Friday, September 29, 2006

+ Word of the Day +

From Life Of The World:
At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, "Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, and said, "Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.

"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offense comes! If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life lame or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into the everlasting fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire.

"Take heed that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that in heaven their angels always see the face of My Father who is in heaven. For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost" (Matthew 18:1-11).

Islam isn't violent...except in Nigeria

Fulfilling their god's commands and emulating their false prophet, Muslim youths destroy 10 churches over a comment:
...A mob of Muslim youths injured six Christians – one critically – and set fire to 10 churches last week in Dutse, capital of Jigawa state in northern Nigeria.

The attacks on September 19 and 20 were sparked by allegations that a Christian woman had blasphemed the Muslim prophet Muhammad.

Angered Muslims demanded that the woman, identified only as a tailor named Jummai, be stoned to death for her comments.

“Muslims believed that the Christian woman would not be stoned to death, and that is why they decided to vent their anger on Christians and their churches,” Malam Isa Hussani told Compass.

Rumors spread rapidly, and after a few skirmishes on the evening of the dispute, a rampage broke out the following morning against the churches, homes and businesses of local Christians.

Hundreds of Muslims assembled on September 20 at 10 a.m. at Dutse’s Central Mosque, with another group congregating at the district Muslim leader’s residence. Christian leaders said the mobs were addressed by the Emir (Muslim leader) of Dutse, Dr. Nuhu Muhammadu Sanusi, his defense minister, and Jiwaga State Governor Ibrahim Saminu Turaki.

According to the South Korean online “OhmyNews” website, all three officials as well as State Police Commissioner Abubakar Sardauna were trying to “keep the protest from getting out of hand,” but failed when police fired teargas into the crowd, enraging the protestors and sending them on a rampage. Sardauna declined to speak to Compass about the incident.

The Rev. Joseph Hayab, secretary of the North-Western Nigerian chapter of the Christian Association of Nigeria, confirmed that 10 churches were torched in the attack, although a police spokesman told Reuters that a total of 11 churches had been burned.

...Hussani, one of the Dutse Muslims protesting against the woman, said that Jummai’s argument with an unidentified Muslim man on September 19 had started over controversial statements about Islam attributed to Pope Benedict XVI the previous week.

But persons who witnessed the verbal dispute stated that Jummai was reacting to a blasphemous remark against Jesus Christ made by the Muslim man.

“Such a minor incident between a Muslim man and a Christian woman should not have led to the destruction of churches,” Hayab told Compass. “This is a heinous crime in the name of religion.”

According to sources in the Anglican congregation, which lost St. Peter’s Anglican Cathedral in the attack, the Anglican bishop’s residence was also partially destroyed, forcing BishopYusufu Lumu to seek shelter with his wife and children at a local police station.

In addition, an Assemblies of God church, the Living Faith Church and three Evangelical Church of West Africa churches were confirmed among those demolished.

At least 20 Christian homes were also looted and destroyed during the rampage, along with 40 shops belonging to Christian traders. More than 1,000 local Christians who were displaced during the attack fled to the police barracks and schools to escape from the mob.

The Jigawa state government imposed an 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew after the violent attacks.

On September 22, the federal government sent armored tanks and truckloads of armed soldiers and anti-riot police into Dutse to patrol the town during Friday Muslim prayers.

Police reported that six Christians injured in the attacks received treatment at Dutse General Hospital. One victim is in critical condition, with local doctors saying they lack adequate facilities to treat his injuries.

Another Christian identified only as Mr. Friday, a security officer for the governor, was slashed across his face with a machete before being rescued from the mob by police.

...Police authorities in Dutse have detained Jummai for questioning on the incident. There was no confirmation whether the Muslim who had argued with her was also in custody, although police spokesman Nwakalor Ejike confirmed on September 22 that more than 20 people had been arrested over the incident.

Ejike, a police public relations officer, attributed the riots to “a little misunderstanding,” which he said the police were working to contain.

An estimated 80 percent of Dutse’s population are Muslim. In a previous outbreak of violence in the town nearly two years ago, heavily armed Muslim militants attacked Christian evangelists during an open-air preaching event.

Alhaji Muhammadu Maccido, the Sultan of Sokoto and spiritual head of Nigeria’s Muslims, declared after last week’s attacks that religion should not be used as a tool of violence. “No religion will support violence, harassment, victimization and all vices, let alone murdering of innocent people,” Maccido told Nigeria’s The Guardian.

Jigawa state is one of 12 northern Nigerian states that have imposed Islamic law in the past six years. Repeated outbreaks of religious violence have erupted ever since, claiming thousands of lives. In a similar incident in Jigawa state’s Kazaure town in November 2003, Muslim militants burned 10 churches and destroyed 100 Christian properties.

"Innocent"? Muslims keep using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means.

Thursday, September 28, 2006

Will they so easily dismiss the Pentagon?

President Bush edged toward the truth with "Islamofascism" before backtracking. It appears the Pope has (mostly) retreated from Palaeologus's accurate assessment of Mohammed's heresy.

But what will the liars and the stubbornly ignorant say now?

As many who have examined the Religion of Death's "holy" texts and history with their own eyes attest, it is the will of Allah and his false prophet as revealed in Qur'an and Sunnah that provides the source and sustenance of Islam's fighting against, subduing and humiliating, and killing non-Muslims and Apostates to make the world Islam.

Though it is too late for those whose life and limb have been wasted in an attempt to "win the hearts and minds" of millions of Fausts, it is not too late for the rest of us. Individuals in the United States government appear to be realizing that Suicide bombers follow Quran:
With suicide bombings spreading from Iraq to Afghanistan, the Pentagon has tasked intelligence analysts to pinpoint what's driving Muslim after Muslim to do the unthinkable.

Their preliminary finding is politically explosive: it's their "holy book" the Quran after all, according to intelligence briefings obtained by WND.

In public, the U.S. government has made an effort to avoid linking the terrorist threat to Islam and the Quran while dismissing suicide terrorists as crazed heretics who pervert Islamic teachings.

"The terrorists distort the idea of jihad into a call for violence and murder," the White House maintains in its recently released "National Strategy for Combating Terrorism" report.

But internal Pentagon briefings show intelligence analysts have reached a wholly different conclusion after studying Islamic scripture and the backgrounds of suicide terrorists. They've found that most Muslim suicide bombers are in fact students of the Quran who are motivated by its violent commands – making them, as strange as it sounds to the West, "rational actors" on the Islamic stage.

In Islam, it is not how one lives one's life that guarantees spiritual salvation, but how one dies, according to the briefings. There are great advantages to becoming a martyr. Dying while fighting the infidels in the cause of Allah reserves a special place and honor in Paradise. And it earns special favor with Allah.

"Suicide in defense of Islam is permitted, and the Islamic suicide bomber is, in the main, a rational actor," concludes a recent Pentagon briefing paper titled, "Motivations of Muslim Suicide Bombers."

..."His actions provide a win-win scenario for himself, his family, his faith and his God," the document explains. "The bomber secures salvation and the pleasures of Paradise. He earns a degree of financial security and a place for his family in Paradise. He defends his faith and takes his place in a long line of martyrs to be memorialized as a valorous fighter.

"And finally, because of the manner of his death, he is assured that he will find favor with Allah," the briefing adds. "Against these considerations, the selfless sacrifice by the individual Muslim to destroy Islam's enemies becomes a suitable, feasible and acceptable course of action."

The briefing – produced by a little-known Pentagon intelligence unit called the Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA – cites a number of passages from the Quran dealing with jihad, or "holy" warfare, martyrdom and Paradise, where "beautiful mansions" and "maidens" await martyr heroes. In preparation for attacks, suicide terrorists typically recite passages from six surahs, or chapters, of the Quran: Baqura (Surah 2), Al Imran (3), Anfal (8), Tawba (9), Rahman (55) and Asr (103).

CIFA staffs hundreds of investigators and analysts to help coordinate Pentagon security efforts at U.S. military installations at home and abroad.

The Pentagon unit is especially concerned about a new wave of suicide bombings hitting Afghanistan.

Suicide bombings have killed more than 200 people in Afghanistan this year, up from single digits two years ago. On Tuesday, a suicide bomber detonated his explosive vest and killed 18 outside an Afghan government compound. Last week, a suicide bomber riding a bike killed at least four NATO soldiers. And earlier this month, a suicide car bomber rammed into a U.S. military convoy near the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, killing 16 people, including two American soldiers.

...The U.S. command in Afghanistan now warns that a suicide bombing cell is operating inside the Afghan capital. Meanwhile, the Taliban's top military commander told ABC News he has 500 suicide bombers at his disposal.

"We have so many of them that it is difficult to accommodate and arm and equip them," Mullah Dadullah Akhund said. "Some of them have been waiting for a year or more for their turn to be sent to the battlefield."

The emergence of a suicide cell in Kabul troubles military analysts because suicide attacks are the most effective weapon Muslim terrorists can use against the West. The Rand Corp. predicts they'll pose a serious and constant threat to the U.S. for years to come.

The U.S. intelligence community is growing increasingly worried, as well.

"Most jihadist groups will use suicide attacks focused primarily on soft targets to implement asymmetric warfare strategy," warns the just-declassified executive summary of the National Intelligence Estimate on the global terror threat. "Fighters with experience in Iraq are a potential source of leadership for jihadists pursuing these tactics."

Many scholars and media pundits, however, insist Muslim suicide bombers are not driven by religion.

"Beneath the religious rhetoric with which [such terror] is perpetrated, it occurs largely in the service of secular aims," claims Professor Robert A. Pape of the University of Chicago. "Suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation rather than a product of Islamic fundamentalism."

He says U.S. foreign policy is more a factor than faith.

"Though it speaks of Americans as infidels, al-Qaida is less concerned with converting us to Islam than removing us from Arab and Muslim lands," Pape said.

But what about the recent video by Adam Gadahn, the American al-Qaida, warning fellow Americans to convert to Islam before al-Qaida attacks again?

"He never mentions virgins or the benefits Islamic martyrs receive in Heaven," Pape asserted.

In fact, Gadahn notes 36 minutes into his speech that Allah reserves the highest rewards – "honors and delights" – for martyrs in Paradise.

"[He] promised the martyr in his path the reward over and above the reward of the believer," Gadahn said. "He has promised them honors and delights too numerous to go into here."

The 9/11 hijackers and the London bombers made martyrdom videos. In their last testaments, they recite the Quran while talking of their "love of death" and "sacrificing life for Allah." Seven martyrdom videotapes also were recovered by British authorities in the foiled transatlantic sky terror plot.

Before the 9/11 attacks, the hijackers shaved and doused themselves with flower water in preparation for their weddings with the beautiful virgins in Paradise. "Know that the women of Paradise are waiting, calling out 'Come hither, friend of Allah,'" according to a four-page letter circulated among them titled "THE LAST NIGHT." "They have dressed in their most beautiful clothing."

But are the virgins scriptural or apocryphal? French documentarian Pierre Rehov, who interviewed the families of suicide bombers and would-be bombers in an attempt to find out why they do it, says it's not a myth or fantasy of heretics.

He says there's no doubt the Quran "promises virgins" to Muslim men who die while fighting infidels in jihad, and it's a key motivating factor behind suicide terrorism.

"It's obviously connected to religion," said Rehov, who features his interviews with Muslims in a recently released film, "Suicide Killers." "They really believe they are going to get the virgins."

He says would-be Muslim suicide bombers he's interviewed have shown him passages in the Quran "in which it's absolutely written that they're going to get the girls in the afterlife."

Muslim clerics do not disavow the virgins-for-martyrs reward as a perverted interpretation of the Quran.

And even Muslim leaders in the West condone suicide bombings. British scholar Azzam Tamimi recently told 8,000 Muslims in Manchester, England, that dying while fighting "George Bush and Tony Blair" is "just" and "the greatest act of martyrdom." Earlier, he said it's "the straight way to pleasing Allah."

And the founder of an allegedly mainstream Muslim group in Washington – the Council on American-Islamic Relations – also has given his blessing to suicide bombings.

Addressing a youth session at the 1999 Islamic Association for Palestine's annual convention in Chicago, CAIR founder Omar Ahmad praised suicide bombers who "kill themselves for Islam," according to a transcript provided by terror expert Steve Emerson's Investigative Project.

"Fighting for freedom, fighting for Islam, that is not suicide," Ahmad asserted. "They kill themselves for Islam."

Osama bin Laden has encouraged "Muslims brothers" to defeat the U.S. and U.K. with suicide attacks.

"I tell you to act upon the orders of Allah," he said in 2003, "be united against Bush and Blair and defeat them through suicide attacks so that you may be successful before Allah."

Sunday, September 24, 2006

Islam's wounds and other ironies

Is it possible for the West to grovel any more shamelessly at the feet of the Religion of Death?

In a disgusting inversion of truth, a television news report today expressed concern over whether "Islam's wounds would be healed."

They were talking about Muslim rage over Pope Benedict's citing a Byzantine emperor's demonstrably true statement that Mohammed espoused the use of violence in spreading his religion. (For an irony within an irony: Emperor Palaeologus's city, Constantinople, was besieged by Islam during his reign, finally falling to the Religion of Peace within just a few decades of making the infamous remark. I guess he knew what he was talking about!)

Rather than patronize those whose feelings are hurt by the truth, Western media should be talking about the actual, irreparable wounds caused by fourteen hundred years of fighting against, subduing and humiliating, and killing non-Muslims to establish the reign of Allah and his false prophet.

It is not "Islam's wounds," but Islam wounds (humanity).

On a related note: The federal government can ban spinach within hours over three deaths, but it does nothing except apologize for Islam which has raped, enslaved, and slaughtered millions upon millions.

A tangential hypocrisy: Liberals ignore or deny the stifling effect of taxes on human behavior until they want to use your vote to control others. In this case, they argue that raising taxes on cigarettes will reduce smoking.

That they would be so honest in their other tax-induced suffocations of human creativity and industry.

Saturday, September 23, 2006

Baseless conspiracy theories only weaken our defenses

Whether that consequence is intended or not. Doesn't he realize we're at war with an ancient and merciless foe?

Unfortunately, his willingness to attack the single person most responsible for America's defense is characteristic of too many in the West.

From here:
New evidence of deliberate White House cover-ups
...looks a lot like evidence of a detachment from reality.
The recordings from the planes that supposedly hit the WTC have the last words of the hijackers as being "Allah ahkbar" or "God is great". But a Muslim wouldn't say that if he knew he were about to die. Instead he'd recite a blessing stating that Allah is God and Mohammed is his prophet.
Obviously, you know all about Muslims who are about to die. What about when they kill?

That phrase is often uttered when slaughtering Infidels.
Scientists and chemists who have analyzed the metal pools left behind at Ground Zero doubt a plane hit the building....
Despite millions of eyewitnesses to the second plane's impact.

As for the collapse, how likely is it that "untrained" Muslim terrorists would be able to fly the planes into exactly the locations where the explosives had been set ahead of time? For it is clear from the footage of the attack that the Towers collapsed exactly where the planes hit them.
I simply reiterated what other more prominent and educated people than myself have determined.
An appeal to authority rather than evidence...interesting.

OBL has admitted to his organization's planning and carrying out 9/11; for your intellectually-irresponsible "simple reiterations" to be true, President Bush would have to have been at least cooperating with him. Reason would dictate that Osama would have brought up that fact sometime during the last five years of his people being killled by American and other Coalition forces.

We need clarity if we are to prevail in Allah's War Against Humanity

From here:
'Wacko Christians vs. Wacko Islamists = Bush Republicans'
This demonstrates an embarrassing (and suicidal) lack of intellectual and moral clarity.

One group devoutly believes in a God Who commands: "Love your enemies," and "Love your neighbor as yourself."

The other devoutly believes in a god that requires: "Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them," and "I [Mohammed] have been ordered to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle."

Thursday, September 21, 2006

Misapplying "Essential Liberty"

Did America's revolutionaries do any sort of monitoring of the enemies' communications during the War? Did they seek to discover those within the Colonies who were helping the Crown? Is it prudent, during a time of war, to know what your enemy is planning and their contacts within the nation's borders?

Benjamin Franklin on Liberty:
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
This statement of defiance in the cause of Freedom has lately been misused by some in the context of the United States government's surveillance of terrorists and their accomplices within the country. On the surface it may seem applicable; upon closer inspection, it clearly is not analogous.

When Franklin and other patriots stated this simple but profound truth, they were facing a mortal threat from England: Stand down and submit, or else. The trade-off here for Americans was that if they were to avoid martial conflict with the Crown, they were going to have to sacrifice their God-given Liberty and their dignity as men. The temptation to acquiese to England's tyranny in an effort to avoid harm to their bodies and property must have been great.

Today, the aforementioned quotation is used not to encourage Americans to fight against the murderous Tyranny of Allah, which has maimed and killed thousands of Americans in its effort to subdue and humiliate us in accord with Islam's "sacred" texts (indeed, "Islam" means "submission" not "peace"). It is not used to ignite patriots' love of Liberty against those who would subject us to the vile state of abject abasement and humiliation called dhimmitude. Neither is it used to inspire courage against those who would take and use our sons, daughters, wives, and lives to gratify their "divinely-sanctioned" sadistic and imperialistic predilections.

Instead, this indictment of those who love safety more than Freedom is misapplied to a government seeking to identify those who would kill us (and worse) in the name of their false god and prophet.

The West is now in the latest phase of Allah's one and one-half millennia-old War Against Humanity; it needs to make every effort to defend itself, and that includes using every technological advantage at its disposal to discover and monitor the jihadists and their accomplices. The intellectually lazy and morally bankrupt should not handicap our struggle by taking the Founders' comments out of context.

Those who have nothing to hide have nothing to fear.

We must defend our Lives, Liberty, and sacred honor against the malevolent, tyrannical evil seeking to them in the name of Allah. Anything less is cowardice. We are better than that, and we have much that is worth defending.

Monday, September 18, 2006

Only the ignorant, the liar, and the coward

Where is the moderate Muslim?

Why does the papal citation of a Byzantine emperor's empirically-true statement result in murder, fire bombings, and death threats around the Muslim world, but Islamic "extremists" like bin Laden are considered heroes of the faith?

Why do the West's political and media elites bend over (not backwards) to offer the "Islam is a religion of peace hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists" lie despite all scriptural and historical evidence to the contrary?

Emperor Palaeologus's accurate observation was made while his Great City was under siege by Mohammed's minions. Islam's bloody rage in reaction to it is one more proof that only the ignorant, the liar, and the coward can utter phrases like, "Islamism has nothing to do with Islam."

The New Mecca Times continues the fight for Islam

It used to seem that the Times were just such God-hating, anti-American leftists that they couldn't help but try to hurt politically a socially-conservative, Christian, Republican president.

The Times revealed our surveillance of terrorists' calls into the United States. It exposed our monitoring of the banking transactions of our enemy. Now the Times has denounced the Pope for quoting a factually-true statement on Allah's mandate for violence against non-Muslims, made by an emperor whose Great City was about to fall to Islam.

The Times has gone so far past typical liberal sabotage and unwittingly treasonous behavior that it almost appears to be actively and intentionally serving the Jihad against the West. Even if it isn't intentional, the effect is the same: Say what you want of Christians. Do what you want to Jews. But never, ever, under any circumstances say anything less than complimentary about the Religion of Peace, even if it's true.

I thought the New York Times liked exposing impropriety. Why does it not demonstrate some of the intellectual vigor and moral clarity of which it is undoubtedly so proud by exposing the base doctrine of Mahomet and the blood-soaked history of his followers? Why does it not denounce and call for apologies from those who fight against, subdue and humiliate, and kill Infidels and Apostates to make the world Islam (and those who support them), just as their god and false prophet require?

Cowards. And it's not just the Times.

From here:
The New York Times on Saturday joined other newspapers that have denounced latest remarks by Pope Benedict XVI and demanded an immediate apology from him.

In an editorial published Saturday, the Times called Pope's remarks about Islam as 'tragic and dangerous' and urged him to apologize.

...The Times recalled that this was 'not the first time the pope has fomented discord between Christians and Muslims.'

In 2004 when he was still the Vatican's top theologian, he spoke out against Turkeys joining the European Union, because Turkey, as a Muslim country was in permanent contrast to Europe, the paper recalled.

At the recent comments, Turkey's ruling party likened the pope to Hitler and Mussolini and accused him of reviving the mentality of the Crusades.

"A doctrinal conservative, his greatest fear appears to be the loss of a uniform Catholic identity, not exactly the best jumping-off point for tolerance or interfaith dialogue," the editorial said.

"The world listens carefully to the words of any Pope," The Times continued. "And it is tragic and dangerous when one sows pain, either deliberately or carelessly. He needs to offer a deep and persuasive apology, demonstrating that words can also heal."
Exactly how will lying about the malevolence of Allah heal Infidel wounds?

If the Pope doesn't give us a better apology for saying we're violent, we'll become...violent!

As long as groups like Hamas do not consider the Pope's statement an apology, there is hope. Once they're satisfied, this will just have been another instance of a Western leader's vile submission to the most successful thug in history.

From here:
Pope Benedict said on Sunday he was deeply sorry Muslims had been offended by his use of a medieval quotation on Islam and violence, but failed to quell the fury of some Islamic groups demanding a full apology.
Good.

The head of the world's 1.1 billion Roman Catholics, whose comments on Tuesday sparked worldwide Muslim anger because they were seen as portraying Islam as a religion tainted by violence, said the quotation did not represent his personal views.

"In Hamas we do not view the statement attributed to the Pope as an apology," said Sami Abu Zuhri, spokesman for the militant group which controls the Palestinian government.

Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, the main opposition force, initially said the Pope made a "sufficient apology". But deputy leader Mohammed Habib said later: "It does not rise to the level of a clear apology and ... we're calling on the Pope to issue a clear apology that will decisively end any confusion."

It will be a tragedy if he does.

By the way, has anyone noticed that the two groups here unsatisfied with the Pope's cited a Byzantine emperor are terrorists?
Before the Pope spoke and mollified some Muslims, there were attacks on churches in the West Bank and a protest in Iran. In Somalia, an Italian nun was killed in an attack one Islamist source said could be linked to the dispute.
But I thought Islam was "untainted by violence."
"I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address at the University of Regensburg, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims," the Pope told pilgrims at his Castelgandolfo summer residence.
That's a good non-apology.
"These in fact were a quotation from a medieval text, which do not in any way express my personal thought," he said at his weekly Angelus prayer.
Leaving out the words "in any way," would go a long way to confirming the Pope's courage and intellectual honesty. In fact, he ought to come out with a much more explicit statement. Something like that posted here or here.
"The heads of Muslim countries had expressed dismay at what they saw as an offensive comment and religious leaders had called it the start of a new Christian crusade against Islam.
Considering that the first Crusade began as a response to a desperate call for help from Eastern Christendom suffering at the hands of Allah and his false prophet, a new Crusade is entirely appropriate, about eight hundred years too late, five years too late, and too much to hope for from today's flaccid Western "leaders."
Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi hoped the death of a nun working at a Mogadishu children's hospital was 'an isolated event'. The nun's order said there was no evidence to suspect it was related to the Pope's speech last Tuesday.
Where I come from, nuns are shot all the time.

Didn't the article just note above that an "Islamist" source attributes the nun's murder to Muslim anger over the citation?
In the speech, the Pope, a former theology professor and enforcer of Vatican dogma, referred to criticism of the Prophet Mohammad by 14th century Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus.

The emperor said everything the Prophet Mohammad brought was evil 'such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached'.
That's not what he said. The emperor said that Mohammed brought nothing "new" except that which was evil and inhuman. That's a fact.
...But angry Muslim leaders flung what they saw as allegations of violence back at the West, referring to the medieval crusades against Islam and to the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which have fanned the flames of Muslim resentment.
Both the Crusades and our Global War of Self-Defense Against Islam are instances of Infidels fighting back against the jihadist onslaught, so basically, Islam resents its victims defending themselves against it. That's typical of Islam's moral clarity and intellectual honesty.
In Iran, about 500 theological school students protested in the holy city of Qom and hardline cleric Ahmad Khatami said that if the Pope did not apologize, 'Muslims' outcry will continue until he fully regrets his remarks'.
One al Qaeda umbrella group in Iraq, the Mujahideen Shura Council, threatened in an unauthenticated Internet statement to 'break the cross and spill the wine' in revenge, referring to Christian symbols and sacraments."
That certainly sounds like a religion of peace to me!

Let's hope Turkey's State Minister Mehmet Aydin, who said that the Pope seemed to be saying he was sorry for Muslim rage but not his actual comments, is correct.

Speaking of Turkey, has anyone in the media noted that within only a few decades, Palaeologus's comments on Islam were finally and brutally proven true with the fall of Constantinople?

Saturday, September 16, 2006

Now what will Western dhimmis do?

For here is a voice that can not be so easily dismissed by deceitful apologists for Jihad and their (sometimes) unwitting dhimmi accomplices in government and the media.

Immediately after 9/11, President Bush defended Islam as a "great" world religion of "peace" and "tolerance." He visited an outpost of that murderous ideology, showing the proper dhimmi submission to Islam just hours after its adherents had slaughtered with zeal thousands of his countrymen. The President religiously refrained from using the terms "Islam" and "terrorism" in the same time zone.

Since then, President Bush has been growing in his realization of the breadth and depth of the Islamic threat to the point that he is finally identifying our temporal (and mortal) enemy as "Islamofascists." By this he acknowledges their global effort to subdue the world under the tyranny of Allah.

Regrettably, five years after 9/11, the President has still to admit publicly the fact that Islam itself--as defined by Allah and his false prophet Mohammed in Qur'an and Sunnah, that religion's "sacred" texts--is the source and sustenance of Islamic terrorism and has been for nearly one and one-half millennia. The failure of our nation's leadership to comprehend this fact--combined with the media's compliance in the "Islam is a religion of peace hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists" propaganda game--prevents us from defending ourselves as fully and effectively as we must, it cripples our ability to correctly implement effective measures to contain the enemy, and it makes impossible (if it is possible) to finally end once-for-all-time the threat posed by Allah's bloody ideology.

Apparently providing the leadership the West has been wanting, Pope Benedict and Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus have made the statement of fact the West has needed to hear, needs to hear, and needs to continue hearing, until the religion of Mahomet is recognized as the vile, malevolent evil it is.

Here's from where Islam's latest excuse for its bloodlust comes:

...In the seventh conversation..., the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached".

Undoubtedly, Emperor Palaeologus was referring to those commands and statements found in the perfect word of Allah and the words and deeds of his apostle, of which the following are only a small (but representative) sampling:
"...fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)..." (Qur’an 9:5).

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29).

"Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them...And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail...faith in Allah altogether and everywhere..." (Qur'an 8:38, 39).

"Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not" (Qur'an 2:216).

"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle...'" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

“Muhammad said, ‘A single endeavor of fighting in Allah’s Cause is better than the world and whatever is in it’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 50).

“A man came to Allah’s Apostle and said, ‘Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad in reward.’ He replied, ‘I do not find such a deed’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 44).

"O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place..." (Qur'an 9:38, 39).

"Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): 'I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them'" (Qur'an 8:12).

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror. The treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter..." (Qur'an 5:33).

"Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him" (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57).

"War is deceit" (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 268).
The Emperor was right. To the degree the Pope shares his conclusions, the Pope is right. They are right because they are merely stating the expressed will of Allah and his false prophet.

May the West have the courage to face this truth and act accordingly.

What went wrong in Islam? Allah and his false prophet, of course

For long, I have been arguing that the bigoted or violent religious interpretations we see in the Islamic world are results of not the Koran, but of the post-Koranic traditions that arose in the early centuries of the Islamic civilization. In other words, I have been claiming that the original message of the Koran, which was tolerant, humane and gracious, was overshadowed over time.

Yes, what we Muslims need is to return to the spiritual trajectory established by the Prophet...We should be wise enough to denounce them and reclaim the tolerant, humane and gracious essence of Islam.

That's the urban legend repeated by many Western political, media, and academic elites.

Unfortunately for Infidels and Apostates, here is the "tolerant," "humane," and "gracious" "trajectory" established by Mohammed--and yes, modern Islamic terrorism is the result of Qur'an (and Sunnah):
"...fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)..." (Qur’an 9:5).

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29).

"Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them...And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail...faith in Allah altogether and everywhere..." (Qur'an 8:38, 39).

"O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him" (Qur'an 9:123).

"Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not" (Qur'an 2:216).

"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle...'" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

“Muhammad said, ‘A single endeavor of fighting in Allah’s Cause is better than the world and whatever is in it’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 50).

"Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons...those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward..." (Qur'an 4:95).

“A man came to Allah’s Apostle and said, ‘Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad in reward.’ He replied, ‘I do not find such a deed’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 44).

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods...they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain..." (Qur'an 9:11).

"O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place..." (Qur'an 9:38, 39).

"Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): 'I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them'" (Qur'an 8:12).

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror. The treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

"My mother came to me while I [Aisha] was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old” (Tabari 9:131).

“Allah’s Apostle told Aisha, ‘You were shown to me twice in my dreams. I beheld a man or angel carrying you in a silken cloth. He said to me, “She is yours, so uncover her.” And behold, it was you. I would then say to myself, “If this is from Allah, then it must happen”’” (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 87, Number 139-140).

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter..." (Qur'an 5:33).

"Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him" (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57).

"War is deceit" (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 268).
How can you consider one who is (according to your own "sacred" texts) a lying, thieving, malevolent, murderous pedophile someone whose example is to be emulated?

Friday, September 15, 2006

Don't say Islam is violent or we'll kill you

In response to Pope’s attack on Islam sparks anger:

Throughout Islam's "sacred" texts Allah and his false prophet Mohammed command the faithful to fight against, subdue and humiliate, and kill non-Muslims to make the world Islam.

The Pope angered Muslims not because he lied about their god or 'Ideal Man,' but because he told the truth without paying the proper dhimmi tribute to their murderous pedophile.

Thursday, September 14, 2006

There's no pretty way to say it

Dear Mohamed,

In no way do I wish to offend you. However, to placate you would require my dishonesty. Since it is only through telling the truth that you might turn from your sin and believe in the Christ, that is what I must speak.

It seems proper to point out that apparently you consider citing your god's "sacred" texts is "a block stone," "reviling," and "insult."

I do understand your position. It is dangerous to Muslims' souls and Infidels' bodies, and that is why I must speak.

There is only one option for the decent person who answers the following questions truthfully.
1. Is Qur'an the perfect word of Allah?

2. Are all Allah's commands (that have not been abrogated) in Qur'an to be obeyed by faithful Muslims?

3. Are the words and example of Mohammed to be emulated by faithful Muslims (as their resources and circumstances allow)?

4. Does Allah command the faithful Muslim to "...kill the unbelievers wherever you find them"? Does Allah require the faithful Muslim to "Fight...until all religion is for Allah"? Did Allah command faithful Muslims to "Fight...the People of the Book until they feel themselves subdued and pay the jizya"?

5. Did Mohammed say that he had been ordered to "fight until all confess there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet"?

6. Did Mohammed say that there is no work like Jihad?

7. Did Mohammed say that he had "been made victorious with terror"?

8. Did Mohammed say "If anyone changes his religion, then kill him"?

9. Did Mohammed indulge his "marital impulse" with a nine-year-old child? Did he not "marry" her when she was six? Did he not attribute this child rape to Allah by saying, "If this is from Allah, then it must happen"?

10. Have Muslims warred against humanity to make the world Islam (in accord with their resources and will) for nearly fourteen centuries?
The answer to all these is, regrettably and tragically, yes. These are unalterable facts of history, despite what deceitful apologists and gullible, ignorant infidels and apostates might say to the contrary.

No decent person can discover the will of Allah and the words and work of Mohammed as revealed in Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira and do anything other than condemn them as evil.

I hope that you will admit the truth about the vile, wicked doctrine of Mahomet, reject it, and embrace the true God Who has revealed Himself to us in His Son.

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

There's not much fun (of any kind) to be had when you take this author's advice

From Clean fun: What are you judging?!!!:
"'Prophet Mohammad came with the message of Islam which is inviting to peace, love, cooperation, kindness among all people,his message was ordering not to hurt others'"
But Allah commanded, 'Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them,' and 'Fight...until all religion is for Allah.'

And his false prophet said, 'I have been ordered to fight until all confess there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet.'
'...not to steal, drink, harlot, oppress....
How is 'Fight...the People of the Book until they feel themselves subdued and pay the jizya' not oppression?

(And shall we mention Mohammed's six-year-old 'wife,' Aisha, with whom he consummated their 'marriage' when she was nine? Or that Allah required this pedophilia?)
'...said that it's a religion of terrorism.'
But Mohammed said, 'I have been made victorious with terror.' And remember Allah's promise to strike terror into the hearts of the Infidels.
'They didn't give themselves the opportunity to read teachings of Islam,and read Qur'an,and teachings of prophet Mohammad(PBUH).'
As made obvious in my comments above, consulting Islam's 'sacred' texts doesn't help your argument, it only justifies the intuition of those ignorant, prejudiced Infidels whom you condemn.

And no, there is no 'context' that makes those passages mean anything other than what their literal interpretation indicates.
'Judging a religion...And I insist in this point;you must look at what you're judging, if you're judging Islam so look at its teachings taken from Qur'an and Sunnah...'
Again, appealing to Allah's will and Mohammed's example won't really soothe the suspicions of wary Infidels.
'but if you're going to judge deeds of Muslims so look at deeds of good Muslims same like you look at deeds of bad Muslims.
The only trouble is that when evaluated in light of the words of Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira, the 'good' Muslims are those who fight against, subdue and humiliate, and kill non-Muslims to make the world Islam.

I don't think you'll persuade (deceive?) too many Infidels with that line of reasoning.