Sins of The Fathers – Purged by Fire

5 02 2015

As the Media Trilobites once again flounder about trying to bring their version of the “news” to the viewer, the coverage of the latest big event involving the Islamic State, the media are stumbling all over themselves bringing their profuse apologetic narrative to a fever pitch, which coincides perfectly with President Obama’s narrative that “ISIS is not Islamic!!”

Via FrontPageMag.com

The execution by burning alive of Jordanian pilot Lt. Muath al-Kaseasbeh, 26, by the Islamist “Islamic State”, has been hijacked by those who would rather “use a crisis” to further their own agenda.  That young man is the same age as my own son (a USMC Sergeant), and the pilot died in the service of his King and country, fighting an enemy who will, if not stopped, take not only Syria and Iraq, but also Jordan, just as they will Saudi Arabia and the rest.  The pilot, while himself a Muslim, is considered apostate, and was fighting in the service of an Apostate King, in the eyes of the Islamic State and Caliph Al-Baghdaddi.

Apologists all over the news networks, both British and American, spent seldom mentioned this story without profusely making the point that “There is no mention in Islam for this kind of barbarity!” “This is proof that ISIS is not Islamic!”  Al Jazeera English even joined in the chorus with an editorial from a California State University professor calling ISIS a “nihilistic death cult acting in the name of Islam…”  Shoot, I’ve been calling Islam a death cult for years.

It seems that with every savage instance of Islamic Terrorism, from 911 up to every sordid beheading video that IS releases, the media is more concerned about a “potential backlash against Muslims”, than the butchery itself!  The “Backlash” that never happens!  Perhaps those Muslims who may be concerned about becoming a victim of a “backlash” might want to be more concerned about the butchers because the Caliph looks upon any Muslim who desires to integrate into Western Society and enjoy its freedoms, as one of two things: Apostate, which according to Sharia “deserves to die”, or Jahili, which is a back-slidden Muslim, and if non-repentant, also may die.

Muslim Brotherhood‘s own Seyyid Qutb writes all about this Jahili in his “Milestones“, the vanguard publication for the modern Islamic Revival, published 1965.  Qutb explains that Muslims must repent and remove themselves from that Jahiliyyah (a state of ignorance) leadership which has enticed Muslims into submitting to earthly, man-made rules and rulers, instead of submitting to Allah by means of following his laws (Sharia).  This theological doctrine is the root of everything we are witnessing in the Islamic world today.

Muslims are not to commit allegiance to a nation or state or geographic area.  (This is why there is little or no national loyalty in Islam.) Neither is a Muslim bound by any commitment or loyalty or oath to non-Muslims. Only to Allah does one claim or pledge allegiance.  Only through Islam is any relationship, contractual or filial valid.  Qutb writes,

“A Muslim has no country except that part of the earth where the Shari’a of [Allah] is established and human relationships are based on the foundation of relationship with [Allah]; a Muslim has no nationality except his belief, which makes him a member of the Muslim community in Dar ul Islam; a Muslim has no relatives except those who share the belief in [Allah]…” [p. 108, 109]

In the closing paragraphs of Milestones, Qutb conjures macabre images referring to his title:

This intricate point requires deep thought…to whatever country or period of time they belong; for this guarantees that they will be able to see the milestones of the road clearly and without ambiguity, and establishes the path for those who wish to traverse it to the end…Then they will not be anxious, while traversing this road ever paved with skulls and limbs and blood and sweat, to find help and victory…” [p. 158]

The Trilobites were finding “scholars” and “experts” wherever they could drag them out to reassure that “burning a human is not acceptable in Islam”.  They continued this for hours, expressing “how barbaric” this mode of execution is, and this is proof that ISIS is not Islamic.  Really?  Is it more barbaric than sawing a mans head off with a dull knife?!

Burning is indeed not only an accepted means of execution, it has a history in some Islamic applications.  Apostacy is an especially grievous sin against Islam, and in 1400 years there has never been an Islamic society which has not enforced the capital laws against leaving Islam for another religion, or no religion at all.  You see, Sura (Quran) 2:256, “There is no compulsion in religion…”  is abrogated by 9:29, commanding to fight non-muslims until they are subdued (dhimmi).

The Islamic State (IS, ISIS, ISIL) is ruthlessly following the model of Islamic conquest that was practiced by Abu Bakr, Muhammad’s (the prophet) top lieutenant and most trusted friend.  He gave his young 6 yr old daughter Aisha to Muhammad to wife, making him the prophet’s father-in-law, and was Muhammad’s first convert outside the family.  Immediately after Muhammad’s death in 632 AD, the tribes began to quit Islam, becoming apostates, and refusing to pay the zakat (required alms of Muslims).  Abu Bakr thus became the 1st Caliph and began a systematic military campaign that swept across the Arabian Peninsula, known as the Ridda Wars, or the Wars of Apostacy.  Within 2 years he had put down or executed those Muslims who refused to pay, even though they practiced the prayers, referring to them as apostate because they failed to practice all 5 pillars of Islam.  Therefore their blood was on their own hands.

In a letter sent out to the various apostate tribes, Abu Bakr warned that, “the Apostle of Allah…struck whoever turned his back to him until he came to Islam, willingly or grudgingly.”  And then that, Allah had called him (Abu Bakr) ” to fight those who deny Him“, and that Abu Bakr “will not spare any of them he can gain mastery over, but may burn them with fire, slaughter them by any means…take women and children…nor shall he accept from anyone anything except Islam.” Within 2 years Abu Bakr had brought the “apostate” tribes back under his rule, and had sent his generals to conquer the Sassanids (Persians) in Iraq and Persia.  This was a very speedy and overwhelming conquest in which Khalid’s light cavalry could swoop down on a city and own it before the indigent armies could respond.  The Caliph then declared Jihad against the Byzantine Christians.

Abu Bakr only ruled for a bit over 2 years and was the 1st of the “Four Rightly Guided Caliphs”, the other 3 of which led short, bloody reigns as well.  These “Four Rightly Guided Caliphs” were all personal companions of Muhammad’s, and are yet today highly revered as men who closely followed in the steps of Muhammad.

Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, via Wikipedia

It is no accident that the current Caliph took this name – Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.  This man holds a PhD in Islamic Studies from the University of Baghdad and has been supervising and enforcing the Sharia since the mid-2000’s.  He is indeed an expert on Islamic Law (Sharia).  His job as Caliph is to punish apostates and carry jihad to non-believers who refuse to embrace Islam.  If you deny this, you deny 1400 years of history.  You have to be an imbecile to refuse to make the connection of true Islamic doctrines and theology to fundamentalist Islamic militant groups such as IS.

However, we are dealing with the Trilobites; a media organism who has no knowledge or desire to investigate history beyond their last bowel movement, which is incidentally about the same consistency of what they report. Jordan’s military, just like Saudi Arabia, exists pretty much to keep the Royal Families safe.  Hardcore movements against Islamic State are not going to be part of the program for either country.  Jordan may divide shortly with a lot of internal upheaval and Saudi will be soon to follow.  The military for both of these countries are paper tigers, perhaps Jordan’s a little tougher.

Any true security or stabilization in the region is going to have to come from one of 3 sources: USA, Israel, or Russia.  President Obama isn’t interested, despite the fact that Jordan is probably the most moderate Arab country in the region, obviously the most stable and is a pretty good ally to Israel.  Obama keeps throwing up a straw man argument that it’s either continue our ineffective airstrikes or send in 300K ground troops, and that’s not an option of his.  He will give aid but no Middle Eastern leader trusts him now anyway, enough to depend on him.

Israel knows it is the ultimate target and continues to monitor the progress of IS and has attacked positions in the Golan area of Syria/Lebanon.  Saudi Arabia is depending more and more on Israel for its own security and Jordan is working with Israeli military also.

Yep, it’s gonna get pretty sporty…





Sharia is not a Threat?

21 09 2013

When Kansas debated and passed American Laws for American/Kansas Courts in 2012, one of the arguments against it was “It’s a solution looking for a problem”.  The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) used the same mantra against the Missouri Legislature this year, which narrowly failed to over-ride Governor Jay Nixon’s veto of SB267 on Wednesday according to this article at Missouri Lawyers Weekly.  (H/T Creeping Sharia)

The Kansas City, Missouri attorney Ahsan Latif has hung out his shingle specializing in Sharia Law.  Little surprise here considering that just a few miles to the West at Kansas

KU Sharia Handbook

KU Sharia Overview Workshop Handbook

University Law School there are classes that teach Sharia to aspiring young law students.  The textbook reads like you would expect; revised history and a sanitized theological discussion, soothing the non-inquisitive mind and ignorant spirit that its just “freedom of religion” and no different than Jewish Halakhah or Catholic Canon.  Of course, the sanitized Sharia version leaves out all the gory stuff like dismemberment for thieves and pow’s, execution for apostates (o8.1; “When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.”), homosexuals (p17.1 “Kill the one who sodomizes and the one who lets it be done to him.”), wine-bibbers (p14.2-1, “Scourge whoever drinks wine…if he drinks it a fourth time kill him.”) atheists (o9.0 “The Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim.”), and anyone of the Jewish or Christian persuasion who does not “submit” to the rule of Islam.  Sharia also obliges the Muslim adherent, male or female, to circumcision (e4.3), and despite Muslim claims to the contrary, there is no age limit for marriage of girls.  A high percentage in the Islamic world are given (for dowry) in marriage by their fathers under the age of 16, many before puberty, such as the recent case in Yemen resulting in the death of the 8 yr old child.  This is not uncommon in Sharia controlled states. But the sanitized version will treat this as an outlier, a regional or custom related practice, when in reality under sharia, the family determines the age.

Touted as mainly for use by Muslims for “family matters”, the sanitized version also leaves out the fact that a woman’s testimony is worth half the value of a man’s and she rates behind any male heirs who get the first shares of the estate right after the mosque,  and a rape victim is generally to blame for her plight and she could be shamed, outcast or worse.  It is not uncommon for rape victims to be beaten or stoned for adultery, fornication, and/or “honor killed”, under sharia as discussed in this article by Hasan Mahmud.

The Sharia that is taught at KU and is shown to the general public also whitewashes Jihad as the “inner struggle”, ignoring the fact that this one line is cherry picked from 8 pages of directives concerning the Jihad (Holy War, o9.0) “to war against non-Muslims…signifying warfare to establish the religion (Islam)…” and presents Hadith’s like Bukhari quoting Muhammad as saying, “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 possession from me, except for the rights of Islam over them.”  The remaining headings under “Jihad” are titled: “The Obligatory Character of Jihad”,  “Who is Obliged to Fight in Jihad”, “The Objectives of Jihad” (“The caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians…[and] fights all other people until they become Muslim.”), “The Rules of Warfare”, “Truces”, “The Spoils of Battle”. This section on “Jihad” is immediately followed by, “Non-Muslim Subjects of the Islamic State (Dhimmi)”.  Now I ask you, does that sound like that very personal, struggle within ones own self to submit to Allah and maintain one’s faith?

One other important aspect to Sharia is that it codifies lying, or “deception”, in order to advance the cause of Islam (r8.2) and stay out of trouble with one’s wife!  Aside from the obvious advantage of keeping the wife deceived, “Taqiyya” (deception) is employed especially when Muslims are outnumbered, as a minority of a host society, in order to gain the trust and deceive the host, until a majority of Muslims can use politics, education, or force to overpower it.  Sound familiar yet?  Click here for more on Sharia.

[Shaira quotes and references from: “Reliance of the Traveller, A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law”, by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, accepted by Islamic Scholars around the world as the authoritative English translation]

You see, the objective of Islam is not to be equal, just as CAIR co-Founder Omar Ahmad stated, “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.

Then there is the proposed “Blasphemy Law” that is being called for by Muslims around the world, which would make it a crime against humanity to criticize Islam.  Immediately after Barack Obama gave his infamous speech, declaring “The future does not belong to those who would slander the prophet” at the 2012 United Nations General Assembly, in the wake of the Benghazi terrorist attack (which he and Hillary Clinton blamed on an anti-Muhammad video), Muslims from around the world and closer to home made the hue and cry for freedom of speech to be made criminal.

Muslims encourage stifling of free speech

Muslims encourage stifling of free speech

The Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City posted a link to a petition on their website encouraging visitors to sign on, petitioning “The President of the United States: To sponsor a bill that outlaws any action that may insult one’s religion”.  (The petition got a whopping  351 signatures.)  While the President hasn’t actually sponsored legislation to curtail free speech, he has enacted policies within the many bureaucracies, including DHS and the DOJ, which are threatening American’s freedom of speech.  The Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) immediately petitioned the UN to pass the same ordinance.

You can be sure this will not be slowing down anytime soon.  CAIR and cohorts are like sharks with blood in the water.  Once a breech is made, a flood will ensue.  In fact the flood gates are open and this breech will not be closed under this government. While “American Laws for American Courts” is good law and so far, effective as to it’s intent, it is only as good as our legal system which is becoming increasingly compromised.

American’s (non-Muslim that is) must learn why Islam is detrimental to all of Western Culture and the basic freedoms that we have enjoyed for so long.  Islam is indeed, “The Great Black Beast”, a cloud hanging over head that is going to become more oppressive unless we learn to reject it, and once again embrace the true God which has been the source of all that is good and just in our culture thus far.

If we do not, our children and grandchildren will never know what we lost.





Islamic Reformation

18 03 2011

Islam will never have a reformation

There has been lots of talk recently focused on the “Reformation” that Islam is currently experiencing. There are a handful of good people, Muslims, like Dr. Zudhi Jassar of Phoenix who is working tirelessly to bring a liberal view of Islam to life; and Ali Eteraz, who’s articles in the UK Guardian discuss the need to form a ‘Muslim Left’ which denies the legitimacy of theocratic governments.

However, these voices are lost in the cacophony of rhetoric from pro-Islamist groups such as CAIR, MAS, MSA, MPAC, ISNA, ICNA and the like. Then there is dawa, or “Islamic colonialism” being practiced and promoted far and wide by the “Turkish Delegation” through groups like the Turquoise Council of American Eurasians (TCAE), The Gulen Institute, and the Raindrop Turkish Houses which host countless receptions, breakfasts, socials, and trips to Turkey for public officials including everyone from the local firehouse, to city councils and mayors, to state legislators. These latter lobbyists forge relationships that serve to influence support and introduction of legislation particularly friendly to Islam.

Many self ascribed “experts” and “intellectuals” and bleeding heart “moderates” in American politics and academia have declared that Islam is struggling to emerge through a “Reformation” of the religion that will purify it and allow it to shed it’s violent and oppressive political nature, keeping intact those virtuous qualities of peace and benevolence with those who do not share the same beliefs. Usually they cite the Christian Reformation as the model for such a phenomena.

These pundits and commentators obviously have no grasp of religion of any kind, never mind the complex system we call Islam.

Christian Reformation

Firstly, I want to clarify that the Christian Reformation wasn’t about purifying or modernizing a “religion” or “faith”. The basis of the Christian faith, the Holy Bible, written by forty different inspired people over a period spanning 1500 years, was left intact and unchanged (although translated into several languages, which had been previously forbidden by Rome) throughout the process of the Reformation. The movement of “Reform” was a political move against the Papal authority of an organized Church over the whole of “Christendom”, which was a result unification of church and state by Constantine in 325 AD. There was nothing Biblical about this political move by the Emperor of Rome. Constantine unified church and state in order to preserve the Empire after Rome had failed to stamp out Christianity for 200 years. In fact, Jesus Himself actually taught separation of church and state when He was asked if the Jews should pay taxes to the Romans. His answer was “Whose image is on this coin? (Caesar’s) So then give to Caesar that which is Caesar’s and give to God that which is God’s.” (Of course the image of God is in mankind.)

The Reformation was not about changing the fundamentals of the Bible. It was a political movement. Thus, the “Protesting” resulted in “Protestants” rejecting the authority of the Papacy. [Indeed it was a bit more complex, but in a nutshell this was the Christian Reformation.] While there were some liturgical and practical changes made, the Bible was still the foundational document delineating the teachings of the founder, that being Jesus Christ, the perfect model for the aspiring Christian. The “fundamentals” remain yet today.

The glaring problem for “Islamic Reformation” is this: The fundamentals are flawed. Not only the self proclaimed prophet Muhammad, but the Koran itself is rife with inconsistencies. But the inconsistencies are not even the main problem. (These may be understood when considering the Islamic principle of “Abrogation”. That is to say if there are two differing instructions on the same matter, the latter verse abrogates the former.)

The consistent themes of the Koran and Hadith carried by the enforcement of Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia Law) through an over arching political ideology are so intertwined they can never be separated. To live the fundamentals of Islam is to practice “Islamization” on a global scale because this is what Islam demands. There can be no separation of religion and state because the “religion’s” legal system must run the state, and will if Islam is allowed to run its natural course to fruition.

Islam is not simply a belief or a religion.

This has been the mistake of the last 50 years, especially here in America as well as Western Europe. To ascribe Islam as a religion gives it a free rein to infiltrate and affect not only culture, but politics and jurisprudence in a manner we would never allow another contradictory ideology or legal system.

Islam is a socio-political ideology with a religious aspect. In those nations or societies where Islam reigns supreme, competing religions or political movements are not only discouraged but forbidden. Just watch the news.

In order for a reformation to occur within Islam, first the Koran has to be open to critique and debate; It is not. Secondly, Muhammad must be availed to critique and scrutiny; He is not. Finally, Islam itself must be open to debate and self examination; It is not. Why? Because Allah, through his messenger Jibril, gave his ‘perfect Koran’ to his ‘perfect Prophet’. It is not open for doubt or debate; he reminds the reader about 200 times, “Do not doubt this Koran”. To change the founding document would be sacrilege and no doubt lead to “Fitna”, or civil war within the Muslim Ummah, the same way the standardizing the Koran did in the mid 7th Century. We have all seen the uproar caused by those who dare to criticize or characterize Muhammad.

This is the reason ‘Reform’ will never happen in Islam. If you take away the oppressive demand for submission; you have no Islam. If you rewrite the Koran to eliminate the Jihad, the racist element, the directives for dominating your women, the demand for world dominance of Allah’s perfect religion, then you have no Islam. If you eliminate the passages of Koran and Hadith regulating slavery, the supremacy of Muslims in society, and the directives to institute Islamic Law for the good of humanity, then you have no Islam.

Everyone knows that water consists of two hydrogen molecules and one oxygen. If you separate one hydrogen molecule from water, you no longer have water.

I must say I respect Dr. Jasser in his honorable intentions to separate the religion from the politics of Islam. But if you could do that, which you cannot, then you have no Islam. The very word “Islam” means “Submission”. This submission is not simply for the pious Muslim, but the Muslim is charged with the responsibility to advance the code of Islam into the culture or society until Islam reigns supreme and everyone, including non-Muslims, are subjugated under Sharia. Those Muslims who refuse this task, are shamed by the fundamentalists, who accuse them of “shirking” their responsibility. (“Shirk” is to disobey Allah)

Islam has already experienced its “Reformation”

Ibn Taymiyyah, 1268-1321, began a call to Muslims back to the fundamentals of Islam to follow more closely the teachings of Koran and Hadith. This was then refreshed and further advanced in the 18th Century by a student of Taymiyyah named Abd al Wahhab . Wahhab began to revive fundamentalist Islamic practices by first leveling the shrine at the grave of Zayd Khattab, the brother of the Caliph Omar. Wahhab contended it had become an object of idolatry. He then ordered the stoning of an adulteress, a practice which had become rare in the region. This kind of radical teaching brought some life threatening attention to Wahhab who left and settled in a village occupied by Muhammad Ibn Saud in 1740. Saud and Wahhab became inseparable and their heirs expanded their holdings by both dawa and military campaigns, gaining control of the modern day Arabian Kingdom. Their legacy continues today in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia where Wahhabism is both protected and funded throughout the globe. Wahhabism is the foremost source of radical Islamic fundamentalism and has influenced more or less nearly every other school of Islamic theology, particularly in Sunni Islam, which accounts for over 80% of Islam.

Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood and Seyyid Qutb, both Egyptians, carried on the torch of fundamentalism throughout Sunni Islam by their writings and leadership from the 1920’s until Qutb’s execution in 1965 for sedition against the government of Egypt. This influence is more alive today than ever before, and on a global scale. The push is on for Islam to dominate the globe in this century, bringing the entire world into “submission to the religion of Allah” and all governments using the Sharia.

Such is the directive of Islam. Not to convert everyone to Muslim; but to subject everyone to Sharia. Only then can there be peace in the world.

Good Luck Dr. Jasser!





Intellectuals, Jihad, Abrogation, and Dhimmi’s

8 12 2010

Intellectuals abound. Oh yes, they are everywhere. They think of themselves as, perhaps agnostic, atheistic, or secular. The thing about these “intellectuals” that I find so very humorous is these very individuals who perceive themselves as “broadminded” and “tolerant” are the most narrow minded and intolerant creatures when it comes to things they have no real knowledge of, specifically spiritual matters, or more generally “Religion”. Furthermore, what really amazes me, is in spite of their unbelief or even disdain for “religion”, they do not cease from embracing and even defending the most oppressive of all these; Islam.

As I observe the commentary from the “intellectuals” something becomes very clear: It isn’t simply that they defend and embrace Islam, but the fervent hatred with which they address and refer to Christianity and Christians. Never mind that the entirety of Western society has its basis in the Judeo-Christian ethos; if it is Christian it must be evil. If it is anti-Christian it must be good. (It isn’t yet politically correct to slander Jews in America. Jews aren’t Christians and therefore do not yet warrant the same vitriol.) Isaiah 5 speaks of those calling “evil good and good evil.” Romans puts it, “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”

Education does not equal intelligence; nor does knowledge equal wisdom. Education is simply information transfer and knowledge is the retention of that information. Intelligence is the capacity to process that information. But wisdom… Wisdom is spiritual.

Wisdom is that rare quality of discernment which guides the proper dispensation and application of knowledge. You cannot obtain wisdom from instructors; worldly wisdom comes only from objective assessment of world experience. Likewise, godly wisdom comes from experiencing God. Therefore, the “intellectual” has placed himself at an obvious disadvantage when assessing things of a spiritual or religious nature.

Many critics throw out the “Crusades” as proof that Christianity is just as wicked as any other religion. Then also, terms like “Christian terrorist” when referring to people like Scott Roeder, (murderer of the abortion provider, Dr. George Tiller) or Timothy McVeigh, convicted of the Oklahoma City bombing. These are used in order to deflect criticism of Islamic terrorism or try and make the point that Islamic terrorists are but an extreme element and Christianity has its own terrorists. (You can hear this on any radio talk show or website which discusses Islam.)

I would never stoop to defend or justify any murderer nor advocate any such actions of these criminals as justified on any political or religious basis. I have previously set forth my argument for evaluating a religion according to its own founding documents or scriptures. (See Fundamentals)

Admittedly, there have been some horrendous things done throughout history in the name of Christianity. Not only to Muslims, but more-so to Jews and to Christians who refused to acquiesce to Papal authority. However, such an act that is done under the banner of “Christianity” by an individual, group, government or even a church, is not found as a directive in Christian scripture. Therefore, the responsibility lies not at the feet of the religion, but squarely upon those who perpetrated the acts. Nowhere will you find a scriptural reference to the man Jesus commanding an earthly army or admonishing his followers to advance Christianity or any religion by the sword.

Islam on the other hand, has instructions given for jihad, holy war, in the Quran. It is very specific in who and how to kill unbelievers and apostates. In fact, it warns against refusing to make war upon the unbelievers, and advises Muslims not to befriend non-Muslims. If you question the definition of ‘jihad’ look no further than Shari’a itself*. The first line (o9.0) reads: “Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion…” There are nearly 8 pages of instruction on how to conduct jihad, its Quranic justification, its obligatory character, the objectives of jihad, the spoils of war, and so on. In all those pages only one line states of the “greater jihad”, the inner struggle, “it is the spiritual warfare against the lower self”. This latter definition is the one given for Western consumption. *[Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law]

Jihad is justified when Islam is insulted. To insult Islam one needs to do no more than reject it. Sharia requires that an invitation to Islam is given to non-Muslims. If rejected, this is seen as an offence to Islam and consequently justifies jihad as a “defensive” action. Medieval Islam had reached the zenith of its empire by jihad. History has shown it will only co-exist long enough to re-arm, regroup, and gain strategic advantage. Once it has the advantage, the battle continues.

There also seems to be some confusion among those “intellectuals” about history, some citing jihad as a response to the Crusades.

For context here is the historical timeline: Judaism founded by the Hebrews circa 1400 BC. Jesus Christ crucified 33 AD and Christianity founded by Jews in 1st Century in Jerusalem. Roman Church established 325 AD by Constantine. Mohammad gets his first vision in 610 AD establishing Islam and dies in AD 632. Islam conquers from Central Asia across North Africa and by 750 AD has advanced into France where it is finally stopped at Tours. (The Crusades to reclaim Jerusalem for Rome would not be declared for another 300 years.)

The establishment of the historical timeline is significant in understanding Islam today. There is a principal, a law established in Quran known as “Abrogation”. This single word and principal is perhaps the most important tenet in Islam.

Quran is very unique among the texts of ‘revealed religion’, in that it invokes this principal known as “abrogation”. That is to say, “the latter annuls the former”. In other words, the earlier peaceful revelations to Mohammad are abrogated by the later, more violent revelations. Mohammad was quite a peaceful and affable individual early in his ministry, but after the Meccans put out a warrant on him he fled to Medina, where he gained strength militarily. Mohammad began raiding Meccan caravans as retribution. Eventually, this violence increased culminating in a war which the ‘Prophet’ was victorious being personally militarily involved.

This law of “abrogation” is discussed in Quran concerning the disclosure of Sura’s to Mohammad as a progression of revelation, bringing Mohammad and his Companions from point A to point B slowly and in stages. This is the model set forth by Islamic scholars for the strategy of covering the entire world with the cloak of Islam. You see, the historical ‘revealed religions’ occur sequentially. First came Judaism, then came Christianity, and finally comes Islam. Islam teaches that each successive religion abrogates the former until Islam reigns supreme, and without opposition. So much for “co-existence”.

To my “intellectual” friends I would simply impart this fair warning: Christians and Jews are known in Al Quran as “People of the Book”. Once conquered, if they do not choose to convert to Islam, these are afforded the status of “Dhimmi” if they agree to submit to the authority of Islam and pay the Jizya (poll tax). Dhimmi must acquiesce to Muslims in everything and have no equity with Muslims. Atheists and pagans are offered no such clemency. There is only conversion or death. There is no tolerance for “intellectual dissention”.

Please do not simply dismiss this information. Do some reading to see if it isn’t so. The current narrative is being written by Islam. It cannot be trusted. Never forget the Islamic doctrine of “abrogation”.

I do not advocate bigotry toward Muslims; only understanding that Islam is antithetical to the American system of government, to the Judeo-Christian ethos, to liberty and choice, and equality before the law. Islam has its own socio-political system which emanates from Shari’a. It is not simply a “religion”.

Prove me wrong.





Of Mosque’s and Men: “Unmosqueing” the Cordoba Initiative

12 08 2010

By now certainly you have heard of the controversial Mosque planned to be built next to the site that America has come to know simply as ‘Ground Zero’, the place where once stood the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center. Time for a history lesson.

Islamic conquest has been marked through history by construction of a new mosque or conversion of an existing building into a Mosque.

The very first mosque was actually Muhammad’s house in Medina, which also serves as his burial site and is now incorporated into a sprawling structure known as The Mosque of the Prophet. Muhammad established this mosque, also his home, basically as a point of reference to encourage his Companions and subsequently his Medinan converts to unity in prayer to Allah and a community relations and command center. It was established in 622 and served as the beachhead of Muhammad’s wars on the Meccan’s and the Jews. It is considered the second most sacred site of Islam.

The second mosque was the Kaaba, the black “Cube” at the center of the pavilion of the Grand Mosque in Mecca. This is the most sacred site of Islam, and preceded the establishment of Islam by Muhammad in 610 AD. The Kaaba was believed to be built by Abraham and Ishmael, and until Muhammad conquered Mecca and ‘cleansed’ the Kaaba, it housed 360 idols which were worshipped by the Arab tribes. They all prayed to their own god by facing Mecca and their idols. Muhammad destroyed all the idols and re-dedicated Kaaba as a house of Islamic worship only. For the last year and a half (since his ‘Night Journey’ to Jerusalem) Muhammad had ordered Muslims to pray facing Jerusalem (as did the Jews of the area). From this day forward all Muslims were to face Mecca and marked the victory of Islam over paganism in Arabia.

The huge structure surrounding the Kaaba was begun as a modest wall, serving as a Mosque, shortly after the Muslims took Mecca. It was updated and expanded for 1400 years, and took its present shape in the 1960’s under a $4 billion contract awarded by King Faisal to one Mohammed bin Laden, father of Osama, a close personal friend to the royal family.

As Islamic conquest began to rapidly increase after the death of Muhammad in 632 pressing up into the Byzantine and Persian empires, as new territory North and East became secured, the growing Islamic armies turned West. One by one, Byzantine strongholds in Lower Egypt fell until finally the coastal capital city of Alexandria, with her universities and its famous library was sacked and burned.

The new Egyptian capital city of Al-Fustat was built at the head of the Nile Delta where the modern city of Cairo sits. The center of Al-Fustat was the first mosque on the continent of Africa in 642 AD claiming not only Egypt, but would be, in essence, the launching point for the thrust across Northern Africa for the sake of spreading the religion of Allah. This historic mosque was named for the commander of the Army of Islam, Amr ibn al-As and is known as the Mosque of Amr.

The next mosque of historical significance to be built was Al-Aqsa Mosque, or “the farthest Mosque” along with “The Dome of the Rock”, built on the most holy site of Judaism, the Temple Mount. This hilltop was the site of the first temple built by King Solomon immediately after the death of his father King David, 1000 BC. This temple was destroyed by the Babylonians circa 586 BC. After 70 years in captivity the Jews were allowed to return to their homeland and rebuild their Temple. This “Second Temple” was renovated and stood until 70 AD when it was completely and utterly razed by the Romans. True to the prophecy of Jesus Christ there was “not one stone left upon another”. All that remained and yet remains today is the Western Wall, the “Wailing Wall” which is merely a huge retaining wall built to stabilize the mountain and create a level top for the Temple.

“The Dome of the Rock” houses the rock known as the “Foundation Stone” according to Jewish tradition upon which Adam, Cain, Abel , and later Noah offered sacrifices. It is also thought to be the altar upon which Abraham was going to offer Isaac in obedience to the test of God, as well as the rock upon which Jacob slept as he dreamed of the angels descending and ascending the ladder. This is also the stone identified in the Bible upon which David offered his sacrifice after purchasing the land there used as a threshing floor for the future temple. This stone, according to Jewish scholars, is where the Ark of the Covenant rested in the First Temple, the Holy of Holies.

Muhammad said he was taken there by Ul-Baruq, the winged horse, where he prayed and then stepped upon the stone ascending into the ‘7th Heaven’ to receive a message from Allah. After Muhammad’s death, many years later, Caliph Umar was led to the site and told of its significance and a fence was erected around it. The Dome of the Rock was then built in 690AD, almost 60 years after Muhammad died. The Dome was engineered using the same basic measurements as the nearby Church of the Holy Sepulcher built in 326 AD by Constantine.

The Mosque, a separate structure opposite the Dome of the Rock, was first erected by Umar prior to the construction of the Dome and has undergone many reconstructions since. The entire complex covers the 35 acres atop the Temple Mount and testifies to the perceived Islamic superiority over both Judaism and Christianity.

[Consequently, as you can see, the succession of history shows that Jerusalem, built by the Jews around the crown jewel of Judaism, the Temple, was well established for nearly 1700 years before any Islamic presence. Islam was even preceded in Jerusalem by original Christianity by over 600 years, and the Roman Catholic presence which built the several churches and shrines, had been there for over 360 years prior to the first Islamic structure appearing. Crusades notwithstanding, the Temple Mount continues to be claimed by Islam.]

Not far away from Jerusalem to the northeast stands the Grand Mosque of Damascus. This was a Roman Catholic basilica which even still today, houses a shrine containing the (supposed) head of John the Baptist. Incidentally, it also housed the head of Husayn, Muhammad’s grandson, which he lost in the First Fitna (Islamic civil war resulting in Shia and Sunni) as well as the heads of all the other rebels killed and executed at Karbala.

Initially, Muslim conquest of Damascus in 634 did not affect the church and a mosque was added to the south side of it, but Caliph Al-Walid converted the entire structure to a mosque in 706 AD. Al-Walid fostered a building program across the rapidly expanding Islamic empire which changed the architectural look of nearly every city conquered. The Grand Mosque of Damascus was the central structure in the city that was the seat of the Umayyad Caliphate for a hundred years.

In 711 Muslim forces crossed the Strait of Gibralter and invaded Western Europe conquering most of the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal) before being stopped. Cordoba was built by Rome as an important port city around 150 BC. Being located many miles up the navigable Guadalquivir River, it was a key agricultural and strategic location with access to the heartland of the Iberian Peninsula. As the capital city of the Roman Province of Hispania, it was known as a thriving cultural center producing philosophers such as Seneca the Younger and the great orator Seneca the Elder, as well as poets like Lucan.

The “Cathedral of our Lady of the Assumption” was built by the Visigoth’s around 600 AD overlooking the river and the magnificent Roman bridge spanning it. After the Islamic armies penetrated and conquered most of the peninsula, Emir Abd ar-Rahman I purchased the church from the conquered and now dhimmi (submissive) Visigoth’s and reworked the building naming it the Aljama Mosque. Over the next two hundred years of ongoing updates and new construction it became the Great Mosque of Cordoba. This was declared the new capital of the Ummayad Caliphate by Rahman after he fled Damascus, being overthrown by the Abbassid rebels in 750 AD. The next two hundred years in Spain are what is today known in the West as the “Golden Age of Islam”.

The Jews actually did fare better in dhimmitude under the Caliph than under the Visigoth and Roman Catholic rule. Why? The Arabs were a long way from home and needed a cooperative population in order to establish a new beachhead in Western Europe. The Jews had been in Iberia since long before Christ and had suffered persecution by whomever happened to govern, but persecution under Roman Catholic rule was particularly intense. The Quran has passages that make allowances for Jews and Christians who submit and pay the jizya (poll tax for non-Muslims) to be treated decently as long as they remain subservient. This is why Rahman purchase the church instead of simply take it by force. He needed friends among the Infidels. There are Jewish historical records showing that all the great advances made in the sciences during this period which have been claimed or credited to Islam were actually done by Jewish scholars under Islamic rule.

Cordoba quickly became one of the largest cities in the world was believed at one point in the late 900’s to be the largest city of Europe. It maintained its cultural status and at this point boasted the largest library in the world. It was known as one of the most advanced places in the world, not only in culture, but politically, and economically.

[While Cordoba was the gem of the Islamic world, at least west of the Nile, for a couple of hundred years it became the victim of politics and bad blood between Muslim rulers and the Caliphate was moved to Seville and the infighting continued. I suspect that much of the internal problems stemmed from the lifestyles of many of the Muslim Rulers. In my research for this article I discovered that the second Caliph of Cordoba was homosexual and had an exclusively all male harem. Al Hakam II only brought in a female concubine in order to produce for him an heir. Another known bisexual was Al Mutamid ibn Abbad who killed his own lover, the Muslim poet, Ibn Ammar. Al Mutamid was himself known as a great Arab poet and the last King of Seville in Al Andalus.]

Cordoba was finally taken during the long process known as Reconquista, which ended in 1492 at Granada. The Great Mosque was recaptured in 1236 and rededicated as a church, however all the Mosque’s ornate architecture and artwork was left intact. Today it serves as both an active church and a museum.

So what is the purpose of this history lesson?

In Islam, nothing is done by coincidence and everything in the culture, including many dates, names, locations, etc. are symbolic in nature. Islam is very mindful of historic events and places high value in recognizing these and passing it’s traditions on to the next generation. It is this highly regarded value that motivates Islam to perpetrate it’s own culture upon not only it’s vanquished foes, but also uses the cultural aspect of Islam to penetrate host cultures in an effort to supplant the host culture. It has been happening in European countries for many years now, and has been quite successful in creating inroads into other aspects of the host society.

Therefore, we cannot ignore the blatant selection of the name of the “mosque and cultural education center” planned to be built just a few hundred feet from the gaping hole in the surface of Manhattan Island where the Twin Towers stood. The World Trade Center had been known as the center of commerce and finance, not only of the United States but of the free world.

The Cordoba Initiative, as the proposed project is known, commemorates by name the very point of conquest in the Iberian Peninsula, from which was intended to be launched the conquest and conversion of Western Europe. The distance from Arabia, the Frankish Armies, the Pyrenees Mountains, and perhaps the immaturity of the new Islamic religion, all served as major obstacles in that military endeavor, so the focus of the Caliphate was to transform Cordoba into an irresistible cultural and economic center. It was indeed.

The historical “modus operendi” is established. The importance of historical continuity is understood. The intent of Cordoba Initiative, based upon historical behavior, and the fundamental objective of Islam to dominate every society in the world, is obvious. Put pretty names on it, profess benign intent, and feign surprise and dismay to the visceral rejection by freedom loving Americans.

Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, we are onto you. Salam.

The Imam? Oh, that’s another article…





Fundamentals

1 07 2010

There is an old parable which goes something like this: “For want of a clench, a nail was lost. For want of a nail, a shoe was lost. For want of a shoe, a horse was lost. For want of a horse, a knight was lost. For want of a knight a battle was lost. For want of a battle, a kingdom was lost.” Well, something like that.

Words are like nails. The definition of a word determines the tightness of the clench. I’m into definitions. I suppose that is obvious from the name of this blogsite. The reason I’m into definitions is, to quote a famous radio personality, “Words mean things”. Words define sentences, which define subjects, which define ideas. Communication, even sign language, is reliant upon words to inflect meaning and definition of language expressing emotion, thoughts, intents, and ideas.

One word which particularly interests me these days is “fundamental“. The commonly used internet dictionary Merriam-Webster defines “fundamental” as follows: 1-a: serving as an original or generating source; [primary] b: serving as a basis supporting existence or determining essential structure or function; [basic] 2-a: of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts; [radical also: of or dealing with general principles rather than practical application ] b: adhering to fundamentalism 3: of, relating to, or produced by the lowest component of a complex vibration 4: of central importance: [principal ] 5: belonging to one’s innate or ingrained characteristics: [deep-rooted] (note: some punctuation/symbols edited for clarity in this format)

Fundamental is a word used to express definitive structure or skeletal origin and principles concerning architecture, music, athletics, sociology, politics, religion, government, virtually everything tangible and intangible. Everything has a fundamental nature, cause, precept, function, ideology, value, means, or purpose. Even this article has a fundamental purpose.

That purpose specifically is to discuss the fundamentals of religion, and perhaps briefly, our government. Now, if you have read my page “God Hates Religion” you probably already know where I stand on the definition of religion. But for the sake of this discussion, I am going to refer to religion in the general sense and explore two of those: Islam and Christianity.

The fundamentals of a religion define it. As with a building, the foundation determines the size, shape, weight and height of a building. That is source of its existence. It’s “founding”. The fundamentals of a government are revealed in it’s founding documents. The founding documents of our American Government are the Mayflower Compact, The Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, and The Constitution of the United States. Further insight can be gained by studying the people who wrote those documents: “The Founders”. These define American government and give insight to America’s purpose as a nation. (Incidentally, I think I remember candidate Obama saying he wanted to “fundamentally change America”. Wonder what he meant by that?)

Likewise, in order to get to the fundamentals of a religion you must explore the founding documents and those key figures of it’s early existence. Those who adhere to the fundamentals of their religion are known as “fundamentalists”.

Fundamentalist Christians take the Bible as the Word of God. They also trust in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, as the Christ, the Son of the Living God as recorded in the pages of the Bible; Prophesied over 300 times in the Old Testament, and the central figure of the New Testament. They believe that He was born of a virgin, crucified on a Roman cross, suffered for the sins of all mankind, died, was buried and then was resurrected from the dead. The New Testament places Him present on Earth for 40 days after the resurrection and records Him to be seen by a minimum of over 500 people. He then ascended into Heaven and will return at the conclusion of this present age of Grace. These are the fundamentals of the Christian faith, which of course are dependent upon the Bible as its founding documentation.

Examining the Bible as a founding document, we find a collection of documents actually, from the Law of Moses, to the Psalms, to the Prophets and including the Gospels and the letters right up to the prophecy of The Revelation. These documents written over a period of 1500 years, given by revelation through the Holy Spirit to 40 men over that span of time, all fit together, none contradicting another.

Islamic Fundamentalists likewise take the Koran as the word of Allah as dictated to Muhammad by the angel Jibril (Gabriel to you Bible scholars). They do not however believe that Muhammad is the son of Allah (“Allah forbid that he have a son!” (Koran Sura 19). Muhammad never claimed to be the son of Allah, or even the messiah. He did however claim to be the last and greatest Prophet, and established the law of abrogation, which nullifies every prophet, scripture, and revelation to precede him. Muhammad even used the law of abrogation to nullify those passages of Koran which taught peace and love, by those which teach violence and death to those who do not submit to Allah’s religion of Islam. Sura 9 was the last major revelation from Jibril to Muhammad and it is indeed the most violent. Abrogation defined is “the latter takes precedence over the former”.

During the last ten years of his life, Muhammad himself led or planned 66 raids in many of which men, women, and children alike were butchered, property confiscated or burned, and slaves taken, used or traded. He took to wife a 6 year old child, consummating the marriage when she was 9. Although Muhammad had limited his followers to only 4 wives, he enjoyed 11 not counting slave girls he kept to service him.

Muhammad would fall into a “trance” (some speculate a seizure) and come to with a new revelation from Allah, which he recited (this is what Quran means, “recitation”) to his companions. Muhammad did not read or write, being illiterate. All his Koran was verbally transferred and retained by memory for years until after his death, and during the Uthman Caliphate the Koran was finally standardized in written form, aggregating bits and pieces of Sura’s from palm leaves, bone, skins, and memory of the reciters.

The “Golden Age of Islam” that is so vaunted by Islam’s scholars and sympathizers, was that time period after Muhammad’s death, in which Islam was ruled by the “Four Rightly Guided Caliphs” of the 7th Century up through about 1100 AD. All four of those Caliphs were either killed in battle or assassinated. The fourth, Muhammad’s son-in-law Ali presided over a massive civil war in which Muslims killed Muslims by the tens of thousands. From this came the two schools of Sunni and Shia Islam.

So there is your founding for Islam. A Koran which in fact contradicts itself in numerous places, is inconsistent in content and directive, a prophet which claimed to be the exclusive, last and greatest channel of Allah’s law and directive for Mankind, and a blood-soaked century in which the believers were ordered, and dutifully obeyed, murdering, robbing, raping those who would not submit to Muhammad’s new religion of Islam.

Now at this point,, you may be thinking, “What about the Crusades when the Christians killed so many Muslims?” Great question and I’m glad that you asked. Remember now, we are talking about Fundamentalism. The Crusades did not begin until 1095 AD. Jesus died in 30 AD.

Jesus never told His disciples to kill anyone. In fact, to the contrary he said, “Those who live by the sword will die by the sword” and He chastised Peter for attempting to defend Him with his sword.  His commission to His followers was to “Go into all the World and preach the Gospel to every creature”. (Mark 16:15) Muhammad said, “Make war on them: Allah will chastise them at your hands and humble them.” (Sura 9:14) The only blood that Jesus ever shed was His own.

The Crusades were largely organized and carried out by the Roman Church originally to stop the tide of Islam invading Europe.  Some Crusades were sponsored by kings themselves seeking glory in battle and sometimes they devolved into something less honorable and Jews, and Papacy rejecting Christians were killed instead of Muslim invaders. This never was a fundamental facet to Christianity and has been held up by its critics as part and parcel of the Christian religion. No, it doesn’t stick. Go back and check the definition of “Fundamental”. Then read your Bible again. Oh, there was plenty of blood for the Christians too, in their first 300 years. Christian blood quenched the dust of the Roman Colosseum and amphitheatres throughout the empire. Romans hunted them for sport, and used them as human torches at garden parties. They were despised, nonetheless they multiplied in such great numbers they changed history.

You see, the fundamental documents, the teachings, and the founders of the religion defines it. Those beliefs are at the core, not the extremities or the fringe. Diagram A illustrates the politically correct view as opposed to the factually correct view.

Diagram A

As you can see the Fundamentalist must be the core value holder simply by definition. If placed on the extremities of the circle, it is no longer a fundamental but an extremity. For example, your hand is an extremity; you can exist without it. Your core (torso) contains your vital organs. Without your vital organs your extremities cannot exist and function.

Diagram B illustrates the effect that each has upon the mainstream. The Fundamentalist, adhering to the core of the belief system, is the influencing factor on the entirety of the religion. The closer you are to the fundamentals, the less you are influenced by the extremities. Conversely, the Extremist, or the fringe element has no practical access to the core values or the fundamentals of the belief system.

Diagram B

So here now is the myth of Islam: “Islam is basically a Peaceful Religion that has been “Hi-Jacked” by Extremists”. Now here is the fact: Islam was a peaceful religion for nearly 13 years while Muhammad resided in Mecca. As he became more obnoxious and belligerent the Meccan’s threatened his life and he and his companions fled to Medina which was a bit more accepting. From there he began raiding Meccan caravans for a living and finally provoked a war.

Islam at its very core is flawed. The fundamentals are inconsistent with a practical and uniform belief system. Its self proclaimed prophet is inconsistent with all that is just and good. It’s deity called Allah is impersonal, untouchable, unloving, and without grace and mercy. Heavy on judgment, Allah would never condescend to sinful Man and offer any semblance of relationship.

This all should make sense by now; Allah is not the God of the Bible. Allah’s symbol is the Moon. The Bible says the moon is the ruler over the darkness, “the lesser light to rule the night”. (Gen. 1:16) The “greater light” to rule the day is known as the Sun. That’s Messiah. (Malachi 4:2) More specifically, Jesus is referred to by Peter as the “day star” (2 Pet. 1:17-19).

So if Allah is not God, and is the “ruler of darkness”, who does that remind you of, Hmmm? Fundamentally, speaking…..





Walid Shoebat defines Islamic Movement in America

11 06 2010

I have written in “Kansas Jihad” and “Turkish Connection” about Islam infiltrating the United States. The goal is establishment of Sharia-Sacred Islamic Law. Now hear a former Muslim and Palestinian Terrorist explain it.








%d bloggers like this: