The American Presidency going from bad to bad, or worse

It is very frustrating watching the most powerful man on earth use that power to advance Islam.

It seems to me that even the most uninformed Christian would refuse to equate The Religion of Death with his Christ. How much sense must one possess to know: Don't aid Muslims killing non-Muslims and stealing their land?

(At this point, Power-At-All-Costs-Republicans, Hugh Hewitt, liberals, and everyone else with their heads in . . . the sand should recall that in President Bush's second inaugural address he referenced the words of "the Ten Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, and the Qur'an.")

Unfortunately, the Three Replacements remaining in our current presidential race look to be no better in telling the truth about Allah's War Against Humanity.

At best, we will end up with GWB 2.0, a man who can't help but add at least three modifiers to the words "Islam" and "jihad" when uttering them. (Okay, using "jihad," even with modifiers, is an improvement.)

At worst, we'll get either a nominally-Christian liberal (whose church is led by a supporter of racism) with an Islamic education and devout Muslim family members and strong-man allies (who ally themselves with jihad), or a godless liberal with the Muslim daughter of a Saudi imam acting as her closest aide (and paramour, if the reports are true).

Dark days are coming.

First Afghanistan, then Iraq, and now Kosovo

Is Israel next?

At least Afghanistan was previously in the hands of the Taliban, so Allah gains little there.

But in the others? President Bush has used American Blood and Treasure to establish Sharia in Iraq, he has rewarded jihad in Kosovo by having our government recognize it as an independent state, and he continues to pressure Israel to commit suicide.

If the United States is truly a "government of the people, by the people, and for the people," then I want to make it clear that this part of the American government condemns vehemently his treachery.

What do you call a "Christian" who aids Allah?

I've given the President the benefit of the doubt for many years now, but how can an uninterrupted chain of betrayals of Liberty in the cause of jihad continue to be explained away as the by-product of his ignorance of Islam?

It begins now to look like dhimmitude, bribery, or perversion.

Telling the truth about our nation's enemy in a time of war -- in this case, Islam -- is his job as Commander-in-Chief.

Telling the truth about the latest phase in the nearly 1400-year-old jihad that Allah has waged against humanity is what our President, Congress, clergy, universities, and media (especially the "Conservative" pundits) ought to be doing.

Unfortunately, all of them are groveling in the muck at Mohammed's feet.

It's not even a matter of indifference. They actually obfuscate for Islam.

This week, Hugh Hewitt and a guest were patting themselves on the back for their vast knowledge of "Islamofascism," proud that they knew that the "extremist Islamist jihadists" had been warring with us not since 9/11, but since 1979.

And now, President Bush has established another Muslim state, this time in Europe.

Bill Clinton bombed Christians to aid the mujahideen against Serbia, and George W. Bush is finishing what his predecessor began. Under the UN's protective gaze, Muslims have burned churches, destroyed property, and brutalized, raped, and slaughtered Christians in the name of Allah.

I imagine the President will want now to finance with our tax dollars the KLA. (Instead, he ought to use some of that Saudi money he and his father have received over the years to do it.)

What's next? Will he bomb Israel to help Hamas?

Apart from Geert Wilders, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Diana West, and Sue Myrick, can you think of any leaders in the West telling the truth about the Most Hateful Ideology the World Has Ever Seen?

Abraham never did what Mohammed preached and practiced

From here, in response to an Islamic lie commonly repeated by ignorant dhimmis:

As a post-Vatican II Catholic myself, I share the ecumenical beliefs of most modern Christians. One of these is that Islam, being one of the three "Abrahamic" religions, has a great deal in common with Christianity, and that these common roots should be cultivated. It contains truth, and wisdom, and has built civilisations.

Islam shares nothing in common with Christianity.

That Mohammed transmitted (or fabricated) perversions of Biblical characters and events does not make Islam a continuation, completion, or correction of Christianity.

Neither can Islam be called an "Abrahamic" faith. When combating the heresy and apostasy of His own day, Christ told an unbelieving audience that if they were truly children of Abraham, they would do what Abraham did. Abraham never did what Mohammed preached and practiced. The prophet from Hell made the most vile and barbaric violations of the Ten Commandments "divine."

The words and actions of Mohammed prove clearly that Allah is no Christ. For example, Jesus said, "Love your enemies," but according to Mohammed, Allah commands, "kill the unbelievers wherever you find them . . . ." Jesus said that He is the Son of God, but Mohammed taught that whoever says Allah has a son blasphemes. Third, Jesus warned that whoever causes a little child to sin would be better off if a large stone were tied around his neck and he were thrown into the depths of the sea, but Mohammed said of his raping little nine-year-old Aisha, "If this is from Allah, then it must happen."

Mohammed may have received revelations from a "deity" (even the grotesquely self-serving ones), but there is no way that his god was the Biblical One.

Another light in the dark struggle against the malevolence of Allah

While the Archbishop of Capitulation shills still for the Religion of Death, another bishop refuses to bend the knee.

We need more leaders with the sense and courage to tell the truth about Islam. Michael Nazir-Ali is the Bishop of Rochester. According to this article, he's received much criticism (and veiled threats to himself and the non-Muslim public) for refusing to genuflect to the Prophet from Hell.

Imagine that! Someone has the nerve to admit publicly that "people of a different race or faith face physical attack if they live or work in communities dominated by a strict Muslim ideology."

But doesn't "Islam" mean "peace"?

No, it means "submission," just as Mahomet professed:

"the Messenger of Allah . . . would say: 'Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war. . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them . . .'" (Muslim Book 19, Number 4294).

"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).

"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).

Nazir-Ali lays the blame where it belongs for allowing a formerly-Christian land to sink so far into the Islamic Abyss -- multiculturalism and faithless clergy:

Bishop Nazir-Ali, who was born in Pakistan, gives warning that attempts are being made to give Britain an increasingly Islamic character by introducing the call to prayer and wider use of sharia law, a legal system based on the Koran.

In an attack on the Government's response to immigration and the influx of "people of other faiths to these shores", he blames its "novel philosophy of multiculturalism" for allowing society to become deeply divided, and accuses ministers of lacking a "moral and spiritual vision".

And here's one of the veiled threats issued typically by Muslims, this from Ibrahim Mogra of the Muslim Council of Britain:

"It's irresponsible for a man of his position to make these comments."

Where are our leaders?

Apart from a few half-hearted refusals to outright disagree with Nazir-Ali, the replies to his observations either favor submission ("Sit down and shut up!") or obfuscate by putting the blame where it doesn't belong (it's not "religions" harming Britain, it's Islam).

We the People must use our Freedoms of Speech and of the (key)Press while there is time. If we do not, we may find too late that our only option left is the exercising of our Right to Bear Arms.

Many great civilizations before us faced the bloodlust of Allah, and are no more.

Winston Churchill observed:

"Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves."

Geert Wilders and Ayaan Hirsi Ali warn the West against encroaching Islam

What major political leaders in the West have the sense and courage to confront the bloodlust of Allah? Certainly not President Bush.

Here is Geert Wilders with a proper warning against encroaching jihad and what motivates it, in two parts.

Notice the interviewer's suggestion for dealing with the unsurprising death threats coming from Muslims -- sacrifice your freedom of speech:

And here's the first part of Submission, the film written by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, for which Theo van Gogh was butchered by Allah (some images unsuitable for children):