Monthly Archives: January 2014

Bachmann says House preparing to sue Obama for overreach: ‘He’s not a king’


Bachmann says House preparing to sue Obama for overreach: ‘He’s not a king’

A screen grab of Rep. Michele Bachmann's response to President Barack Obama.

“He’s the president of the United States — he’s not a king,”

President Barack Obama delivers his State of the Union speech on Capitol Hill in Washington, Jan. 28, 2014. (REUTERS/Larry Downing)

WASHINGTON — Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann says House conservatives are preparing to sue President Barack Obama for executive overreach in response to his threats of unilateral action on a host of issues.

“He’s the president of the United States — he’s not a king,” the Republican lawmaker told reporters after Obama’s State of the Union address. “He may think he’s a king, he may declare himself king, but that’s not what he is under our Constitution.”

Bachmann said an effort is underway in Congress to take back their “authority under the Constitution as the House of Representatives.” She said the plan is to introduce legislation allowing lawmakers to hire an attorney, so “we can force the president to act under the Constitution.”

“We’ll sue the president of the United States and force him to no longer act unilaterally,” she said.

In his address at the Capitol Tuesday night, Obama said he plans to take unilateral action on the minimum wage for federal workers. He suggested he might go solo on guns, for example.

“I intend to keep trying, with or without Congress, to help stop more tragedies from visiting innocent Americans in our movie theaters, shopping malls, or schools like Sandy Hook,” he said.

Bachmann says Obama will have a fight ahead. “If he wants to go forward with his unilateral activity, he better be prepared for the lawsuit that the United States Congress will bring,” she said.

Asked by The Daily Caller for details about the legislation, a Bachmann aide pointed to the legislation introduced in December by South Carolina Republican Rep. Tom Rice. Text of that bill calls for “a civil action for declaratory or injunctive relief to challenge certain policies and actions taken by the executive branch.”

Bachmann said Obama has “acted unilaterally multiple times.”

“Obamacare is the passed law of the land and yet the president has changed Obamacare at least 17 times on his own, unilaterally, without going through the legislative action that he’s required to do under the United States Congress,” she said. “That’s just one. He also said that he would refuse to uphold the [Defense of Marriage Act], which he is required by law to uphold.”

“He’s done this multiple times and he’s also threatened — we can’t say we weren’t warned — he’s threatened us tonight that he’s going to act unilaterally,” Bachmann said after his speech.

Read more:  http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/29/bachmann-says-house-preparing-to-sue-obama-for-overreach-hes-not-a-king/#ixzz2rxlSH53c

Via : http://vineoflifenews.com/bachmann-says-house-preparing-to-sue-obama-for-overreach-hes-not-a-king/

Political Murders – The forbidden trail : Olof Palme


Political Murders – The forbidden trail : Olof Palme

File:Olof Palme 1968.JPG
.
.
.
.
.
Assassination of Olof Palme

Europe could sink into chaos due to muslim immigration


Europe could sink into chaos due to muslim immigration

.

.

.

One gets personally tired of hearing how Islamic organizations like the MuslimBrotherhood that want to destroy our civilization are called “moderates,” whereas Westerners are “extremists” if we resist this, yet that is exactly what our media and authorities do. We are not extremists; we are subjected to policies that are extreme. Is reducing a people to a minority in their own land, without proper debate about future consequences, not to be regarded as extreme?

Some observers fear a “western extremist backlash,” but if people are soconcerned about this then they should stop creating the foundations for such extremism to grow. Native Europeans increasingly get the feeling that they are being pushed into a corner and have an entirely justifiable fear of being overwhelmed. Fear leads to desperation, which sometimes leads to aggression. If we do get an outbreak of extremist political movements, this will not come about because Europeans are born evil; it will come about because they will be pushed into extremism, feel that their continued existence is at stake and that they have been abandoned by their authorities. The solution to this is to recognize that Western nations have accepted more immigration from alien cultures in a shorter period of time than any other civilization has done peacefully in history. We have reached our limit and we need a break before our entire political and economic system breaks down. The ongoing mass immigration is population dumping where less successful cultures dump their population in more successful ones. This is a form of global Communism and will generate the same disastrous effects by destroying successful communities and centers of excellence.

Native Europeans are being told that we don’t have a culture and that we thus “gain” culture when others move to our countries. This is an insult to thousands of years of European history, to the Celtic, Germanic and Slavic legacies and the Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian heritage we all share in. The next moment we are told that we do have a culture, but it consists of nothing but a long line of crimes and is not worth preserving, anyway.

As Professor Ida Magli writes in an Italian essay entitled A Nation for Sale: “Why can’t we protest? Why aren’t we allowed what every people has always had the right to say, that is that no ruler, whatever the system of government — monarchy, dictatorship, democracy — has either the power or the right to sell off the homeland of their own subjects?”

It has happened many times that a people move into an area and subdue those living there before, but the natives have at least been allowed to defend themselves. It is unprecedented in the annals of history that a people is banned by their own leaders from defending their lands from foreign colonization. The established historical pattern is that people who are conquered by others are harassed by the newcomers. When we are being told that mass immigration is “inevitable,” we are actually being told that verbal and physical abuse of our children is inevitable and that we should “get used to it.” I see no reason to accept this. If mass immigration leads to harassment of my children then it is my duty to resist it.

Observer Ole Kulterstad notes that Europeans who are against free migration are labeled as “right-wing extremists.” But common sense indicates that giving away your country to alien cultures is more extreme than merely wanting to preserve it as it once was.

Courtesy : Kanal von 8b2xcc71

My Name Is Patsy


My Name Is Patsy

Connections: Anders Breivik and at least two members of the English Defence League may have met in the past after discussions were posted on an internet forum

Lee Harvey Oswald's Wife Auctions Off His Wedding Band
Lee Harvey Oswald posant avec un fusil dans son jardin. Il a été tué après son arrestation le 24 novembre, à la veille de l'enterrement de Kennedy.

.
Hello Muse, may be it need to refresh the page, because all videos got sound, working perfectly fine.
I had problem with the pictures, I wanted a different display but didn’t work.
Handcuff picture in cross for both, Gun picture for both and an army picture for both.
I react to this Sweedish Newspaper who says that Anders did make some statement…Now it goes around twisting thing further.
The Only thing I agree, is that he feel lonely and bitter as the “Rising” didn’t happen…enven less a an Uprising..
More of an “Hiding” after what he did. So yes that part is true for the rest they have still no Clue about who is Anders Breivik.
.
Wilhem T. Knox
.

Interview With Assad Advisor Dr Bouthaina Shaaban


Interview With Assad Advisor Dr Bouthaina Shaaban via Friends Of Syria

Interview Taken From :

http://friendsofsyria.co/2014/01/27/interview-with-assad-advisor-dr-bouthaina-shaaban/

Music : Fame, Swiss hiphop In Swiss Dialect


Fame – “Lueg Nid Zrügg”

imagesfame

Fame – I Weiss No

Obama Says We Hate Him Because He’s Black


Hello, I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. No, Mr. Obama, we don’t hate you because you’re black. President Barack Obama’s approval rating has fallen badly in the national polls. His ratings are historically low: the second lowest in modern history at this point of a Presidency. Lower than George W. Bush. Lower than everyone but Richard Nixon. And just barely above Nixon. It’s only a matter of time before Obama has the lowest poll ratings in history.

Here come the excuses. Obama desperately wants us to believe it’s all because he’s black. In a lengthy interview with New Yorker Editor David Remnick the President tells him there are “some folks who just really dislike me because they don’t like the idea of a black President” (because if he didn’t have that excuse, it would have to be based on his performance).

When Obama blames “some folks” for not liking him because he’s black, he refers to conservatives and white Americans. I’m an unapologetic member of both groups. It’s an interesting excuse. If we actually did hate him for the color of his skin, that would excuse everything he’s done to damage or destroy American exceptionalism, capitalism and the U.S. economy.

If this were about race, it would excuse his dismantling of the economy. It would excuse the 92 million working-age Americans not in the workforce. It would excuse all-time record lows for workforce participation. It would excuse tens of thousands — and in some cases, hundreds of thousands — of Americans dropping out of the workforce every month. It would excuse the fact that only crummy, crappy, low-wage, part-time jobs are being created because of Obama’s policies.

If this were about race, it would excuse Obama’s taking the formerly greatest healthcare system in the world and plunging it into crisis and confusion. It would distract us from seeing his failed Obamacare website that cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Or his blatant lies about keeping our health insurance if we like it. Or his lies about the middle class not being taxed to pay for 30 million new patients.

Or his lies about the quality of care remaining the same, even though we’ve added 30 million new patients, with no new doctors. Or his lies about prices going down, while our rates are going through the roof, and while his own Internal Revenue Service predicts health insurance will cost the average family a staggering $20,000 per year by 2016.

If this were about race, it would excuse his lies about wanting to create jobs for middle-class Americans while he’s made conscious decisions to hire foreign companies (who rely on cheap foreign labor) to build and fix the defective Obamacare website.

If this were about race, it would excuse his never ending spending and debt. Or the damage he’s done to middle-class Americans: the doubling of gas prices; the all-time record highs for electricity; the jobs he’s destroyed by not approving oil drilling, or fracking, or the Keystone Pipeline. Or using the Environmental Protection Agency to try to put the coal industry completely out of business.

It would excuse his using the power of the IRS to persecute Tea Party groups and conservative critics (like me), while allowing the IRS to hand out fraudulent tax refunds to illegal immigrants claiming fake dependents not even living in the United States.

It would excuse four dead American heroes in Benghazi, Libya; a refusal to send help while they were fighting for their lives; and a blatant cover-up before the election.

But putting all that aside, let me point out a few inconsistencies in Obama’s allegation against conservatives and white Americans:

  • First, I don’t despise Obama. I despise his beliefs and his policies.
  • Second, last I checked, Obama is not just “black.” He’s half white, born to a white mother, raised by white grandparents.
  • Third, I’ve been consistent my entire life. I’ve been a true-blue conservative patriot since age 3, when I handed out campaign literature for Barry Goldwater in my father’s arms. I judge people by their political beliefs and policies, not the color of their skin.

At the age of 11, I despised the policies of ultra-leftist Presidential candidate George McGovern. His beliefs and policies were almost identical to Obama’s today. Did I hate white Midwestern men?

In 1980, as a student at Columbia University, I despised the policies of President Jimmy Carter, whose policies were almost identical to Obama’s today. Did I hate white Southern men?

Today, I despise the policies of ultra-leftist politicians like Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. Do I, therefore, hate white Mormons and Italians?

Lastly, I can think of many Jewish Democrats whose policies I despise. The first one that comes to mind is Debbie Wasserman Shultz, whose statements often make me physically ill. Does that mean I hate Jews? That’s pretty funny, because I’m Jewish.

In each case a Republican conservative like me despises the political beliefs and policies of people I believe now, or believed back then, to be extreme, radical, socialist, economically ignorant and damaging to America and capitalism.

No, Mr. Obama, we don’t despise you because you’re black. But we do despise your policies, your lies and your destruction of the greatest country, economy and middle class in world history.

Oh, and just to set the record straight: I don’t believe Obama really thinks this is about race. That’s just what he says publicly to incite more anger, bitterness, division and class warfare, which is exactly what his mentor Saul Alinsky taught him: “The ends justify the means.”

Obama knows he’s unpopular because he is carrying out a purposeful plan to wreck the economy. He just needs to cry racism to distract the masses, so they don’t notice what is happening right in front of their eyes. It’s a philosophy he learned at Columbia University called “boil the frog slowly.”

How do I know? We were classmates. I learned the same philosophy. Just set the temperature low enough that the frog doesn’t even know he’s being boiled to death… until he’s dead. Don’t look now, but the American people are the frog. This is precisely how you destroy America from within.

I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. See you next week. Same time, same place. God bless America.

http://personalliberty.com/2014/01/23/obama-says-we-hate-him-because-hes-black/

THE “Stop White Genocide” Video



25 dec. 2013

Flooding virtually every White country with oceans of non-Whites, forcing them to assimilate, subjecting them to constant anti-White propaganda and agitprop, and ensuring that those who object are fired (in America) and/or incarcerated (in Europe) is genocide, per International Law.

White Genocide.

Period.

Find Out More: http://whitegenocideproject.com/
Follow The White Rabbit: http://whiterabbitradio.net/
Fight With BUGS: http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/

From Courtesy of C.U.N.T. (Casuals United News Team )
http://casualsunited.wordpress.com/2014/01/16/anti-racist-is-a-codeword-for-anti-white-video-enochpowell/

And..Yes He was right !

https://swissdefenceleague.wordpress.com/2013/06/11/rivers-of-immigration/

The Chris Christie Scandal: Fat And Furious


The Chris Christie Scandal: Fat And Furious

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has gotten himself in a pickle. All scandals deserve high-profile names. Let’s call this one Fat and Furious.

Integrity is everything in life. I have been a leading critic of President Barack Obama here at Personal Liberty. I think he’s a criminal. I think any politician — no matter what party he belongs to — who uses government to hurt, damage, bully, intimidate or destroy a political opponent should be fired and forced to resign or go to prison. These are crimes we cannot tolerate in a free society.

So Chris Christie is the biggest loser.

But Obama’s Fast and Furious is far worse than Christie’s Fat and Furious. Obama sold arms to Mexican drug lords that wound up killing a U.S. border agent. That is far worse than causing a traffic jam. It is criminal.

Obama’s using the Internal Revenue Service to destroy political opponents (like me) — and to change the outcome of a Presidential election — is far worse than causing a traffic jam. It is the worst criminal conspiracy in U.S. political history.

Obama’s using the National Security Agency to spy on every American — and members of the media — and perhaps to use that information to blackmail political opponents is far worse than causing a traffic jam. It is criminal.

Obama’s covering up an arms deal with radical Muslim rebels that backfired and killed four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, is far worse than causing a traffic jam. It is criminal.

Obama’s telling lies and committing fraud when he said, “If you like your health insurance, you can keep your insurance,” when Obamacare caused millions of Americans to lose their health insurance, is far worse than causing a traffic jam. It is perhaps the biggest fraud in world history. It’s certainly criminal.

Now it is reported that the Drug Enforcement Administration was involved in drug dealing from 2000 to 2012. That’s with the approval of both George W. Bush and Obama. That’s far worse than a traffic jam. Why aren’t the media holding them accountable for government-certified drug dealing by Mexican drug lords?

Yes, Obama should pay for his crimes against the American people. Because no one, including the President, is too big to jail.

But conservatives need to be consistent. We need to put ethics above party. We need to be willing to shout loudly when one of our own does something wrong. We need to be better than the hypocritical liberal media that covers up for Obama.

Christie, like Obama, is a bully. He uses the force of government to try to intimidate and damage his political opponents. He uses government to scare people into silence. He uses government for political retribution.

Oh, and let’s not forget that he’s also the jerk who double-crossed Mitt Romney, sold his buddy out and helped to re-elect Obama. As I’ve said in hundreds of media interviews since the Presidential election, “The GOP can never again trust Chris Christie. Christie stabbed Mitt Romney in the back. Once a traitor, always a traitor. He cannot be our Presidential nominee.”

I was right. The true Christie was just exposed. He’s not much different than Obama. If you cross him, or anger him, or criticize him, he’ll try to destroy your life. And he doesn’t care who gets in the way (even thousands of New Jersey voters stuck in hours of traffic, half of whom might have been Republican supporters). Fat and Furious is a small scandal, but it represents a much bigger picture.

Let’s Look At The Chris Christie Story

I’m a Tea Party libertarian-conservative Republican. Mitt Romney was not my cup of tea. (Excuse the pun.) But once I choose sides, I’m “all in.” There is no 90 percent or even 100 percent. Either you give everything you have, or don’t get involved. So I gave Romney 110 percent.

I knew the re-election of Obama would devastate the economy and kill more jobs. I knew the implementation of Obamacare would annihilate the middle class. I knew Romney was the only alternative. So I was “all in.” I gave Romney everything I had. His loss was devastating to me.

But not for Christie. He sold Romney out for ego, media spotlight and his own political future. As soon as Christie saw the opportunity to advance his own future Presidential prospects, he dumped Romney like yesterday’s news. He didn’t just stab Romney in the back and kiss Obama’s ring. He went a step further: He French-kissed Obama at the New Jersey airport.

You never betray your friends like that. Never. There would have been nothing wrong with shaking Obama’s hand at the airport and announcing: “I don’t support your policies, and I’m still supporting Romney. But when there is a natural disaster, we all come together as Americans.” That would have been fine.

But Christie became best friends forever (BFFs) with Obama that day. Christie’s over-the-top lovefest damaged Romney’s Presidential ambitions. At the time, several national polls had Romney up by 5 to 7 points. His ratings sunk like quicksand after Christie’s symbolic embrace. It’s bad enough to kiss your opponent’s ring, but Christie French-kissed Obama. Yuck. And he never again mentioned Romney’s name or his support of Romney. Do hurricanes cause amnesia? With friends like Christie, who needs enemies?

What did Christie get out of it? Was it pure ego, to prove his bipartisan credentials and win adulation from the liberal media? Yes, I think that was part of it.

Did Obama bribe Christie? Was he promised billions of dollars in government loans and Federal Emergency Management Agency hurricane-relief money if he stabbed Romney in the back? Yes, I think that was part of it.

Was it pure political payback for not being chosen as Romney’s Vice President? Yes, I think that was part of it.

Or was it pure political calculation? Did Christie realize if his buddy Romney won the election, he (Christie) would have no political future. Romney would be in for eight long years, and Christie would have nowhere to move up — and he would be long forgotten after his second term as Governor was up. My guess is all of the above.

Don’t forget this is a guy who Romney chose as the keynote speaker at the GOP convention. Christie rewarded his faith by giving an entire speech about himself. Listening to Christie’s speech that night, I wasn’t sure if it was Romney or Christie accepting the nomination.

This same Christie went out of his way to denigrate and bad-mouth the Tea Party. You know, the same group that is the very foundation of the GOP. The same group that makes up the most loyal base of support, donations, energy and excitement for the GOP. The same group that produced the greatest landslide in modern political history in 2010. Why? Once again, ego. Christie needed to flex his muscles, prove his independence and win adulation from the liberal media.

This same Christie went out of his way to denigrate Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. He not only picked a fight and called them bad names, but then he refused to kiss and make up.

Christie has kissed Obama’s ring 24/7 since the election, but he wouldn’t make peace with two Tea Party heroes of the GOP. Interesting way to gain the GOP Presidential nomination.

This same Christie badmouthed Libertarians. Not a word about liberals. He said nothing about the Marxist cabal in the White House destroying our economy. But he went out of his way to bad-mouth freedom-loving Libertarians.

You’d think Obama would love Christie. Yet first chance he got, Obama stuck the knife into Christie. First, Attorney General Eric Holder announced he was investigating whether this traffic jam scandal was criminal. Then, he announced the Justice Department is investigating Christie’s possible misuse of Superstorm Sandy relief funds. Amazing! Poor Christie. All that ring kissing, butt kissing and French kissing… and Obama still wants to ruin him.

What Are The Lessons From Fat And Furious?

First, what goes around comes around. Karma’s a b***h. Christie got what was coming to him.

Second, if the customer is always right in business, that’s doubly true in politics. Who is the GOP’s base (i.e., best customer)? The Tea Party. Any Republican who bad-mouths the Tea Party is a moron. You can disagree, but do it nicely. Show respect. If you don’t, expect to be shown the door. You just committed political suicide.

Third, stop trying to make friends with the media. The media hate all Republicans, even the “moderate” ones. When a Republican courts the media, he dances with the devil. You may think they like you. You may think you’ve charmed them. But in the end, the media will aim to destroy you for the “crime” of being a Republican.

Christie just found out what happens when the media think you’re the one guy who can beat Hillary Clinton. They turn on you like a pack of wolves.

Fourth, never trust big-government Republicans like Christie. They use the same power of government to damage people’s lives, just as Democrats like Obama do.

Fifth, never allow politicians of any party to bully or intimidate taxpayers. Whether they are ordering IRS audits or ordering traffic jams, they deserve impeachment and prison terms. They answer to voters — not the other way around. They are our servants; we aren’t their serfs.

Sixth, if you’re a Republican and you make nice with Obama (the Marxist destroying our country), you are making a pact with the devil. And the first chance he gets, he’ll double-cross you. Deals mean nothing to the devil.

As a football player, I learned a valuable lesson. I was taught that as a wide receiver, you’re going to get hit — whether you catch the ball or drop it. So you might as well catch it. The hit hurts much less after you made an important catch for your team. When it comes to Obama, he’s going to try to destroy you either way. You might as well try to destroy him, too. Because playing nice doesn’t help. He is a radical Marxist. He hates patriots. He hates Republicans. He hates businessmen. You cannot win him over. He drinks the Marxist Kool-Aid. He will never be your friend.

Lastly, stop making excuses for Republicans who believe in big government. Taxes went up under Christie. Spending went up under Christie. The size of government went up under Christie. Do you ever get the message that this is why America is so screwed up, that this is why we face economic disaster? If Republicans are no better than Democrats, who needs them?

Funny enough, I actually feel bad for Christie. His scandal was just a traffic jam, for gosh sakes. Fat and Furious is a small scandal compared to the crimes of Obama. But it’s symbolic of everything that ails America and the GOP. Christie is the biggest loser. Pun intended.

I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. See you next week. Same time, same place. God bless America.

http://personalliberty.com/

2083 – Anders Behring Breivik (Holy War 2.83)


2083 – Anders Behring Breivik (Holy War 2.83)

 

1

O God, do not keep silent; be not quiet, O God, be not still.

2

See how your enemies are astir, how your foes rear their heads.

3

With cunning they conspire against your people; they plot against those you cherish.

4

Come, they say, let us destroy them as a nation, that the name of Israel be remembered no more.

5

With one mind they plot together; they form an alliance against you –

6

the tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites, of Moab and the Hagrites,

7

Gebal, [ That is, Byblos ] Ammon and Amalek, Philistia, with the people of Tyre.

8

Even Assyria has joined them to lend strength to the descendants of Lot. Selah

9

Do to them as you did to Midian, as you did to Sisera and Jabin at the river Kishon,

10

who perished at Endor and became like refuse on the ground.

11

Make their nobles like Oreb and Zeeb, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna,

12

who said, Let us take possession of the pasture-lands of God.

13

Make them like tumble-weed, O my God, like chaff before the wind.

14

As fire consumes the forest or a flame sets the mountains ablaze,

15

so pursue them with your tempest and terrify them with your storm.

16

Cover their faces with shame so that men will seek your name, O LORD.

17

May they ever be ashamed and dismayed; may they perish in disgrace.

18

Let them know that you, whose name is the LORD – that you alone are the Most High over all the earth.

Psalms 83.2

.

.

Reconquista

.

http://2083europe.wordpress.com/

 

“Pilgrim’s Progress” : “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers….”


Valiant-for-truth
jihad-poster-1
The Quran FROM The Religion Of Peace.com
The Quran: Quran  (2:191-193) – “And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing… but if they desist, then lo!  Allah is forgiving and merciful.   And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone.  But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)”  The  historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims  had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan  adversaries.  In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that  Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did).  The use of the word “persecution” by some Muslim translators is  thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution – “idtihad” – and  oppression – a variation of “z-l-m” – do not appear in the verse).  The actual Arabic comes from “fitna” which can  mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation.   Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized  until “religion is for Allah” – ie. unbelievers desist in their  unbelief.Quran (2:244) – “Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth  all things.”

Quran (2:216) – 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.”  Not  only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also  contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the  audience was obviously not under attack at the time.  From the Hadith, we  know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

Quran (3:56) – “As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in  this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help.”

Quran (3:151) – “Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that  they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority”.  This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity  (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be ‘joining companions to Allah’).

Quran (4:74) – “Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for  the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious,  on him We shall bestow a vast reward.”  The martyrs of Islam are  unlike the early Christians, led meekly to the slaughter.  These Muslims  are killed in battle, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the  cause of Allah.  Here is the theological basis for today’s suicide bombers.

Quran (4:76) – “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”

Quran (4:89) – “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the  same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in  the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize  them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or  helpers from their ranks.”

Quran (4:95) – “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. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with  their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith)  Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished  above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-”  This passage  criticizes “peaceful” Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting  them know that they are less worthy in Allah’s eyes.  It also  demolishes the modern myth that “Jihad” doesn’t mean holy war in the  Quran, but  rather a spiritual struggle.  Not only is the Arabic word used in this  passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the  physically disabled are given exemption.  (The Hadith reveals the context  of the passage to be in response to a blind man’s protest that he is unable to  engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).

Quran (4:104) – “And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then  surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain…”  Is pursuing  an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

Quran (5:33) – “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and  strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered  or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides  or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this  world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement”

Quran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore  strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”  No  reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

Quran (8:15) – “O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not  your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless  maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath  from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey’s end.”

Quran (8:39) – “And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder,  unbelief) and religion should  be only for Allah”  Some translations interpret “fitna” as  “persecution”, but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported  by the historical context (See notes for  2:293, also).  The Meccans were simply refusing  Muhammad access to their city during Haj.  Other Muslims were allowed  to travel there – just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on  Mecca prior to his eviction.  The Meccans were also acting in defense of  their religion, since it was Muhammad’s intention to destroy their idols and  establish Islam by force (which he later did).  Hence the critical part of  this verse is to fight until “religion is only for Allah”,  meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the  opposition.   According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that “Allah must have no rivals.”

Quran (8:57) – “If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in  those who are behind them, that haply they may remember.”

Quran (8:59-60) – “And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah’s  Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape.  Make ready for them all thou canst of  (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of  Allah and your enemy.”

Quran (8:65) – “O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight…”

Quran (9:5) – “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters  wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait  for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the  poor-rate, leave their way free to them.”  According to this  verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam  (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion’s  Five Pillars).  This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence  within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as  well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack.   Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make  it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months).   The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by  Muhammad and posed no threat.  Once the Muslims had the power, they  violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.

Quran (9:14) – “Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to  disgrace…”

Quran (9:20) – “Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth  and their lives in Allah’s way are of much greater worth in Allah’s sight. These  are they who are triumphant.”  The Arabic word interpreted as  “striving” in this verse is the same root as “Jihad”.  The context is  obviously holy war.

Quran (9:29) – “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.”  “People of the Book” refers to Christians and Jews.  According to  this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification  being their religious status.  This was one of the  final “revelations” from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military  expansion, in which Muhammad’s companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the  Christian world in the next 100 years.  Islam is intended to dominate  all other people and faiths.

Quran (9:30) – “And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The  Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate  the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are  turned away!”

Quran (9:38-39) – “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.”  This is a warning to  those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.

Quran (9:41) – “Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and  your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew.”  See also the verse that follows (9:42)  – “If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would  (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed)  on them”  This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in  self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long  distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case,  according to the historians).

Quran (9:73) – “O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be  unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.”  Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that they are merely  firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter.  It also explains  why today’s devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.

Quran (9:88) – “But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with  their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they  who will prosper.”

Quran (9:111) – “Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for  theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and  slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the  Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah?  then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement  supreme.”

Quran (9:123) – “O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and  let them find in you hardness.”

Quran (17:16) – “And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people  of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves  true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction.”  Note that  the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is “utter destruction.”   (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an  invitation to Islam).

Quran  (18:65-81) – This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a  family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either  through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion.  The story (which is not  found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with  “special knowledge” who does things which don’t seem to make sense on the  surface, but are then justified according to later explanation.  One such  action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74).  However, the wise  man later explains that it was feared that the boy would “grieve” his parents by  “disobedience and ingratitude.”  He was killed so that Allah could provide  them a ‘better’ son.  (Note: This is one reason why honor killing  is sanctioned by Sharia.  Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says  that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills  their offspring (o.1.1-2).)

Quran (21:44) – “We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until  the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land  (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?”

Quran (25:52) – “Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the  utmost strenuousness…”   “Strive against” is  Jihad – obviously not in the personal context.  It’s also significant to  point out that this is a Meccan verse.

Quran  (33:60-62) – “If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the  alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them,  then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while.  Accursed, they  will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter.”    This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered “merciless” and “horrible murder”  in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to  “fight in the way of Allah” (3:167)  and hence don’t act as Muslims should), those with “diseased hearts” (which include Jews and  Christians 5:51-52), and “alarmists” or “agitators who include those who merely speak  out against Islam, according to Muhammad’s biographers.  It is worth noting  that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today’s  terrorists do.  If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of  Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah’s eternal word to Muslim  generations.

Quran (47:3-4) – “Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe  follow the truth from their lord.  Thus does Allah set forth form men their  lessons by similitude.  Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks  until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners,”  Those who reject Allah are to be subdued in battle.  The verse goes on to  say the only reason Allah doesn’t do the dirty work himself is in order to to  test the faithfulness of Muslims.  Those who kill pass the test. “But if  it had been Allah’s Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them  (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But  those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be  lost.”

Quran (47:35) – “Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be  uppermost (Shakir: “have the upper hand”) for Allah is with you,” 

Quran (48:17) – “There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is  there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth  Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers  flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom.”  Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means ‘spiritual struggle.’   Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted?  This verse also  says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.

Quran (48:29) – “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless)  against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves”  Islam is not about treating everyone equally.  There are two very  distinct standards that are applied based on religious status.  Also the  word used for ‘hard’ or ‘ruthless’ in this verse shares the same root as the  word translated as ‘painful’ or severe’ in verse 16.

Quran (61:4) – “Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way”  Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to “battle array”  meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict.  This is followed by (61:9): “He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the  religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even  though the infidels may resist.”  (See next verse, below).   Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.

Quran (61:10-12) – “O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you  from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ),  and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and  your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will  forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and  pleasant dwelling in Gardens of ‘Adn – Eternity [‘Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is  indeed the great success.”  This verse refers to physical battle  in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above).  It uses  the Arabic word, Jihad.

Quran (66:9) – “O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be  stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey’s end.”  The root word of “Jihad” is used again here.  The context is clearly holy  war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include “hypocrites” – those who  call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.

From the Hadith:Bukhari (52:177) – Allah’s Apostle said, “The Hour will not be  established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will  be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.” Bukhari (52:256) – The Prophet… was asked whether it was permissible to  attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women  and children to danger. The Prophet replied, “They (i.e. women and children) are  from them (i.e. pagans).”  In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is  permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy.   This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.

Bukhari (52:65) – The Prophet said, ‘He who fights that Allah’s Word,  Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah’s Cause.  Muhammad’s words  are the basis for offensive Jihad – spreading Islam by force.  This is how  it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today.

Bukhari (52:220) – Allah’s Apostle said… ‘I have been made victorious  with terror’

Abu Dawud (14:2526) – The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things  are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, “There is  no god but Allah” and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and  not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be  performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day  the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist)

Abu Dawud (14:2527) – The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah  (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler,  whether he is pious or impious

Muslim (1:33) – the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to  fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that  Muhammad is the messenger of Allah

Bukhari (8:387) – Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the  people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’.   And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we  slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not  interfere with them except legally.”

Muslim (1:30) – “The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so  long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah.”

Bukhari (11:626) [Muhammad said:] “I decided to order a man to  lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their  houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes.”

Muslim (1:149) – “Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which  of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and  Jihad in His cause…”

Muslim (20:4645) – “…He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said:  There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade  one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal  to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa’id) said: What is that  act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!”

Muslim (20:4696) – “the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said:  ‘One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any  desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'”

Muslim (19:4321-4323) – Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over  the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against  unbelievers.  His response: “They are of them (meaning the enemy).”

Muslim (19:4294) – “When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)  appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort  him… He 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. If  they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from  doing them any harm. 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.”

Bukhari 1:35  “The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty ( if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise ( if he is killed).” 

Tabari 7:97  The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, “Kill any Jew  who falls under your power.”  Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad’s  men because he insulted Islam.  Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his  orders to kill.  An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his  Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.

Tabari 9:69  “Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us”  The words of  Muhammad, prophet of Islam.

Tabari 17:187  “‘By God, our religion (din) from which we have departed is better and more  correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them  from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.’ And they  returned to their former religion.”  The words of a group of Christians  who had converted to Islam, but realized their error after being shocked by the  violence and looting committed in the name of Allah.  The price of their  decision to return to a religion of peace was that the men were beheaded and the  woman and children enslaved by the caliph Ali.

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 327: – “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A  slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of  this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires  killing them to manifest the religion.’”

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 990: –  Lest anyone think that cutting off someone’s head while screaming ‘Allah Akbar!’  is a modern creation, here is an account of that very practice under Muhammad, who  seems to approve.

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: – “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah.”  Muhammad’s instructions to his men prior to a military raid.

Saifur Rahman, The Sealed Nectar  p.227-228“Embrace Islam… If you two accept Islam, you will remain  in command of your country; but if your refuse my Call, you’ve got to remember  that all of your possessions are perishable. My horsemen will appropriate your  land, and my Prophethood will assume preponderance over your kingship.”   One of several letters from Muhammad to rulers of other countries.  The  significance is that the recipients were not making war or threatening Muslims.   Their subsequent defeat and subjugation by Muhammad’s armies was justified  merely on the basis of their unbelief.

 

Additional Notes: Other than the fact that Muslims haven’t killed every  non-Muslim under their domain, there is very little else that they can point to  as proof that theirs is a peaceful, tolerant religion.  Where Islam is dominant (as in the Middle East and Pakistan) religious minorities suffer brutal  persecution with little resistance.  Where Islam is in the minority (as in  Thailand, the Philippines and Europe) there is the threat of violence if  Muslim demands are not met.  Either situation seems to provide a  justification for religious terrorism, which is persistent and endemic to  Islamic fundamentalism.The reasons are obvious and begin with the Quran.  Few  verses of Islam’s most sacred text can be construed to fit the contemporary virtues of religious tolerance  and universal brotherhood.  Those that do are earlier “Meccan” verses  which  are obviously abrogated by later ones.  This is why Muslim apologists  speak of the “risks” of trying to interpret the  Quran  without their “assistance” – even while claiming that it is a perfect book.

Far from being mere history or theological construct, the  violent verses of the Quran have played a key role in very real massacre and  genocide.  This includes the brutal slaughter of tens of millions of  Hindus for five centuries beginning around 1000 AD with Mahmud of Ghazni’s  bloody conquest.  Both he and the later Tamerlane (Islam’s Genghis Khan)  slaughtered an untold number merely for defending their temples from  destruction.  Buddhism was very nearly wiped off the Indian  subcontinent.  Judaism and Christianity met the same fate (albeit more  slowly) in areas  conquered by Muslim armies, including the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Europe,  including today’s Turkey.  Zoroastrianism, the ancient religion of a proud Persian  people is despised by Muslims and barely survives in modern Iran.

So ingrained is violence in the religion that Islam has  never really stopped being at war, either with other religions or with itself.

Muhammad was a military leader, laying siege to towns,  massacring the men,  raping their women, enslaving their children, and taking  the property of others as his own.  On several occasions he  rejected offers of surrender from the besieged inhabitants and even butchered captives.  He actually inspired his followers to battle when they  did not feel it was right to fight,   promising them slaves and booty if they did and threatening them with Hell if  they did not.  Muhammad allowed his men to  rape traumatized women captured in battle, usually on the very day their  husbands and family members were slaughtered.

It is important to emphasize that, for the most part, Muslim armies waged aggressive campaigns, and the religion’s most dramatic military conquests  were made by the actual companions of Muhammad in the decades following his death.  The  early Islamic principle of warfare was that the civilian population of a town was  to be destroyed (ie. men executed, women and children taken as slaves) if they  defended themselves.  Although modern apologists often claim that  Muslims are only supposed to attack in self-defense, this is an oxymoron  that is  flatly contradicted by the accounts of Islamic historians and others that go back  to the time of Muhammad.

Consider the example of the Qurayza Jews, who were completely  obliterated only five years after Muhammad arrived in Medina.  Their leader  opted to stay neutral when their town was besieged by a Meccan army that   was sent to  take revenge for Muhammad’s deadly caravan raids.  The tribe killed no one  from either side and even surrendered peacefully to Muhammad after the Meccans  had been turned back.  Yet the prophet of Islam had every male member of  the Qurayza beheaded, and every woman and child enslaved, even raping one of the  captives himself (what Muslim apologists might refer to as “same day marriage”).

One of Islam’s most revered modern scholars, Sheikh Yusuf  al-Qaradawi, openly sanctions offensive Jihad: “In the Jihad which you are  seeking, you look for the enemy and invade him. This type of Jihad takes place only when the Islamic state is  invading other [countries] in order to spread the word of Islam and to remove obstacles standing in its way.”  Elsewhere, he  notes: “Islam has the right to take the initiative…this is God’s religion and it is for the whole  world. It has the right to destroy all obstacles in the form  of institutions and traditions … it attacks institutions and  traditions to release human beings from their poisonous  influences, which distort human nature and curtail human freedom.  Those who say that Islamic Jihad was merely for the defense of the ‘homeland of Islam’ diminish the greatness of the Islamic way of life.”

The widely respected Dictionary of Islam defines Jihad as “A religious war with those who are unbelievers in the  mission of Muhammad. It is an incumbent religious duty, established in the  Qur’an and in the Traditions as a divine institution, and enjoined specially for  the purpose of advancing Islam and of repelling evil from Muslims…[Quoting from  the Hanafi school, Hedaya, 2:140, 141.], “The destruction of the sword is  incurred by infidels, although they be not the first aggressors, as appears  from various passages in the traditions which are generally received to this  effect.”

Muhammad’s failure to leave a clear  line of succession resulted in perpetual internal war following his death.   Those who knew him best first fought to keep remote tribes from leaving Islam  and reverting to their preferred religion (the Ridda or ‘Apostasy wars’).  Then, within the closer community,  early Meccan converts battled later ones.  Hostility developed between those  immigrants who had traveled with Muhammad to Mecca and the Ansar at Medina who  had helped them settle in.  Finally there was a violent struggle within  Muhammad’s own family between his favorite wife and favorite daughter – a jagged  schism that has left Shias and Sunnis at each others’ throats to this day.

The strangest and most untrue thing that can be said about  Islam is that it is a Religion of Peace.  If every standard by which the  West is judged and condemned (slavery, imperialism, intolerance, misogyny,  sexual repression, warfare…) were applied equally to Islam, the verdict would be devastating.  Islam never gives up what it conquers, be it religion,  culture, language or life.  Neither does it make apologies or any real  effort at moral progress.  It is the least open to dialogue and the most  self-absorbed.  It is convinced of its own perfection, yet brutally shuns  self-examination and represses criticism.

This is what makes the Quran’s verses of violence so dangerous.   They are given the weight of divine command.  While Muslim terrorists take them as literally as anything else in their  holy book,  and understand that Islam is incomplete without Jihad, moderates offer little to  contradict them – outside of opinion.  Indeed, what do they have?  Speaking of peace and  love may win over the ignorant, but when every twelfth verse of Islam’s holiest  book either speaks to Allah’s hatred for non-Muslims or calls for their death,  forced conversion, or subjugation, it’s little wonder that sympathy for  terrorism runs as  deeply as it does in the broader community – even if most  Muslims personally prefer not to interpret their religion in this way.

Although scholars like Ibn Khaldun, one of Islam’s most  respected philosophers, understood that “the holy war is a religious duty,  because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to)  convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force”, many other Muslims are either unaware or willfully  ignorant of the Quran’s  near absence of verses that preach universal non-violence.  Their  understanding of Islam comes from what they are taught by others.  In the  West, it is typical for believers to think that their religion must be  like Christianity – preaching the New Testament virtues of peace, love, and  tolerance – because Muslims are taught that Islam is supposed to be  superior in  every way.  They are somewhat surprised and embarrassed to learn that the  evidence of the Quran and the bloody history of Islam are very much in  contradiction to this.

Others simply accept the violence.  In 1991, a  Palestinian couple in America was convicted of stabbing their daughter to death  for being too Westernized.  A family friend came to their defense,  excoriating the jury for not understanding the “culture”, claiming that the  father was merely following “the religion” and saying that the couple had to  “discipline their daughter or lose respect.” (source).   In 2011, unrepentant Palestinian terrorists, responsible for the brutal murders of civilians, women and children explicitly in the name of Allah were treated to a luxurious “holy pilgrimage” to Mecca by  the Saudi king – without a single Muslim voice raised in protest.

For their part, Western liberals would do well not to  sacrifice critical thinking to the god of political correctness, or  look for reasons to bring other religion down to the level of Islam merely to  avoid the existential truth that this it is both different and dangerous.

There are just too many Muslims who take the Quran  literally… and too many others who couldn’t care less about the  violence done in the name of Islam.

Sam Harris on Islam the Religion of Peace

The Religion Of Pieces


The Religion Of Pieces

 

http://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/video-hear-what-rohingya-muslims-are-up-to-in-myanmar-burma/

 

Eulogy for Former Prime Minister Ariel “Arik” Sharon


January 12, 2014

Eulogy for Former Prime Minister Ariel “Arik” Sharon

Ariel “Arik” Sharon was the man at the focal-point of Israeli history from the fight for independence and the founding of the State of Israel to her defender throughout her wars often serving as the mainstay against disastrous potentials turning them into miraculous victories. Unfortunately, Arik Sharon will be remembered enough for his shortcomings as he will for his laudable victories both on the field of battle and within government service in the Knesset and as Minister of Defense and Prime Minister. Israel’s enemies will forever point to the assault on the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila in 1982 by Christian ‘Phalanges’ militias taking revenge for the assaults and murders of Christians by Palestinian terrorists. Arik Sharon was cleared of direct responsibility for these attacks but will always suffer from suspicions that he could have taken steps to either prevent or severely curtail the resulting slaughter. Arik Sharon will also be remembered by many ardent Zionists as the man behind the destructions of the Sinai settlements when Israel traded the entire Sinai Peninsula for a potentially worthless treaty which may result in not being worth the paper it is printed on as well as the driving force behind the most disastrous political decision made throughout Israeli history, the disengagement from the Gaza Strip which resulted in allowing a Hamas governed terrorist entity that trains and launches endless attacks on Israelis living in the southern half of the country.

Where these detractions from what would otherwise be one of the most laudable men in the modern history of Israel will forever be noted in the written history, for the period of mourning for a man who served the nation and her people to the best of his formidable ability we should forgive his transgressions and pay homage and give thanks for all that the man known as the Bulldozer gave selflessly to the absolute best of his abilities. As a military commander and soldier he never showed any sign of weakness or indecision. No task he was assigned was ever too difficult as he surmounted every challenge in his path by plowing straight ahead as a bulldozer smashing all in his path. Arik Sharon was not one to shrink from challenges and was ever the bold leader needed at some of the darkest times of great challenge from the fight for independence through facing the terror threats and assaults by foreign armies. When confusion ruled the day, Arik Sharon would point his troops in the direction of the threats and always gave the same order, go forward, straight to the goal and let nothing stand to deny you your victory, and that was exactly what the troops under his command would do, executing somewhat out of fear of falling short and having to face Sharon and explain as well as because they had been well trained and had the confidence in themselves and in General Sharon.

For the time being, let us all praise the greatness as a protector of Eretz Yisroel and her people that was Arik Sharon and put aside any differences we may have had with the man who Israel could always rely upon on the field of battle. Admire a commander of troops for whom retreat was simply not moving forward as rapidly as he would have liked but never would it mean giving lands needing to pay for that same piece of ground twice. We should honor the man for whom everything could be settled with a good dose of boldness and determination, a trait he exalted on the battlefield and also brought to politics. It can be said simply that Arik Sharon did not take prisoners and could always be depended upon to advance never resting on his laurels. Let us remember Arik Sharon as a man of action who after a long service where remaining complacent was never a consideration faded slowly away allowing time for a nation to carefully consider his merits and deficiencies and hopefully the vast majority will side that Arik Sharon was a laudable man of convictions and proud in service of his country and its people. Eretz Yisroel owes him thanks for honest service in deed and thought, may he be accepted with grace, blessings, and Psalms of appreciation in Heaven.

From Beyond the Cusp

http://beyondthecusp.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/eulogy-for-former-prime-minister-ariel-arik-sharon/

(Video) Serbian Foreign Affairs Editor Srdja Trifkovic Says It Like It Is About Islam


(Video) Serbian Foreign Affairs Editor Srdja Trifkovic Says It Like It Is About Islam



The Muslim Issue

Aired by RT on Sep 17, 2012, Serbian Foreign Affairs Editor of the Chronicles magazine, Srdja Trifkovic, must be one of the most honest and smartest journalist’s around.

Listen to his comment about the Muslim aggression, blamed on the ‘Mohammed film’ that also killed U.S. Ambassador to Libya in Bengazi, Chris Stevens. Serbia has spent hundreds of years battling Muslim insurgency and problems since the Ottoman Empire. In spite of that Serbia has a lower Muslim population today than Sweden, UK, Germany or France. They know very well there exist no ‘minority’ Muslim extremist, or different versions for jihad or Islam.

Stevens was also raped with a rod before he was killed, a rather common practice amongst the Islamonazi’s to humiliate their victims.

The uproar in the Arab world was in fact an annual 9/11 cross-border jihad and had nothing whatsoever to do with the film, which didn’t even…

View original post 143 more words

Music : Idan Raichel


Music : Idan Raichel (Courtesy of Louyehi)

Idan Raichel.jpg

Idan Raichel (Hebrew: עידן רייכל‎, IPA: [ʔiˈdan ˈʁaiχel]; b. September 12, 1977) is an Israeli singer-songwriter and a musician, known for his Idan Raichel Project (Hebrew: הפרוייקט של עידן רייכל), distinctive for its fusion of electronics, traditional Hebrew texts, Arab and Ethiopian music. Prior to the Project, Raichel was a keyboardist, collaborating with artists such as Ivri Lider.

Idan Raichel – Bo’i (come with me)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idan_Raichel

 

Will Arabs Have the Courage to Label Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Group?


The Bullying, Lying, Spying Tyrant In The White House


 

The Bullying, Lying, Spying Tyrant In The White House

Hello, I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. Happy New Year 2014. Unfortunately, happy days aren’t here again. I can’t lie to you. I can’t make something up to pacify you during a national holiday. My New Year’s gift to you is the truth. You’ve got to hear it if you want to save America, save your job or business, save your civil rights and freedoms, and save your children’s or grandchildren’s future.

The truth is shocking and disturbing. The truth is we have a tyrant in the White House. His level of bullying, lying, spying, distorting, manipulating, intimidating, demonizing and using propaganda to cram his policies down our throats is unlike any President in history. His name is Barack Obama. But it might as well be some Marxist thug like Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez or the old leaders of East Germany. The result is something none of us ever imagined: America living in decline, crisis and fear.

An even better analogy is to compare Obama to Chicago’s own Al Capone. We have an organized crime gangster living in the White House who believes the ends justify the means. He’s playing the meanest, dirtiest game that has ever been played in D.C. Let me explain the tricks of the gangster’s trade and how we are being played.

First, Obama uses his army of government employees to fix elections by intimidating critics and destroying his political opposition. The Tea Parties won the 2010 elections in a historic landslide. So just like the dictator/gangster Obama is, he used the Internal Revenue Service to attack, persecute and bankrupt them. He sucked out their life, energy and enthusiasm. The result: Amid the worst economy since the Great Depression, Obama won the election with his army of government employees doing the dirty work.

And just to be sure, Obama’s loyal government employee goons in the Census Bureau created fraudulent data about jobs in the weeks leading up to Election Day. Like all organized crime, the books were cooked. And I believe the fraud continues unabated every month. The jobs reports are either outright crooked, just made up out of thin air or certainly manipulated to make it look like we have a jobs recovery. We don’t.

That’s how gangsters and tin pot dictators stay in power: through an army of brutal enforcers doing whatever it takes to keep the boss in power. We don’t have a President, we have a capo di tutti.

Don’t forget Obama also used the IRS to silence free speech by attacking critics (like me) and hundreds of others who dared criticize him. Obama even stooped so low as to persecute a Stage 4 terminal cancer victim who criticized Obamacare. Only a few days after appearing on FOX News, this cancer victim at death’s door was audited by the IRS. Coincidence? If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

But that’s all child’s play. The serious dictator/gangster wants to know your deepest, darkest secrets so he can extort and blackmail you. Obama uses the IRS to uncover his opponent’s business and tax dealings. He uses the National Security Agency to listen to all our calls, emails and texts. He uses Obamacare to snoop into your medical and sexual history. Or didn’t you know Obamacare demands that your doctor ask about your sexual history? That information is now in the hands of government (aka Big Brother). Obama understands whoever has the most information is in control.

Everyone has secrets they don’t want publicly exposed, at the risk of losing your career, reputation or — worst of all — your wife and family. I believe Obama and his goons are using this information to extort and blackmail his GOP opposition.

If you don’t believe this is happening, you are naïve. This is the very point of all the three-letter government organizations: IRS, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), NSA. Obama uses them as his personal army, police force and Mafia hit men.

How else can you explain John Boehner calling Obama bad names and swearing to support small government, lower taxes, less spending and reducing the debt, and then turning around days later and agreeing to a deal to increase spending and raise taxes and the debt?

How else can you explain a true-blue conservative patriot like Justice John Roberts standing in full throttle opposition to Obamacare, writing the majority Supreme Court opinion against it, striking it down, killing it, and then suddenly reversing course to join the other side and write a new majority opinion supporting and approving Obamacare?

How else can you explain Gen. David “We Never Leave Anyone Behind” Petraeus, then head of the CIA, standing silently by while his CIA operatives were murdered and left behind in Benghazi? Obama refused to send help, yet Petraeus never said a word. Why? Was he being blackmailed over an affair? Now we know he was, in fact, having an affair. But at the time, no one knew – except, of course, the government agents listening to his calls and spying on his emails. Did they use that information to blackmail him, and then hang him out to dry after the fact? Perhaps the affair was the smallest thing they had on Petraeus. Perhaps there’s much more that we’ll never know.

But everyone has secrets. Everyone does something wrong. Big Brother now knows them. And I believe they are using them to extort our politicians and military leaders.

Obama obviously has ways to control people. It takes more than wonderful speeches on teleprompter to make conservatives suddenly go against all their principals. My belief is that Obama and his Chicago hit squad has “the goods” on the opposition. They find your weakness, then hold it over your head like a sword. They’ve uncovered transgressions, corruption, insider trading, tax cheating or photos of the political opposition in bed with the wrong person. They might even offer a deal too good to refuse: Vote our way, and we’ll give you a $1 million-per-year lobbying job or law-firm partnership. Vote against us and we’ll leak your embarrassing secrets and ruin your life. There is no other common-sense explanation.

What about Obama’s executive orders, ignoring Congress and the Constitution to carry out his big government plans: to give amnesty to illegal immigrants, to use the EPA to destroy the coal industry, to stop oil drilling cold in its tracks? The list is long. Just like dictators and Mafia gangsters who couldn’t care less what laws say.

Or Obama’s henchman in the Senate, Harry Reid, dispensing with a century of tradition to allow Obama’s appointees to be approved by a simple 51-vote majority: a so-called “nuclear option.” Why? To put appointees in places of importance with such radical Marxist backgrounds they could never be approved without rigging the system.

Then there’s the military purge, about which few American’s know. Obama has fired more commanding generals in the past year, along with hundreds of junior officers on track to become generals, than any President in history. It’s a scene right out of “The Godfather,” when Al Pacino kills every opponent standing in the way of his power.

This is not a happy commentary for New Year’s. But this is the commentary America needs to hear. This is my “tough love” New Year’s gift to America. A wake-up call. A gift that just might save your life.

Wake up, America. Because by next New Year (2015), it may all be gone: our country, capitalism, Judeo-Christian values, American exceptionalism and our children’s future.

All wiped away by one man: a lying, spying, bullying tyrant in the White House.

King Faisal Mosque in Basel incites illegal activity


King Faisal Mosque in Basel incites illegal activity

 By Kacem El Ghazzali. this Article was first published in the Basler Zeitung.

In King Faisal mosque in Basel, at a location accessible only to visitors who come for prayer, you can find an announcement on the wall in Arabic, which is a fatwa by a Salafist sheik from Saudi Arabia, explaining to Muslims who live in the West how they should deal with infidels during their stay in Western countries.

The fatwa starts by explaining the concept of “infidel land”, defined as a land where Islamic Sharia is not applied. This obviously includes Switzerland, as a country that uses civil law as a reference, on the basis of a social contract between all citizens and foreign residents, which guarantees everyone’s rights without any discrimination based on gender, skin color, or belief; meaning that whoever chooses to live in Switzerland would have to abide by those laws, which also ensure his or her protection from any discrimination or persecution.

But when a group of Muslims deems as essential to obey a religious order, even before the nature of the relationship towards society and law is defined, especially when such an order is related to murder or theft, then such an act (issuing such a fatwa and publicizing it) should be considered as dangerous, as it ignores all laws and institutions of the State, and threatens public peace.

This is the case for the fatwa that has been publicized at King Faisal mosque. It urges Muslims living in the land of the infidels, Switzerland, to keep the peace and avoid fighting the infidels and stealing their possessions, but it does not stop there: it adds the condition for peace, must be that those infidels should not have fought them in their religion. At first glance, the reader might wonder, then where’s the problem? Switzerland as we all know is a country that does not participate in wars and has no enmity whatsoever with Muslims, and the Swiss Constitution respects freedom of religion.

That is true of course. Switzerland is a democratic country, and has an old humanistic tradition. But through activities that I followed, by some Islamist Salafist organizations in Switzerland, such as the Swiss Islamic Council (IZRS), I found that in their public meetings, they always put forth an image of Switzerland as a country that is waging a war against Islam and Muslims. What else can we understand from claims made by Nicolas Blancho, the director of the (IZRS), on the Egyptian Salafist channel An-Nas TV, that Muslims are suffering from discrimination and persecution, that a Muslim can’t get a seat in the parliament, and that this “war” comes from the fact that the Western cultural model does not accept an alternative inspired by Islam? I would ask Blancho: what is this Islamic model that he wants as an alternative for Switzerland? Is it a model à la Saudi Arabia, with public decapitations of infidels, where women are not allowed into public libraries? And what would you say about a Muslim father who forbids his child daughter from having swimming courses, because he considers her small body subject to male sexual lust?

When a canton forbids the burka, because it kills the individuality of women and pushes them to isolation from social life, Islamists consider that war on Islam. King Faisal mosque fatwa is therefore a call to war, anarchy, and disrespect of Swiss law, because it linked respect of the law and peace with a condition prone to many interpretations, especially when used by such organizations that adopt a radical understanding of Islam. And instead of being an obvious matter, respect of the law becomes dependent upon religious approval, the future of peaceful coexistence in society tied to religious texts from Saudi Arabia, and the mosque supposed to be a place of worship becomes an institution that meddles with civil law. We have to ring the bells of danger, pay close attention to such happenings, and punish those who encourage such ideas.

Save Muslims from Swiss Islamic Council (IZRS)

Not all Muslims in Switzerland are extremists. It’s a truth that cannot be denied. It would be sheer ignorance to lump all Muslims in the same basket. And when I discuss Islam in Switzerland, I am speaking of that group of Muslims who are trying to impose their laws, and are also characterized by deviousness when dealing with counter arguments. Once for example when I met Swiss Islamic Council president Nicolas Blancho in Zurich, I asked him about their position concerning the application of Sharia, which is in contradiction with human rights, does not recognize civil law, and considers that all laws must be derived from Koran and Tradition. His answer was a shock. He did not say that he was against anyone who infringed upon the law even if it originated from religion, or that he would not accept that in the 21st century people would lose their lives for changing their religion. His answer was: I am with Sharia if people choose it. This shows the nature of his ideology, for he would never say something like “I’m against killing people who leave Islam”, but he would say “we respect Swiss law because we can’t apply Sharia yet”. When would Mr Blancho kill apostates then, do you think?

Every year, Blancho’s association, Swiss Islamic Council, organizes a conference where famous sheiks are invited. And since the beginning, the event has been criticized for inviting some of the most extremist religious personalities. Switzerland only managed to deny entry to two among them, namely Pierre Vogel and Mohamed Al-Arifi, for their incitement to hatred and violence.

Switzerland: Entry Ban for Peaceful Islamic Preacher (Pierre Vogel)

But the most important question here is: why does the council invite sheiks who call for violence, infringement on women’s rights, and killing apostates and infidels? This shows us the true face of the council, which is trying to create a parallel society that refuses to obey the law, and fights government policy to help immigrants integrate into society. The council is therefore hurting Muslims first and foremost, pushing them to isolate themselves from society and its laws, using religion and mosques as a tool of incitement against the society where they live, with its rich cultural components deemed as “blasphemous”.

I know that this article will not be met with a positive and responsible answer from Islamists. I have become used to getting responses in the form of terms and concepts that are completely unrelated to the context of the discussion; only attempts to silence whoever tries to criticize their enmity and hatred to diversity. For every time such topics are discussed in the Swiss public sphere, you get the usual ready-made response, which has almost become like a cliché, “you’re an islamophobe”; and so they succeed, time and again, into diverting the discussion from their deeds and calls for hatred and violence, to another topic completely detached from reality.

When I say that I’m against those who want to divide society into infidels and believers, good guys and bad guys, clean girls and dirty girls… when I state my disapproval of those who await a fatwa from Saudi Arabia to teach them how to deal with society and live among the Swiss people, when I oppose killing apostates, or infringements on human rights in the name of religion, it is simply stupid and foolish to call me an islamophobe, because I’m simply calling for a free society, that guarantees rights for everyone, as opposed to a society that wants to bring back practices from the Middle Ages, when grinding wars were waged under the slogan: killing an infidel is not a crime, it is the path towards God.

Muslim In Switzerland – If Your Wife Does Not Want Sex It’s OK To Beat Her

 

%d bloggers like this: