Nazi) tweeted photos of the capricious young college students wearing the Jesus and Mo T-shirt parody. You need to catch that Nawaz operates an “anti-extremism think-tank” called the Quilliam Foundation.

 

How did the Moderate Muslim Mohammed Shafiq handle Maajid Nawaz tweeting Jesus-Mo caricatures? Shafiq put out the word to fellow Muslims and to crazy Radical Muslims that are terrorists that Nawaz was a blasphemer. And how does Islam handle blaspheming the pseudo-prophet Mohammed? A death sentence is issued. Now that is true Islam.

 

Mohammed Shafiq has tried to walk back any involvement in the get-even and dump fellow Liberal Democrat Nawaz. I look how Nick Cohen of The Observer puts it:

 

At the time we went to press, about 20,000 people had signed Shafiq’s petition to Nick Clegg, saying that the tweet had caused an “extreme amount of insult, hurt and anguish”. The Lib Dems must stop Nawaz standing as their candidate in Hampstead and Kilburn at the next general election, they demanded.

 

 

Shafiq denies that he is spreading fear and if you had not done the research you might believe him. Certainly, you could think him a man who can snuffle out offence where no one else can find it. You could think that the 20,000 or so who have signed his petition are so desperate for reasons to censor that they will manufacture them. But this is a free country and they are entitled to their hysterias.

 

But to put it as politely as I can, Shafiq is not your standard Liberal Democrat. He is in charge of the Ramadhan Foundation, which has hosted speakers whose attitudes towards gay people and Jews are anything but liberal. To make sure that Nawaz felt the full force of his critique, Shafiq slipped an aside into his open letter to Nick Clegg. He talked of Nawaz’s “expected, suspected, wanted reaction from the minority of unhinged in those communities”. Nawaz was deliberately soliciting attacks from the “unhinged”, apparently. He expected them. He wanted them. And if the unhinged should assault or kill him – he had no one to blame but himself. Shafiq told me that he did not mean that Nawaz was inciting his own murder, but I struggle see how else his followers can interpret his words.

 

On Twitter, Shafiq went further and gave a masterclass in double speak. “Ghustaki Rasool Quilliam,” he tweeted. Most of his audience had no idea what he meant. A few knew all too well. “Ghustaki Rasool” is “defamer of the prophet” in Urdu: a charge that incites Islamists to murder. Fanatics took to Twitter to prove the point. “Have spoken to someone in Pakistan,” one of Shafiq’s followers replied. “They will have a surprise for him on his next visit!” Another Twitter user contacted Nawaz to say: “Gustak e rasool is punishable by death anywhere in the world. Btw I’m in the UK not Pakistan.” A third cried that “dogs like Maajid Nawaaz will be punished!” (The Liberal Democrats face a true test of liberty; By Nick Cohen; The GuardianThe Observer; 1/25/14 13.04 EST)

 

At any rate the leader of the UK’s Liberal Democrat Party must have been doing some arm twisting. In a joint statement signed by both Maajid Nawaz and Mohammed Shafiq they offer a bit of give and take publicly which I doubt makes either one happy privately.

 

 

“We recognise that, when it comes to this question, some Muslims of various persuasions may take different views. However, we also recognise that there are many Muslims who have taken offence, and we assert that images of the spiritual leaders of all religions should be deemed to be respectful. We also respect the freedom of every member of the Liberal Democrats on either side of this debate who feels offended by tone or language to make representations to the Liberal Democrats as is their democratic right.

 

“We are both Liberals and support the principle of freedom of speech. But we also understand the importance of respect for others’ views and of moderation of language. In so far as this second principle of moderate language has been breached in the heat and passion of the current debate, we regret this and call for all those who have differing views to ensure that any debate which continues on this subject should use language and attitudes which conform to Liberal standards of respect and moderation.

 

“We now call on those on both sides of this argument to return to moderate debate, free of insult and threat and we do so because we believe this is in the interests of our Party, of the wider Muslim community in Britain and of the principles of peace to which Islam is committed.” (Statement by Maajid Nawaz and Mohammed Shafiq; Posted by The Voice; Liberal Democrat Voice; 1/28/14 12:10 pm)

 

Okay, that was about the good Moderate Muslim Mohammed Shafiq, born and raised in the United Kingdom.

 

Now let’s look at Dr. Muhammad Shafiq of Pakistani origin and a Muslim inter-faith Professor at a Christian college called Nazareth College located in Rochester, NY. The college’s origins in 1924 derived from Roman Catholic Sisters of St Joseph but there is no mention of Catholicism in the private school’s current curriculum. The college seems to have evolved from a parochial school to a Liberal (and I’m not talking liberal arts here) multicultural diversity slant in its current curriculum.

 

I have to tell you that Dr. Shafiq’s public character is representative of what an American would call a Moderate Muslim. He is the Executive Director of Rochester College’s interfaith program which seems to me to emphasize Islam more a typical Religious Studies collegiate program that usually examines all the global religions equally. Now granted secular college Religious Studies programs usually de-emphasize the Christian faith; however there is a close examination of the major religions that will include Islam. Dr. Shafiq’s direct connection to the Islamist organization the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) and his seeming promotion of Islamic interfaith understanding with American culture suggests an Islamic emphasis at Nazareth College. This is America and if the privately funded Nazareth College that had its beginning within a NY State Catholic Diocese has no problem with a person at least sympathetic with Radical Islam then who am I to complain. The only criticism I have is that IIIT representation smacks of deception in the portrayal of a peaceful Islam. It might be a good idea to examine the IIIT bona fides.

 

Clarion Project on IIIT

 

 

The decision to establish IIIT was made at a major Islamist conference in Lugano, Switzerland in 1977. A lead organizer was a senior member of the Egyptian Brotherhood that was also the father-in-law of Ahmed Elkadi, the president of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood from 1984 to 1994. Participants included the leaders of other Brotherhood-originated groups like the Islamic Society of North America and the Muslim Students Association and non-American Brotherhood leaders like Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi.[5]

 

 

Swiss police raided Nada’s home in 2001 and discovered a secret 1982 Brotherhood plan called “The Project” that called for infiltrating countries around the world in order to advance the Islamist agenda. A stated goal is supporting jihad for “the establishment of an Islamic State, in parallel with gradual efforts aimed at gaining control of local power centers through institutional action.”[7]

 

A 1988 FBI file states that IIIT board members Jamal Barzinji and Yaqub Mirza are among those “previously characterized as … members and leaders of the IKHWAN [Muslim Brotherhood].”[8]Another 1988 FBI document states that a source inside the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network “advised that the IIIT … and all the subsidiary and sponsoring Muslim organizations under the control of the IIIT … are in fact IKHWAN organizations.”

 

A source told the FBI that IIIT leaders speak of a six-stage plan to “institute the Islamic Revolution in the United States.” The leaders “indicated that in this phase, their organization needs to peacefully get inside the United States government and also American universities.” They “claimed success in infiltrating the United States government with sympathetic of [or] compromised individuals.” The source believed IIIT was only in the first stage.

 

The FBI source warned that the Brotherhood has “unlimited funds” and has “set up political action front groups with no traceable ties to the IIIT or its various Muslim groups.” In a document made public, the FBI redacted the name of a Brotherhood leader, presumably within IIIT, that the source claims “stated that Muslims in the United States have to be prepared for martyrdom.”[9]

 

In 1991, a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo stated its “work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within.” The same memo listed IIIT as one of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.”

 

 

In 2002, the headquarters of IIIT was raided as part of a terrorism-financing investigation called Operation Green Quest. The probe continued until at least 2007 when the U.S. government tried to force convicted terrorist Sami al-Arian to testify before a grand jury about his links to the organization.[10] IIIT was the largest donor to Sami al-Arian’s front for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist group, providing at least $50,000. Al-Arian even said in a letter to IIIT’s president in 1992 that the two groups are one.[11]

 

IIIT employed a founder of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Bashir Musa Nafi, until he was deported in June 1996. Nafi was a close friend of Al-Arian’s. [12] Another IIIT employee, Tarik Hamdi, gave cell phone batteries to Osama Bin Laden, according to a former U.S. Treasury Department official in 2002.[13] In 2003, IIIT made a donation of $720 to the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation in Oregon. The Foundation was shut down as an Al-Qaeda front the following year.[14]

 

 

IIIT has long published and promoted Islamist texts. In 1990, it endorsed the English translation of an Islamist text on Sharia (Islamic) law, Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law by Umdat al-Salik, calling it a “valuable and important” work for “teaching Islamic jurisprudence.” In 2001, it published a book authored by an IIIT official titled Violence that approved of attacks on Israeli civilians as “justified acts of a liberation struggle, not terrorism.”[16]

 

The organization’s website still lists Islamist books it has published. This includes at least three by Brotherhood spiritual leader Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi. Former IIIT president Taha Jabir Al-Alwani authored one text that complains that there are no academic institutions in the Muslim world that teach “the Islamic vision with the same force and persuasiveness” as Western ideas are taught in the West.[17]

 

READ ENTIRETY (International Institute of Islamic Thought; By RYAN MAURO; The Clarion Project; 4/2/13)

 

This IIIT profile by Ryan Mauro is just an excerpt. You really should read the entire article. Discover The Networks (DTN) also has an excellent essay on IIIT. Most of the information corroborates The Clarion Project exposé but for brevity’s sake here is an excerpt that adds some extra info.

 

DTN on IIIT

 

In the early 1990s, IIIT invented and promoted the term “Islamophobia,” a term which implies that any societal fear associated with Islam is necessarily irrational, even if that fear stems from the fact that Islam’s prophet and its modern-day imams call on believers to kill infidels, or from the fact that the 9/11 attacks were carried out to implement those calls. Moreover, the term suggests that any negative societal reaction to such exhortations to violence reflects a bigotry that itself should be feared.

 

Former IIIT member Abdur-Rahman Muhammad — who was with that organization when the word was formally created, and who has since rejected IIIT’s ideology and terminated his membership in disgust — now reveals the original intent behind the concept of Islamophobia: “This loathsome term is nothing more than a thought-terminating cliche conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.” In short, in its very origins, “Islamophobia” was a term designed as a weapon to advance a totalitarian cause by stigmatizing critics and silencing them. This plan was an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood’s deceptive “General Strategic Goal for North America.”

Although the term was coined in the early 1990s, “Islamophobia” did not become the focus of an active Brotherhood campaign until after 9/11.

 

Controlled by the extremist, Saudi-based Wahhabi movement, IIIT maintains that reports about mosques distributing hate-filled literature are untrue, and claims that the concept of jihad in no way condones or connotes violence. As an IIIT public-relations flyer puts it: “Jihad does not mean ‘holy war.’ Literally, jihad in Arabic means to strive, struggle and exert effort. It is a central and broad Islamic concept that includes struggle against evil inclinations within oneself, struggle to improve the quality of life in society, struggle in the battlefield for self-defense or fighting against tyranny or oppression.” …

 

 

IIIT is a prominent endorser of the book Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, an authoritative compendium of sharia written by an eminent 14th-century Islamic jurist. By IIIT’s reckoning, the English translation by Umdat al-Salik is “a valuable and important work” that is highly successful in “its aim to imbue the consciousness of the non-Arabic-speaking Muslim with a sound understanding of Sacred Law.” According to Andrew McCarthy, Reliance “denies freedom of conscience, explaining that apostasy from Islam is a death-penalty offense”; contends that “a Muslim apostatizes not only by clearly renouncing Islam but by doing so implicitly — such as by deviating from the ‘consensus of Muslims,’ or making statements that could be taken as insolence toward Allah or the prophet Mohammed”; “approves a legal caste system in which the rights and privileges of Muslims and men are superior to those of non-Muslims and women”; “penalizes extramarital fornication by stoning or scourging”; endorses the death penalty for homosexuals and for people who make interest-bearing loans; venerates jihad; and exhorts Muslims “to strive to establish an Islamic government, ruled by a caliph.” READ ENTIRETY (INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ISLAMIC THOUGHT (IIIT); Determine The Networks)

 

Muslim apologists will look you in the eyeballs and tell the Reliance of the Traveller is not accepted as authoritative among Sharia scholars. The reality Reliance is authoritative but it is not singular. The Reliance is one of many instructive tools used by Sharia scholars.

 

The second source text of Islamic jurisprudence used to prepare our summaries is Reliance of the Traveller, compiled and written in the 14th century by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri. Reliance of the Traveller is a systematic codification of the laws of the Shafii school of Sunni Islam. It is based primarily on the writings of Imam Rafii and Imam Nawawi,[3] scholars of Islamic law who lived in the 12th-13th centuries and in the 13th century, respectively[4]. Although it is based on the laws of only one of the Islamic legal schools, Reliance of the Traveller is more comprehensive and detailed in its discussion of Islamic law than The Distinguished Jurist’s Primer is. Therefore, there are a number of places where our summaries refer solely to the Shafii school because certain topics are discussed in Reliance of the Traveller but not in The Distinguished Jurist’s Primer. The English translation of Reliance of the Traveller also includes some sections written by a variety of commentators ranging from the 9th to the 20th centuries. In certain cases, we have cited these other commentators, always clearly noting that these citations are not from the Ibn Naqib’s original 14th century Reliance of the Traveller. On occasion, Keller’s translation of Reliance of the Traveller points out an alternative view of one of the schools other than the Shafii on a particular legal point and we have mentioned these variant interpretations in our summaries. When a footnote on this site designates a source as “RT” without any mention in the text or the footnote of the time from which the comment is taken, that means that the citation is to the translation of the original 14th century text of Ibn Naqib. The full title of the original work is Umdat al-salik wa uddat al-nasikThe Reliance of the Traveller and Tools of the Worshipper. The English translation by Nuh Ha Mim Keller is called: Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law. Our summaries of Reliance of the Traveller are based on the 1994 revised edition of this work published by Amana Publications, Beltsville, Maryland, USA. (Laws of Religion – Source Texts Used for Laws of Islam: Jurisprudence of Schools of Islam; Religion Research Society; Last updated 10/23/12)

 

Al-Azhar University in Egypt can loosely be described as Sunni Islam’s versions of verified Islamic theology much like the Papacy is the final authority on all things Roman Catholic. Al-Azhar University has given the official stamp of approval to Reliance of the Traveller not only on the original medieval Arabic document but also the English translation by American converted to Islam Nuh Ha Mim Keller (now living in Jordan).

 

The Revised Edition (published 1991, revised 1994) is “The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ’Umdat al-Salik by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 769/1368) in Arabic with Facing English Text, Commentary, and Appendices”, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller. The publisher is listed as amana publications in Beltsville, Maryland.

 

This an authoritative source on Sunni Islamic law, because it is certified as such by Al-Azhar University in Cairo. There is no higher authority on Sunni Islamic doctrine than Al-Azhar; it is the closest equivalent to the Vatican that can be found in Islam. (A Complete Collapse of Reason; By Baron Bodissey; Right Side News; 6/24/14 06:16)

 

Counterjihadists point out that Reliance is a manual on how Muslims can become brutal human beings and justified by Islam. For a synopsis of that brutality you really should read Mapping Sharia’s exposé of Reliance. Mapping Sharia also provides a link to the PDF of the full English translation of Reliance. If you want to delve into all 1251 pages in confirmation, knock yourself out HERE.

 

Dr. Muhammad Shafiq is a proud member of IIIT. As a proud member of IIIT he ironically is actively drawing the picture of one desirous of an interfaith dialogue between Islam and the West. AND YET as a member of IIIT he has to be supportive that organization’s secretive goals of promoting a Radical Islam (a la Muslim Brotherhood and Saudi Wahhabism) and a stealth infiltration of Western governments and culture to message acceptance of the antichrist religion of Islam.

 

Okay, I’ve spent a bit of time differentiating two Muslims with the same pronunciation of their names yet with different spelling. First I looked at Mohammed Shafiq and followed that by looking at Nazareth College/IIIT professor Dr. Muhammad Shafiq. Both try to project an image of a Moderate Muslim yet associations and actions expose that moderation as a probable deception.

 

At this point I intended to cross post Paul Sutliff’s LinkedIn page report entitled “Dr. Shafiq vs. Me”. I do believe I have ran out of time and space if you have actually read this far. So this is what I am going to do. I will first post this Shafiq and Dr. Shafiq examination then in a separate post I will cross post Mr. Sutliff’s report pointing back to my thoughts via a link.

 

As background it would do well for you to be cognizant of the portion of this post pertaining to Dr. Muhammad Shafiq. This will help you to understand Sutliff’s outrage about the good professor’s ISIS talk at St John’s Church on Humboldt Street in Rochester, NY on the date September 16, 2014.

 

(Mr. Sutliff actually re-edited his LinkedIn post and got it published at the blog calling itself The Independent Chronicle. I’ll be sticking with the LinkedIn version since that is what inspired me.)

 

JRH 9/19/14

Please Support NCCR

 

Attempting to Rewrite the History of September 11th


Flight 93 - 2nd Jet - World Trade Center 9-1-01

Two national Islamist organizations and other aligned Arab-American groups have hopped on the bandwagon to expunge references to “Islamic” or “Islamist” from a film about al-Qeda (sic), which will be shown at the National September 11 Memorial Museum.

 

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) are among the groups that called the video “ill-considered and insufficiently vetted” in a letter to museum leadership.

 

The signatories demand that “stereotypical” elements in the film, “The Rise of Al-Qaeda,” be addressed and (Islamic Groups Try to Censure Free Speech at 9/11 Memorial; By John Rossomando; the algemeiner; 4/28/14 12:24 AM)

 

CAIR is American-Islamic linked to Islamic terrorist organization Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. MPAC is also a Muslim Brotherhood front group. Hmm … Is it any wonder these two stealth promoters of Islamic terrorism and radical Islam are whining about the al Qaeda documentary?

 

In an email sent by Brigitte Gabriel of ACT! For America she explains why CAIR and MPAC are full of bologna in their criticism of 911 Memorial Museum documentary “The Rise of al Qaeda”.

 

JRH 4/28/14

Please Support NCCR

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

Attempting to Rewrite the History of September 11th

 

By Brigitte Gabriel

Sent 4/28/2014 11:20 AM

ACT link: http://tinyurl.com/m5nuq7h

28 APRIL 2014 07:59

 

On May 21st, more than 13 years after the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, the National September 11 Memorial Museum will open its doors to the public to make certain that Americans will never forget what happened that day.

Unfortunately, some are working to ensure that future generations of Americans never fully understand the attacks, which were the most deadly terrorist attacks in the history of the United States.

One of the exhibits in the museum will feature a 7-minute film called “The Rise of Al Qaeda.”

In that film, the Al Qaeda terrorists are referred to as “Islamists” who were waging “jihad” with the attacks upon America.

Those two words, “Islamists” and “Jihad” have caused a controversy, with a variety of critics calling for whitewashing the description of Al Qaeda and the attacks by sanitizing the museum commentary by removing those two words.

This would be a tragic mistake.

Despite the complaints, the use of the terms “Islamist” and “jihad” in no way suggest that all Muslims are terrorists or support violence. No serious analyst in his or her right mind would make such an assertion.

Nevertheless, in warfare the enemy’s reality becomes your reality, so it makes perfect sense to call Islamists “Islamists” and to call Jihad “Jihad.” After all, in World War II, Nazis were referred to as Nazis, because they themselves referred to themselves as such.

America’s enemies in the war on terror do NOT refer to themselves as “extremists,” “militants,” or “radicals.”

They refer to themselves as Jihadists and Jihadis.

Interestingly, critics on both sides of the issue seem to dislike the term “Islamist.” Apologists for organizations such as Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood claim that the term too closely identifies Islam with “extremism.” Many in the countershariah and counterjihad movement say that the term “Islamist” is a term concocted in the West that has no meaning in the Islamic world.

Both are wrong.

The first known use of the term “Islamist” came from the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the late dictator of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism.

Khomeini said: “We are neither capitalists nor communists. We are Islamists.”

There are many different definitions listed for the term “Islamist,” but that is not the point. The point is that one of the world’s most prominent Muslim leaders coined the term to describe the revolution he led. It is entirely proper for the 9/11 museum to use the term “Islamists” to describe Al Qaeda.

The same is true for the term “jihad.” There has long been a debate about the use of the term jihad, with Muslim Brotherhood organizations such as CAIR particularly objecting to its use to describe violent warfare or terrorism.

The Muslim Brotherhood in America aims to convince Americans that Jihad only means “to struggle” or, more specifically, an internal, personal struggle.

This is only partially correct and any campaign that claims that the term Jihad only means an internal, personal struggle amounts to disinformation. The dualistic nature of Islam, in this case as it applies to the meaning of “Jihad,” is well documented both in historical Islamic doctrine and in contemporary use of the term.

And Jihad definitely does not only mean an internal, personal struggle. In fact, the most widespread meaning of the term that is of particular interest to Westerners who are threatened by Jihad does in fact entail violence.

A false and misleading statement has been attributed to the San Francisco chapter head of CAIR, Zahra Billoo:

“A common misconception of the word jihad is that it means armed struggle or holy war, and that is something that has been perpetrated by many who’ve made careers out of pushing anti-Muslim sentiment.”

Such a meaning for Jihad has nothing to do with anyone with an “anti-Muslim sentiment.” It has everything to do with Islam itself.

Let us examine definitions of Jihad from two authoritative sources.

Jihad According to the Quran

The first is the Quran itself. In this case, specifically The Noble Qu’ran, translated into English by two scholars: Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali, PhD, professor of Islamic Faith and Teachings at the Islamic University, Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah, Saudi Arabia and Dr. Muhammad Mushin Khan of the same institution. The Noble Qu’ran was published by Darussalam Publishers and Distributors, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It has been catalogued by King Fahad National Library. On page 818, in a glossary accompanying the text of the Quran, The Noble Qu’ran provides the following definition of Jihad:

 

Jihad: Holy fighting in the Cause of Allah or any other kind of effort to make Allah’s Word superior. Jihad is regarded as one of the fundamentals of Islam”


Can the Quran itself be promoting “anti-Muslim sentiment” as CAIR’s Zahra Billoo asserts?


Jihad According to Shariah

Our second source is Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law.

Reliance of the Traveler is one of the world’s most widely read manuals of Shariah law. It has been endorsed by a variety of Islamic authorities, including Al Azhar University in Cairo, IIIT (International Institute of Islamic Thought) in Herndon, Virginia, the Fiqh Council of North America, the Islamic Fiqh Academy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the Mufti of the Jordanian Armed Forces and the Imam of the Mosque of Darwish Pasha in Damascus, Syria.

These can hardly be termed as those pushing “anti-Muslim sentiment” as Billoo claims.

On page 599 of Reliance of the Traveler, readers can find the following passage:

 

o9.0 JIHAD

(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion…

The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:

(1) “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);
(2) “Slay them wherever you find them” (Koran 4:89);
(3) “Fight the idolators utterly” (Koran 9:36);

and such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

“I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah”;

and the hadith reported by Muslim,

“To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”

 

Jihad According to Terrorists

If Jihad truly means to “struggle” and not warfare to establish the religion, how does CAIR explain the names of all these terrorist organizations?

Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami (Pakistan, Bangladesh, India)
Islamic Front for Armed Jihad (Algeria)
Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine (Lebanon)
Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine (Israel)
Islamic Jihad Organization (Lebanon)
Islamic Jihad Union (Uzbekistan)
Jama’at al-Jihad al-Islami (Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Russia)
Laskar Jihad (Indonesia)
United Jihad Council (India)

So, it is completely appropriate for the 9/11 museum to use the term “jihadist” and “jihad” to describe Al Qaeda terrorists and their activity.

Conclusion

We suspect that the sensitivity expressed with regard to the 9/11 museum goes way beyond the use of the terms “Islamist” and “jihad.”

The fact is, our country has never truly come to terms with the role that Islam plays in Jihadist terrorism.

It would be great if there was truly no connection whatsoever between Islam and Jihad. But the reality is Jihad is a tenet of Islam.

As previously stated, in warfare the enemy’s reality becomes your reality. It makes no difference what Americans think about the stated motivations and doctrine behind the actions of Al Qaeda. The only thing that truly matters is what the leaders and members of Al Qaeda think about why they wage warfare.

The fact of the matter is, Al Qaeda justify their actions by invoking Islam and Allah:

 

In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate,

The General Command of the al-Qaeda Organization Statement on the Succession of Sheikh Osama Bin Laden in the al-Qaeda Organization’s Command

With hearts that are satisfied with Allah’s ordainment, and assured of Almighty Allah’s promise and His good reward, the Islamic umma, the mujahideen in the al-Qaeda Organization, and in other groups received the news of the martyrdom of the reviver imam, the jihadist immigrant Sheikh Osama Bin-Muhammad Bin Laden, may Allah rest his soul in peace. We pray to the Almighty Allah to raise his rank and to reward him, on behalf of us and the Muslim umma, with the best of rewards.

Since jihad is continuing until the Day of Resurrection … the General Command of the al-Qaeda Organization announces, after completion of consultations, that Sheikh Dr Abu-Muhammad Ayman al-Zawahiri, may Allah guide him to success, has taken over command of the group…

 

Statement from Al Qaeda
Announcing Zawahiri as the
New leader of Al Qaeda after
Osama Bin Laden’s death

 

All these sins and crimes committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on Allah, his messenger and Muslims.

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies – civilians and military – is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in every country in which it is possible to do it…

We, with Allah’s help, call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah’s order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it.

 

Ayman al-Zawahiri
Leader of Al Qaeda

 

It would be a tragic mistake if the 9/11 museum was to erase the role that their Islamic faith played in the leadership and membership of Al Qaeda’s horrific actions on September 11th, 2001.

____________________________

ACT for America Content, LLC. All Rights Reserved

 

ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.