THE CREEP OF SHARIA LAW INTO THE WEST

THIS IS A CHAPTER FROM AN UPCOMING book: Sharia Law for Non-Muslims. The book was designed to be short, only 48 pages. Many people do not want to know anything about Islam, but experience shows that they may have an interest in Islamic law. Since it doesn't make any difference which part of a rope you pick up first, Sharia law is a great way to start learning about the true nature of Islam.

CHAPTER 1

Sharia in Europe Today

When you study Islam in Europe today, you are seeing America in 20 years. Why? The actions by Muslims in Europe are based on Sharia law, the same Sharia law that is beginning to be implemented in America today.

Traffic cannot move in London streets as Muslims commandeer the streets to pray-a political result based on Sharia law.

Entire areas of Europe are no-go zones for non-Muslims, this includes the police. These are Islamic enclaves where only Muslims live. The Muslim-only policy is based on Sharia.

In England an Anglican bishop calls for the rule of Islamic law for Muslims. The bishop is obeying Sharia law.

In the schools only Islamic approved texts can be used. This is based on Sharia law.

Christians may not speak to Muslims about Christianity nor may they hand out literature. This is a political result based on Sharia law enforced by British courts.

Rape by Muslims is so prevalent that Sweden has forbidden the police to collect any data in the investigation that would point to Islam. Rape is part of Islamic doctrine as applied to non-Muslim women.

In London mass demonstrations by Muslims call for the end of British law and Sharia law to rule all people. This political action is based on Sharia.

In some English hospitals, during Ramadan fast (an Islamic religious event) non-Muslims cannot eat where a Muslim can see them. The submission of non-Muslims is based on Sharia law.

At British hospitals, Muslim women are treated only as Sharia law demands.

If a Dane says that he is proud to be Danish near a Muslim, it can be seen as hate speech and racism. This is in accordance to Sharia law.

Sharia in America Today

Here are current and historical events in America that are driven by Sharia law:

On September 11, 2001 jihadists attacked and destroyed the World Trade Center. This was in compliance to the laws of jihad found in the Sharia law. The attack was a political action based upon a religious motivation.

All textbooks in America must be approved by Islamic councils that are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood. This is in accordance with Sharia law.

American employers and schools are met with demands for time and space to do Islamic prayer. These demands are based on Sharia law.

The American banking system is becoming Islamicized with Sharia financing. Our banking system indulges in Sharia financial law and does not know the rest of Sharia law.

Universities are asked to close swimming pools and other athletic facilities to be used for Muslim women.

Hospitals are being sued for not having Sharia compliant treatment.

No course at the college level uses critical thinking in the history and doctrine of Islam. Under Sharia no aspect of Islam may be criticized.

Muslim charities give money to jihadists, as per Sharia law.

Muslim foot-baths are being installed in airport facilities, using tax money. This is in accordance with Sharia law.

American prisons are a stronghold of proselytizing for Islam.

Workplaces are being made Islamic worship sites through special rooms and time off to pray. This is in accordance to Sharia law.

Islamic refugees bring all of their wives for welfare and medical treatment to America. Authorities will not act even when presented with evidence. Polygamy is pure Sharia.

We are fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to implement constitutions that have the supremacy of Sharia law as their first article.

Why Do We Need to Know Sharia?

ISLAMIC SCHOLARS CLAIM: Islamic law is perfect, universal and eternal. The laws of the United States are temporary, limited and will pass. It is the duty of every Muslim to obey the laws of Allah, the Sharia.

SHARIA: Sharia is based on the principles found in the Koran and other Islamic religious/political texts. There are no common principles between American law and Sharia.
Under Sharia law:

There is no freedom of religion

There is no freedom of speech

There is no freedom of thought

There is no freedom of artistic expression

There is no freedom of the press

There is no equality of peoples-a non-Muslim, a Kafir, is never equal to a Muslim

There are no equal rights for women

Women can be beaten

A non-Muslim cannot bear arms

There is no equal protection under Sharia for different classes of people. Justice is dualistic, with one set of laws for Muslim males and different laws for women and non-Muslims.

Our Constitution is a man-made document of ignorance, jahiliyah, that must submit to Sharia

There is no democracy, since that means that a non-Muslim is equal to a Muslim

Non-Muslims are dhimmis, third-class citizens

There is no Golden Rule

There is no critical thought

All governments must be ruled by Sharia law

Unlike common law, Sharia is not interpretive, nor can it be changed

THE SOLUTION
This book uses a fact-based approach to knowledge that uses analytic or critical thought. When you finish reading, you will know what Sharia law is. More importantly you will know why Sharia is what it is. You will understand how Sharia "works" and why it cannot change. For the first time, you will understand Islam. It will all make sense.

The Three Views of Islam

There are three points of view in dealing with Islam. The point of view depends upon how you feel about Mohammed. If you believe Mohammed is the prophet of Allah, then you are a believer. If you don't, you are a nonbeliever. The third viewpoint is that of an apologist for Islam. Apologists do not believe that Mohammed was a prophet, but they try to be tolerant without any actual knowledge of Islam.

Here is an example of the three points of view—in Medina, Mohammed sat all day long beside his 12-year-old wife while they watched as the heads of 800 Jews were removed by sword. Their heads were cut off because they had said that Mohammed was not the prophet of Allah. Muslims view these deaths as necessary because denying Mohammed's prophet-hood was an offense against Islam and beheading is the accepted method of punishment, sanctioned by Allah.

Nonbelievers look at this event as proof of the jihadic violence of Islam and as an evil act.

Apologists say that this was a historic event, that all cultures have violence in their past, and no judgment should be passed. They have never actually read any of Islam's foundational texts, but still speak authoritatively about Islam.

According to the different points of view, killing the 800 Jews was:

A tragedy

A perfect sacred act

Another historical event. We have done worse.

There is no "right" view of Islam, since the views cannot be reconciled.
This book is written from the nonbeliever point of view. Everything in this book views Islam from how it affects non-Muslims. This also means that the religion is of little importance. A Muslim cares about the religion of Islam, but all nonbelievers are affected by Islam's political views.

This book discusses Islam as a political system. There is no need to talk about Muslims or religion. Muslims are people and vary from one to another. Religion is what one does to go to Paradise and avoid Hell. It is not useful nor necessary to discuss Islam as a religion. But we have to talk about Islam in the political realm, because it is a powerful political system.

Bill Warner, Center for the Study of Political Islam

ANOTHER FOOD POISONING ATTEMPT

WE HAVE LEARNED THAT FIVE Muslim soldiers at Fort Jackson in South Carolina were arrested just before Christmas. It is unclear whether the men are still in custody. These five soldiers were part of the Arabic Translation program at the base, and are suspected of trying to poison the food supply at Fort Jackson.

A source with intimate knowledge of the investigation, which is ongoing, told CBN News investigators suspect the "Fort Jackson Five" may have been in contact with the group of five Washington, DC area Muslims that traveled to Pakistan to wage jihad against U.S. troops in December. That group was arrested by Pakistani authorities, also just before Christmas....

Meanwhile, Syrian Jews, of which there are some 100,000 in the New York area alone and whose native language is usually Arabic, are unwanted as translators.

In reply to Jim Foster's question: "Why would our authorities not want native speakers, especially those whose personal experiences would make them ideal partners for combating Islamic terror?"

Spirit of 1683 wrote:

"Political correctness—after all it would be 'racism and bigotry' to hire Christian and Jewish Arabic speakers and not Muslims."

Yep. As I have noted long ago, Christian has become effectively an ethnic category—white—such that even black Nigerian Christians (let alone Middle Eastern Christians) are treated as "honorary whites"—i.e., thrown under the bus to placate Muslims, for Muslims have become, under the mainstream aegis of PC MC, the #1 Most Privileged Ethnic Minority of the world.

Muslims have achieved this distinction for three reasons, which all interlock:

1) the West's mainstream and dominant sociopolitical paradigm, PC MC, favors what it considers "ethnic people" over white Westerners...

2) Muslims are perceived to be an "ethnic people" (or better yet, a wondrously diverse rainbow of different "ethnic peoples"— and there is good reason for this, since over 90% of Muslims around the world indeed look ethnic)...

3) And finally, Muslims are the only ethnic people to consistently threaten violence, plot violence, and often regularly successfully deliver violence on a scale that threatens the security of most nations on Earth. No other ethnic people comes close to Muslims in this regard.

#1 and #2 would explain why the white West would endow Muslims with extra deference and privileges, as the white West tends to do with all "ethnic peoples". But it takes #3 to push the equation further, to explain why it is that Muslims have elbowed their way to the #1 spot in the last decade.

Thanks to the aforementioned JW contributors for this report. For more information of other Muslim-generated food tampering please refer to this article and again here.

THE NICE MUSLIM

Claude Salhami was 'aghast' at a recent PI newsletter—Is a Nice Muslim a Good Muslim? He replied to the newsletter with his Scourge of 'Islam Experts', but he missed my point.

The point of the "Nice Muslim" newsletter is that the doctrine of Islam is inhuman, not that Muslims always practice the Islamic doctrine at all times. A Muslim can be a fine person in dealing with a kafir when they are not practicing Islam. A summary of the Nice Muslim argument is:

The Koran defines the kafir, a non-Muslim. A kafir is hated and plotted against by Allah. Kafirs can be killed, tortured, crucified, raped, insulted, enslaved and deceived. Kafir is the worst word in the human language. A kafir does not have any positive attributes.

There is no Golden Rule in Islamic ethics. The Koran repeats 12 times that a Muslim is not the friend of a kafir.

Mohammed repeatedly said that it is good to deceive the kafirs, if it advances Islam.

Mohammed destroyed each and every kafir neighbor. It is Islam's purpose to make all kafirs submit to Islam.

A Muslim can only be a true friend to a kafir by the use of the Golden Rule, a non-Islamic principle.

The conclusion is that there is no good in Islam for the kafir. Sure there are those 2.6% of the Koranic words that seem to be good, but in every case the so-called good verses are abrogated later.

Anyone who implements the doctrine of Islam is not the friend of a kafir. If they are actually a friend, it is because of the power of the Golden Rule, not Islam. There is no good in Islam for the kafir. Note that this result was reached without the use of a single verse of the Koran (no cherry picking), but uses the systemic nature of its kafir doctrine.

Mr. Salhami makes these points in his reply:

On many occasions Christians have acted badly and Muslims have acted well.

So? Christians and Muslims are people. You can prove anything you want by choosing the right member. He also has some remarks about Christianity. To which I reply: I only discuss Islam, not comparative religion.

There are good Muslims and bad Muslims and we should not confuse the two.

What is meant by 'good' Muslims? Do we judge by the Islam of Medina or by the Golden Rule? If we judge by Islam of Medina, then Osama bin Laden is a good Muslim. Of course, by the Golden Rule he is not so nice. Stay with the doctrine of Islam in judging Muslims. A good Muslim is one who follows Islamic doctrine, not one who is likable.

Mr. Salhami uses his personal experience with Muslims to learn about Islam.

This confuses cause and effect. Islam is the cause and Muslims are the effect. A nice Muslim does not prove a nice Islam. Learning from Muslims is Muslim-ology, a sociological personal endeavor. Learning about Islam from the Koran, Sira, Hadith and Sharia law is learning about Islam.

He criticizes my use of the coined term, kafir-Muslim.

I will grant him this criticism and thank him for it. A much better term is Golden-Rule Muslim. Muslims, like all humans, have an innate sense of the truth of the Golden Rule and use it at times. However, this is an un-Islamic act since Islam does not have a Golden Rule.

All of the nice Muslims Mr. Salhami meets in the Middle East will not teach him anything about the suffering of their kafir ancestors during the jihad invasion and the centuries of being dhimmis living under the horror of Sharia law. He won't learn how the native civilization has been annihilated and replaced with the civilization of Islam. They will not tell him about the murder of millions of innocent Christians, Zoroastrians, Buddhists, animists and Hindus to create the Islamic civilization.

His nice Muslim friends will not instruct him in the vision, strategy and tactics of jihad to annihilate all kafir civilizations. Nor will his nice Muslim friends ever explain Islam's dualistic ethical system, with one set of ethics for kafirs and a different set of ethics for their Muslim brothers.

Mr. Salhami is aghast at the self-taught scholars in Islam. There is a good reason for their appearance. The university trained 'experts' are apologists for Islam. They are trained in denial and justification and produce the type of scholarship that allows the army to investigate Major Hasan's jihad at Fort Hood and never refer to Islam.

The 'experts' give us the history of Islamic conquest and imperialism and praise it as the glorious rise of Islam. The 'experts' teach courses in women's studies and ignore Sharia law and Mohammed's treatment of women. They lecture on slavery and never mention the Muslim wholesaler who sold the slaves to the white man on the wooden ship or the Islamic slave trade in North Africa, East Africa, Europe and India. The denial goes on and on as the 'experts' drive our university policy. Is there a course in any American university system that is critical of Islamic political ideology? Indeed, the 'experts' argue that such a course would be bigotry.

It is the media 'experts' that give us jihad at Mumbai, India and never mention Islam. It is the 'experts' that give us the Official Islam that Bush and Obama talk about. Nice stuff-Official Islam. Too bad it does not exist.

So, it is no wonder that when we have such dhimmified professors, university trained 'experts' and media that professionals from other fields start reading the Koran, Sira and Hadith to see for themselves what the ideology actually is that drives the contradictions between current events and what we are told.

When you understand that the entire doctrine of Islam is found in Koran, Sira and Hadith, you realize that Islam is simpler than the 'experts' told us. All three texts have been made readable today and any disciplined person can become well informed. The 'experts' have failed us, and we must teach ourselves.

It is easy to be an expert. Know Mohammed and the Koran (the book he brought about). If what you say agrees with the Koran or Mohammed, then you are right. If it does not agree with Mohammed, then it is wrong, no matter who you are.

Mr. Salhami, buckle your seatbelt and prepare to be aghast again. It is a war between the university-trained dhimmi 'experts' and the self-taught kafir scholars who stand on the doctrine found in the Koran, Sira and Hadith. We will use critical thought on the doctrine and history of political Islam.

The 'experts' will talk about nice Muslims, criticize Christianity and the West, while not holding Muslims responsible for their ideology. Every Muslim must be held accountable for Islamic political doctrine and its bloody history.

Bill Warner
Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam

LET ME BE CLEAR

JUST TO PUT a sharper and more proper point on the stick that drives home the point by highlighting a few rhetoricals...

Why is my utter disdain of and rugged resistance to this wildly constructed totalitarianism called Islam a "prejudice" whereas my dislike of, say, communism or nazism (which are quite similar in ideological make-up when we sort the lies from the subterfuge), would be a political opinion? Why am I expected to automatically approve of any belief system supposedly grounded in the supernatural? Why is my reliance on reason considered inferior to their "faith" even when that faith orders great numbers of them to hate and kill all "infidels" and all of them to various other methods of aggression against said infidel?

Clearly, there are too damn many frightened little children running around this world in grown-up clothes ready to throw a tantrum if someone spoils their favorite fairy tale. The Muslims are by far the most pernicious contenders in this category.

I am not "prejudiced" against Islam. I detest it as a matter of conviction.

Educate yourselves America before it's too late, and remember, there are a myriad of strategic reasons why multiculturalism and the politically corrupted will seek to smother the truth in sickly sweet-smelling lies at every turn. But the bottom line America is fiscally and morally bankrupt. Global players are wrestling for strategic domination, and our leadership dances with our enemies and pacifies our attackers by acting like puppets, especially the Left. But realize that the Right is complicit, as well. Just educate yourself. Be certain of your sources as the BIG LIE is in vogue, but the truth is out there, and it's probably already in your heart. Knowledge will keep it there.

But the hour is getting late, said the joker to the thief...

Confused? Well, begin here with the Geert Wilders free speech case now going on in the Netherlands.

MOHAMMED SAYS WAR IS DECEIT

More and more ordinary people in America are awakening to the snicker of the jackals and the impassioned roar of the lions set in claw upon these shores. Here is Frosty Wooldridge in his essay—Muslims In 21st Century America: Arrogant, Righteous And Determined—pointing out what many in the citizenry have already discerned. Unfortunately, our bankrupt nation is being sold out by our cowardly leadership. What will it take for the West to finally grow a pair, and stand up for our own civilization instead of importing its own destruction?

AS POLITICAL CORRECTNESS ALLOWS and emboldens Muslims to continue their onslaught into the United States, few Americans see our predicament and fewer still speak up.

While liberals and academics, living in gated communities and ivory towers, shout to the rooftops the wonders of multiculturalism—a not-so-silent war gathers beneath the surface of our seemingly peaceful society.

Today, the U.S. Congress continues importing 100,000 legal immigrants every 30 days. That equals 1.2 million mostly poor, illiterate and unskilled people from third world countries that compete for limited welfare dollars and jobs. At the same time, 14 million U.S. citizens cannot obtain a job, 13.4 million American children live below the poverty line, and finally, 35 million American citizens subsist on food stamps.

Not once will you hear of any debate on the absurdity of adding 100,000 immigrants monthly to our already overwhelmed civilization. As reported in an earlier column, the U.S. suffers 40 million people that cannot read (“America filling up with dumb people” www.newswithviews.com) and 52 million Americans that cannot read past the 4th grade level. Results of poverty and illiteracy:

Unwed mothers birth tens of thousands of babies on public welfare. Black gangs attack white citizens in Denver, Colorado where I live. Hispanic gangs in Los Angeles rule the streets; so much so, police officers do not dare enter gang turf for fear of being executed. As their crimes accelerate, our national prison population, now at 2.3 million inmates, grows commensurately. While in prison, Islam appeals to and converts more and more minorities.

Read it all.

DECONSTRUCTING THOSE ARAB REFUGEES

UNTIL THE 1967 WAR, many in Western Europe saw Israel—correctly—as a tiny and besieged state, surrounded by enemies who wished to destroy it. In this respect, they were helped along by the fact that the leader of those who would after the Six-Day War be carefully renamed as the "Palestinians," were not yet called "Palestinians" but simply "the Arabs" or "the Arab refugees." And their putative leader, Ahmed Shukairy (who was himself half-Turkish), had the habit of expressing himself as a truthful Muslim, and told the world that his goal was the destruction of Israel.

The Arab leaders said the same thing. And those Arab leaders, at the time, did not have the enormous oil wealth that the member-states of OPEC really began to acquire only in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Then they enjoyed a really fantastic jump in oil revenues, and thus an equally fantastic increase in perceived power and real ability to buy all kinds of influence along with other, more tangible goods and services, only when OPEC quadrupled the price of oil in the fall of 1973.

And beginning with their defeat in the Six-Day War, the Arabs realized that they would not be able to defeat Israel militarily, at least not yet, not under the new conditions, and with Israel now in possession of "the West Bank" and Gaza and all of the Sinai (some 95% of the territory Israel won by force of arms in that war). They would have to formulate a new strategy to force Israel to disgorge what it had won, to make Israel appear not to be what in fact it still was, a tiny state subject to this unending Arab and Muslim hostility, that no concessions by Israel would ever truly assuage (at least not for the Muslims who took Islam seriously, and that meant, at least, all of the Arab Muslims). So they did several things. They decided on a campaign of diplomatic and economic warfare, accompanied by terrorist acts within Israel and against Israelis overseas, and on a campaign to weaken Israel and to force its former friends to sever ties, or at least to cease being friendly toward Israel, and ready to misunderstand its plight, and the real nature of the war—the Jihad—being waged against it.

The first to be won over, largely by bribery of African rulers, were the black African states that had enjoyed good relations with Israel and had benefited greatly from Israel's extensive, and intelligent, aid program in Black Africa, which encouraged the development of small-scale agriculture. All of these countries, or almost all, within a year or two after the Six-Day War, had been persuaded by Arab money and the promise—never fulfilled—of more money to come if they did what the Arabs wanted, cut off diplomatic relations with the Jewish state.

Read it all as noted JW contributor Hugh Fitzgerald outs the liars and puts the truth back where it belongs.

RELIGION OF PEACE STRIKES AGAIN

IT'S NOT REALLY A MYSTERY, but I suppose it's time to trot out once again the fundamentals in this old discussion in the wake of the nation's most tragic jihad attack on American soil since September 11, eight years ago. Hear the excuses lobbed in like small stones wrapped in bullying threats—I'm sure he just misunderstands his religion. He's just a lone extremist. And what about the Christian right types who kill abortionists, and uh, did I mention the bloody Crusades?

The murder and attempted murder of over forty US military personnel at Fort Hood, TX, yesterday is just the latest in several attempts by jihadists to attack military personnel stateside. This most recent example of what Professor Daniel Pipes coined as sudden jihad syndrome, we should once again without equivocation point out to our cultural relativist friends that as long as Qur'an-stoked fanatics rule Islam right now, it doesn’t matter a damn if this man had been, or any other Islamic-leaning dunderhead dares claim to be among that indeterminate group called moderate Muslims…

But this was no spontaneous event. There are numerous reports that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan gave away all of his possessions and passed out the ignoble Qur'an before tackling the task he had set for himself. Neighbors described Hasan as a quiet man who began wearing "Arabic clothing" in recent weeks. Edward Windsor, a neighbor, never suspected Hasan was in the Army. Hasan's rank surprised Windsor who would never have imagined an officer with a rank of major would have lived in an apartment that rents for $350 and houses soldiers ranked as private first class....

His history speaks for itself. This particular jihadist was suspicious above and below the call of duty, and as usual to someone who takes the ROP seriously, considered himself more a devoted Islamic believer more than an American military officer. Are ALL Muslims jihadists in waiting? No. But how do we sort them out from those who wish to simply get on with life?

The majority of mid-century Germans weren’t goose-stepping Nazis. The common peoples of Communist China & gulag-infested Russia never wanted to kill nearly a hundred million of their own people, but the ruling forces did indeed. Peace loving and moderate Germans didn’t stop Hitler and his minions. Peaceful, decent Russian and Chinese people didn’t stop their communist tyrants, either. But legion were the appeasers, the apathetic, the cowards.

Clearly then, the peace loving Muslims of today don’t matter in the frenetic scheme of things. These folks, whoever they are, are irrelevant, helpless, cowed, camouflage, et cetera, brainwashed since childhood to despise the enemies of Islam, an idea reinforced with their daily devotions, and thus will never engage to stop the jihadists, but in fact are much more likely to circle the wagons to defend and praise the jihadists. Nothing mysterious. Human nature, actually.

So, it’s up to those of us who have studied both the battlefield and the combatant. We’re the only ones who have ascertained the depth of our enemy's resolve, and it is we who must stop this invasion. Stop Islamic immigration now!

The state-controlled, mainstream, limp-wristed liberal media absolutely despise Christianity, for what they erroneously believe to be puritanical, antiquated and traditional values. Obviously, if Christians don't subscribe to the wanton slaughter of defenseless babies resting comfortably inside a woman's womb, then they must not be progressive enough.

But if that's the case, as it most certainly is, then why aren't the media screaming for the defeat of ALL Muslim terrorists, who are clearly still under the wicked spell of the 7th century warlord they liken to a prophet? Instead, the media treats Islam as a favored son, to be coddled, protected and even exalted by those who should know better and do know better, but have succumbed to their own Marxist worldview and immediate fears.

In other news, the Hollywood cartel who produced the new film, "2012", takes a rip at Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and basically every religious people on earth EXCEPT that of the favored son, the loudest, the proudest, the most violent religious group ravaging the earth today—Islam. They refuse to acknowledge fundamentalist Muslim terrorists because of one reason, and that reason is mere cowardice. They fear the obligatory fatwa from these barbarians at the gate, so they simply continue to ridicule the Christians, since clearly, THESE PEOPLE will not retaliate with a bombing du jour.

Evil will triumph when good men do nothing.

As my friend Kendra Adams puts it:

Your snark doesn't offend. The dhimmified nihilist post modern left offends. And, you're right. You know, when we all opened our eyes (those of us who actually did, I mean), I thought that we would just tell the people who didn't know and that would be that-- we'd all get outraged at this and defeat it. I had NO iDEA that that is NOT what this is about. I had NO IDEA the level of anti-Americanism that existed. None. I thought the left was a bit idealistic, maybe. I didn't know they really didn't mind undermining our values.

Yes yes yes! Well, I thought even those who sympathized with communism realized that our system was better. I mean, I thought they were being idealistic, as I mentioned. So, when I'd press them, and when they realized I was unsympathetic, they easily agreed that capitalism was better. but, I think now they just didn't want to get into it with me because they weren't ready for a real discussion. I didn't know that they TRULY LIKED COMMUNISM! I thought it actually IMPOSSIBLE that someone would prefer a totalitarian society. I thought that the general consensus in the entire non-Islamic world was that totalitarianism was evil. I was very naive.

This much is true about Muslims. Take note ye apologists and appeasers, dhimmis of all stripes. This man could have chosen many paths in solving his "moral" dilemma. Afraid of deployment? Check. Afraid to strive against fellow believers. Check. When confronted with the very real decision of where one's loyalty lies, a decision that most American Muslims can defray their entire lives, this Muslim posing as an army major chooses to slay infidels.

He did NOT choose to slink off to Canada. He did not not claim any sort of conscientious objection, although he did offer we are told to buy his way out. It's been eight years since his grievance began, right after September 11; why the delay? Eight years without an opportunity to bail out seems even in these times a long uninterrupted enlistment. But let's face it, he could have easily but did not claim mental health problems. No. Alone with Allah, his choice was pre-ordained. His decision was to kill infidels.

This man, like so many others, chose to be a Muslim first.

Islam is a religion of violence which promotes lying to infidels and the murder of all of those who stand in Islam's way. When the media reports on a person being a "pious Muslim" this MUST start sending up red flags in the minds of all of us. Unlike a pious believer in Jesus Christ, who most likely would attempt to emulate Jesus' pacifistic, non-violent and charitable lifestyle, the "pious Muslim" seeks to emulate the life of Muhammad, a pedophile who married and raped 9-year old girls, a man who tortured and murdered anyone who disagreed with him, a man who employed genocide and ethnic cleansing against the Jews and infidels of Arabia in the 7th Century, and a man who sought to dominate and destroy every non-Islamic society and individual on Earth.

If we were to look at religion as a computer operating system, then we need to be extremely concerned whenever the Islamic mental operating system gets fired up in someone's mind because the first lines of code that get executed during boot-up are the destruction of democracy, the subordination of women, and the eventual destruction of all non-Muslims through one-on-one violence or global Islamic jihad. Yes, Nidal Malik Hasan is a pious Muslim, and by all accounts rapidly getting more pious.

And the ultimate consequence of his increasing Islamic piety? A mass assassination of non-Islamic Americans whom he viewed—as a pious Muslim—as the enemies of Allah.

UNIVERSAL JIHAD: Radical Islam's Worldwide War on Liberal Democracies

By Vijay Kumar

ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, a war was brought to our shores by a band of men, bound by a militant ideology, in an act of mass murder. The response by the United States was a so-called "War on Terror," a reflex that has proved to be as ineffective as it has been costly.

We have spent more than a trillion dollars on invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. More than 5,000 American soldiers have died in the last eight years, and tens of thousands of American soldiers have been wounded.

What has this flood of blood and money bought us?

There has been no sustainable victory for the United States. There is no strategic victory; there is no political victory; there is no moral victory. And there is no peace. Islamic terrorism continues around the globe unabated.

The Obama administration lately wants to avoid any taint by the phrase "War on Terror," papering it over with even more ambiguity, calling it now an "Overseas Contingency Operation." It's still the same losing war, just as costly, just as ineffective.

The Bush and Obama administrations' "War on Terror" - by any name - has failed for a simple reason. It is because there is no such a thing as war on terror. Terrorism is a technique, a method, a weapon, a means to an end. Terrorism is not an enemy that can be named or identified, much less fought effectively. A "War on Terror" is a war on shadows, a war on nothing and on no one. It is a fool's errand.

Yet there is a war raging. It is a war that already had raged for 1,400 years before it was brought to our shores, a war that has laid waste to entire nations, cultures, and civilizations. The war is Universal Jihad: the eternal worldwide war on all infidel nations.

Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt were Christian nations before Christianity was supplanted by Political Islam. Afghanistan was Buddhist, Iran was Zoroastrian, and Pakistan was Hindu before Radical Islam consumed their civilizations and cultures.

The long-running Israeli and Palestinian conflict is not some unique standalone dispute over real estate or factionalism or any of the other wrong reasons given for it. It is simply another front in Universal Jihad's imperialistic war for the minds and souls of man. There has never been a lasting peace there because Political Islam has no interest in making peace with infidels-and every man, woman, or child anywhere in the world who is not Muslim is branded as infidel.

The crisis in the Middle East never ends because Political Islam never yields to another ideology. It does not believe in or permit of peaceful co-existence. The problem is not Jews or Israel. The only thing keeping the conflict in endless, irresolvable foment is a universal supremacist ideology that demands the conquest of Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Chinese, the West and sub-Saharan Africa.

The purpose of Universal Jihad, its mandate, its raison d'etre is conquest of the infidels and their nations-all of them-whether by conversion, domination, or death. In Political Islam, there is no fourth choice. It does not countenance any form of permanent peace with infidels.

Where Muslims are weak demographically and politically, they will propose truce. But we must understand the difference between truce and peace. Truce is a temporary ploy to buy time until one is stronger. Peace is lasting mutual respect. Muslims care not for peace, ever, with infidels, who are seen as inferiors. Where Muslims are strong they wage Universal Jihad, a worldwide war against the infidel. Jihad is the scriptural imperative of Political Islam, and the infidel is fair game.

For Universal Jihadists, therefore, any tactic, any means, any weapon is fully justified, so terrorism and mass murder are considered to be perfectly valid methods in attaining their theological and political goals.

The Lockerbie mass murderer was given a hero's welcome recently in Libya because in Islam's Universal Jihad he is a war hero.

The September 11, 2001 mass murder in the United States was a holy act, not only sanctioned but also celebrated.

The doctrine of Universal Jihad has a clear global goal: the supremacy of Islam everywhere in the world. It demands theological, political, and cultural supremacy-Islamic Imperialism-over the entire world. There is no room for political pluralism.

In Political Islam, there is no valid law other than the Islamic law, Sharia. The constitutions of liberal democracies are nothing more than the folly of fallible men and not worth the paper and ink wasted on them. Universal Jihad is a war on the cornerstones of democratic principles: individual rights and freedoms. It is a declared war on the very existence of democracy and the freedom of mind in the world.

Islamic Imperialism is the greatest imperialist force the world has ever seen. Until recently, the Western Hemisphere has been largely isolated and protected from Universal Jihad by geographical and technological barriers. Today, all of that has changed.



The United States merely is among the latest nations to be targeted for attack and invasion by Universal Jihad. It is infantile to believe that the Universal Jihadists have brought their 1,400 hundred years war to the West because of America's support of Israel. Universal Jihad predates the birth of the United States and of Israel by a thousand years, and already has conquered much the Middle East and parts of Europe.

America is falling prey to the same overt and covert strategies and tactics. Terrorism has been only one of those tactics.

Demographic conquest is the most permanent form of conquest. The infiltration of both legal and illegal Universal Jihadists to Western Europe and North America is fundamentally altering the very fabric of Western civilization. Political Islam is a State within a State no matter what nation it enters.

Political Islam views the world as being divided into two eternally opposing camps: Darul al-Harb (Land of Hostility, governed by the infidels) and Darul al-Islam (Land of Peace, ruled by Muslims). Any land that is not Islamic and not ruled by Muslims is considered Land of Hostility. Universal Jihadists have a theological obligation to conquer non-Muslim nations by any means and supplant the governments of men with Islamic theocracy. Hence, there is no such a thing as assimilation of Islam into a host society.

What the Western mind has failed to grasp is that in Islam, separation of church and state is categorically, scripturally, emphatically, and dogmatically impossible.

That is why the inherent imperialism of Universal Jihad is a greater threat to liberal democracies than Nazism and Communism combined. Unlike Islamists, Nazis and Communists lacked a transcendental metaphysics and global demographic strength. Nazism was defeated within ten years of its rise to power in Germany, and Communism has collapsed because of its own internal contradictions; post-Communist Russia and post-Nazi Germany became liberal democracies.

Not so the nations and civilizations conquered by Universal Jihadists.

A thousand years ago, the Indian Hindus were in the same predicament as is the Western world today. Their epistemologies were too rational, their metaphysical views too abstract and embracive. Their concept of non-violence even against those who wanted to annihilate them and their way of life was their greatest flaw. It was a fatal flaw. The Western world's present approach is reminiscent of the ancient Hindus.

The current crisis between the West and the doctrine of Universal Jihad is epistemological; it is a war of rationalism and intellectual freedom against virulent theological dogma. But it is a war. It was declared 1,400 years ago. Now it has been brought to America's shores.

Universal Jihadists have been winning through eternal patience and persistence engendered and empowered by their transcendental metaphysics, and their central belief that the entire world was meant to be governed by Islamic theocracy. What they lack in technology, they make up in demographic strength, geographic diversity, ideological clarity, and a fanaticism that is only "business as usual."

Compounding the threat is widespread ignorance among the rank and file. Of the purported 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, 90% do not speak Arabic, yet Islam's most lionized theologians claim that the Quran cannot be translated into any other language. By their measure, 90% of Muslims cling to the ragged edges of a dogma that they cannot hope to fully understand.

At stake are our intellectual and spiritual freedoms, and the most cherished principles of democracy. To preserve them, we must win this war not of our making. The alternative is unconditional surrender. Universal Jihadists are the product of militant ideologies and not vice-versa. Unless and until we confront that ideology for what it is, logically and persistently, all of our efforts are, and will continue to be, futile.

American politicians of both parties have failed or refused to define the true nature of the enemy and its intentions. The enemy is not Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas, Islamic Brotherhood, or any of the hundreds of Islamic fundamentalist groups from Algeria to the Middle East to South Asia to Indonesia. Each of those is merely a tentacle of the same voracious beast called Universal Jihad. The very fact of the multitude of factions is nothing more than another strategy of Universal Jihadists to disperse and confuse and weaken the infidel by making him fight too many enemies on too many fronts. And it is working.

The only real enemy is Universal Jihad in all its manifestations. It is an existential crisis that threatens equally every non-Muslim nation, no matter what their culture, heritage, philosophy, or form of government.

The current military campaign by the United States and an ever-shrinking handful of its allies in the failed "War on Terror" (by any name) are beyond ineffective; it is suicidal. For eight long years it has squandered billions of dollars and thousands of innocent lives attacking the wrong enemies, while leaving the real seats of power of Universal Jihad unscathed, and even embracing them as "allies" and trading partners.

The war in Afghanistan is escalating, with the last two months alone having been the two deadliest months in the eight long years of U.S. involvement there. Yet Afghanistan is only a client state, a proxy, for Pakistan, one of the nations in the triumvirate that is the Empire of Universal Jihad. It is Pakistan's clandestine agency, Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), that rules Pakistan. Using Saudi money, the ISI created Taliban and Al-Qaeda. It is Pakistan's ISI that fosters Afghanistan's chief exports of heroin and terrorism, and that supplies refuge for Universal Jihadists. Yet we embrace Pakistan as an "ally."

The Seats of the Empire of Universal Jihad are Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan. These are Command Central. These are the declared enemies of democracy and of fundamental human rights and freedoms across the globe. Unless and until they are recognized, named, and treated as such, Universal Jihad will continue to ravage every non-Islamic nation and culture everywhere around the world into perpetuity.

The war being waged against humanity and democracy by Universal Jihadists can be won decisively. We can find a lasting and comprehensive solution to the greatest imperialistic threat Western civilization has ever seen. We have billions of willing allies in every place on the globe. But our success, our victory is predicated upon knowing and naming the real enemy, knowing the scope and reality of the threat, and taking decisive and directed action.

I maintain:

War against Universal Jihadists can be won globally in less than five years.
It can be won for less than one billion dollars.
It can be won without any more loss of American or Western Life.

In order to win this war that has been declared against us through no fault of our own, the first requisite is to acknowledge that it is an ideological war. It is the totalitarian Islamic theocracy against fundamental human rights and freedoms and against every democracy in the world.

It's also necessary to recognize that causes of poverty, illiteracy, and misery prevalent in Islamic nations are over-population, suppression of intellectual freedom, hostility to critical thinking, and a dictatorial theocracy as the form of government. Colonialism or Zionist or Anglo-American conspiracies are not the cause.

The conflict between Universal Jihadists and the West is philosophical. Strength is necessary to bring and maintain order, but force alone can never prevail. Reason, empiricism, and the scientific method are our greatest weapons against the religious fanaticism of Political Islam's militant theocracy.

Non-Islamic nations must correctly classify the doctrine of Universal Jihad as a subversive paramilitary political movement whose core ideology, of record, demands the overthrow of the existing forms of governments. Civilized nations recognize that such subversion, in times of war, constitutes treason.

And Universal Jihad is a declared war. It is a war of Islamic theological exclusivism against pluralistic democratic traditions. They are mutually exclusive. Islam's Sharia is the antithesis of individual intellectual and spiritual freedom. It stands in direct opposition to the very existence of any constitutional democracy, and to the very right to existence of any other religion or belief.

Therefore, in order to prevail in this war against the rest of mankind, we must do the following.

Build a global united alliance of nations against Universal Jihad. Jew and Gentile, Anglo-Saxon and Slav, Hindu and Buddhist, Norwegian and Nigerian-all have been victimized by Jihad. Never has any barbaric imperialism so universally threatened mankind without regard to national or ethnic or philosophical or geopolitical boundaries. Whatever our differences, in this war we are allies unified by a common ruthless enemy that will not rest until we and our cultures and nations have been conquered through conversion, domination, or death. United, we cannot be overcome.

Systematically remove all advocates of Political Islam's Universal Jihad from every nation of the Western world-which, by their own definition, is Darul al-Harb (Land of Hostility, governed by the infidels). The claims and requirements of Literal Islam's mandated theocracy call for overthrow of the American and Western forms of government in a declared war, and the supporters of Universal Jihad have committed and condoned acts of war on our soil against our people and our nations. That is treason.

As a united alliance of nations against Universal Jihad, cut off all trade and diplomatic ties to the Empire of Universal Jihad: Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Enforce these sanctions until their governments publicly, formally renounce and disavow Universal Jihad by official proclamation.

As a united alliance of nations against Universal Jihad, use the combined resources of all affected nations to demilitarize, secularize, and democratize the Empire of Universal Jihad.

As a united alliance of nations against Universal Jihad, demand and exact compensation from the Empire of Universal Jihad for having supported global terrorism for at least the past half-century.

If any of these steps to victory seem draconian or undemocratic, pause to reflect that they are far more humane and civilized then the strategies and tactics of Political Islam and its 1,400 years war that has decimated entire civilizations and murdered countless millions. These steps are far more humane and civilized than dropping atomic bombs on civilian populations. These are not some "Modest Proposals" in the tradition of Swift. These are sober, attainable and necessary steps that must be taken if the rationality and freedoms gained by mankind over thousands of years of social evolution stand any chance of surviving the Universal Jihadist's onslaught of barbarism and mass murder to the end of totalitarian rule of the world.

To survive at all and preserve our cherished rights and freedoms, our cultures, our religions, our civilizations, we must declare an ideological war against Universal Jihadists. We must do so now. They long ago declared war on us.

Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com Use and distribute as you wish; do not edit and give us credit.

PITH HELMET

From our friend Hershel Tsvi Yehuda in a pithy response to everything the pro-Palestinean activiists have to say on this very old, very bloody topic:

HISTORY SHOWS THAT THE CONFLICT here in Israel is not over land, but has to do with the inability of our Arabs/Muslim neighbors to recognize that Jews and Christians have any claim, religious or historical, to the land of Israel. Time and time again throughout the middle east, and even now in Asia, it becomes the goal of radical Muslims to destroy religious sites from other religions and build Mosques over them. From the destruction of Buddhist statues in Afghanistan to the constant religious battles in India, and back to the middle east, this history repeats itself over and over again.

But while we are on the subject, let's dig that swimming pool a little deeper, shall we, again from the rife pen of Hershel Tsvi Yehuda:

The first thing to note is that the conflict between Jews and Arabs in the land of Israel predates the settlement movement that started in 1967, and even pre-dates Israel's re-establishment as an independent state in 1948. There were pogroms that included the sadistic rape, murder, dismemberment, and burning of thousands of Jews and their properties here going back to the middle of the 19th century. There was no Israeli state, no settlements, and there was no "occupation" of an Arab people called Palestinians.

Next, it it important to point out that the Palestinian Arabs have been offered a state multiple times and rejected it outright, preferring to wage war on the Jews with the hopes of "throwing them into the sea." The entire land of the British mandate was designated as a Jewish state, and in contradiction to official British policy, 80% of the land was given to the Heshemite monarchy to establish the Kingdom of Jordan (which is now over 80% Palestinian.) Of the 20% of the land remaining, the United Nations (League of Nations at the time) offered partition, half to the Palestinian Arabs, half to the Jews. The Jews accepted the small and virtually indefensible borders and immediately established Israel. The Arabs rejected and sent 5 national armies and legions of Palestinian Arabs to destroy the new Jewish state. Thank G-d, the Jews won, and were happy to have a state even though it did not give them authority over it's most holy sites in Jerusalem.

From 1948 until 1967, after every Jew living in east Jerusalem, the West Bank, or Gaza Strip, (places Jewish families have lived consistently since temple times) had been murdered or exiled, Israel still suffered hundreds of murderous attacks from the Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. From bus hijackings resulting in the murder of the passengers, to schools being raided by child murdering terrorists, shootings, bombings, kidnappings and more. All these attacks despite the fact that there was no occupation, no settlements, and the Arabs did not make a single attempt at establishing an independent state called Palestine.

In 1967, when the Arab countries called up their armies and pledged to throw Israel into the sea, Israel launched a pre-emptive attack destroying the Arab armies, and re-claiming the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Since then, Israel re-built Jewish towns (settlements) in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, reestablishing ancient Jewish communities from biblical places such as Hebron, Bet El, and Shilo, and Israel finally gained control over it's most holy site, the site of the ancient temple that Jews had been forbidden to visit since the Arabs controlled it in 1948. With Israeli control over all of Jerusalem, Christian and Jewish holy sites were restored and for the first time in many years, all religions had access to their holy sites.

Suddenly the Palestinian Arabs decided that the reason they are murdering Jews is because of the occupation. To reiterate, these attacks had been going on all along, before the West Bank and Gaza Strip were "occupied." Throughout this war of terror, Israel has repeatedly tried negotiating with the Palestinian Arabs. They have been offered a state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip 2 times by Israeli leaders, most famously by Prime Minister Ehud Barak who against the security interests of Israel offered them 97% of the West Bank and Gaza Strip with a capital in east Jerusalem. The answer Israel received was a "no," and a wave of suicide bombings and shooting attacks that murdered and injured thousands of Israelis.

Read it all.

Q & A MASKING ON A SUMMER DAY

Someone named Willie questions with jarring simplicity:

The Bellicose Augur? This all seems very alarmist. Countless men before you have made the same sort of statements about other immigrant groups and each time they have been wrong. What makes you so certain that you're right in this case?

Other immigrant groups, unlike Islam, don't have a blueprint for militant supremacist expansionism made more dangerous by a trans-national sense of brotherhood and concrete ways to network internationally to facilitate plans to attack non-Muslims; nor do other immigrant groups have a totalitarian fanaticism expressed in myriad ways which all conduce to the various violent attacks on non-Muslims that have been reoccurring, after a respite of a couple of centuries, all over the globe.

FREE SPEECH IN DISTRESS

"The refusal of the Western elite class to protect their nations from jihadist infiltration is the biggest betrayal in history."

—Serge Trifkovic

Another ambitious article by the American Thinker:

ON JULY 19 , A CONFERENCE entitled "The Fall of Capitalism and the Rise of Islam" took place as scheduled at the Hilton Hotel in Oak Lawn, Illinois, a Chicago suburb. There, in the heartland of a post 9/11America, Hizb-ut Tahrir, an international organization outlawed as a terrorist group in several European and Middle East countries, sponsored sessions focusing on strategies to end free enterprise and replace it with Shari'ah law.

Hizb-ut Tahrir is no academic think-tank simply examining public issues. It is an international group reported to have over a million members, including cells in more than 40 countries. It supports the Taliban and Hamas, sanctions suicide bombing and has called for the killing of nonbelievers. It has spawned terrorists for Al Qaeda, Hamas and Jemaa Islamiya; subscribes to the mantra that "jihad has to continue till the Day of Judgment;" and endeavors to replace existing governments with a worldwide Khilafah (Caliphate) or Islamic government under Shari'ah law.

It is remarkable enough that a conference of this nature by a group that advocates the overthrow of the U.S. government actually took place in an American city. Perhaps even more disturbing is the growing number of cancellations of events and conferences that feature the opposite point of view with material and speakers that seek to educate the public about the threat of radical Islam. Increasingly, our country's prized right to freedom of speech seems to operate in only one direction, providing plenty of opportunities for our enemies to speak openly against us, yet, placing a gag over any discussion about the radical Islam threat.

Here are some disturbing recent examples.

New English Review Symposium

In December 2008, the New English Review, a non-profit organization dedicated to the defense of Western values, had scheduled and signed a contract to conduct a symposium, "Understanding the Jihad in Israel, Europe and America" at the Loew's Vanderbilt Hotel in Nashville, Tennessee. Three days before the symposium was to begin, the hotel manager cancelled the event citing concerns about "the safety, welfare and security of hotel guests and employees." Subsequent investigation disclosed that the manager summarily disagreed with the politics of the event and responded to pressure from prominent Muslims and Leftists in the community. A local paper went so far as to refer to the conference speakers as "agents of intolerance."

American Library Association Panel

Just this week, the American Library Association cancelled a panel, "Perspectives on Islam: Beyond the Stereotyping," at the behest of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and CAIR sympathizers who objected to the participation of Islamic scholar and author Robert Spencer.

Spencer has studied Islamic doctrine for close to 30 years and quotes directly from traditional Islamic sources in his efforts to shed light on the myriad facets of the global jihad. He has led seminars on Islam and jihad for the United States Central Command, the FBI, the Joint Terrorism Task Force, the U.S. intelligence community and other government organizations. Spencer is the author of eight books on Islam and the jihad and has appeared on CNN, BBC, FoxNews, PBS, MSNBC and other networks.

CAIR, which presents itself as a benign civil rights organization for American Muslims, is an unindicted co-conspirator in the successful prosecution of Muslim charity founders who illegally funneled millions of dollars to the Palestinian militant group Hamas. CAIR officials are known to have terrorist ties and the organization has actively fought to repeal the Patriot Act, eliminate military tribunals and even defended convicted terrorists. The group is well known for its pursuit of individuals who expose its links to terrorist funding and support activities. In 1994, one of CAIR's co-founders, Nihad Awad, publicly asserted that he was a Hamas supporter.

In 1998, co-founder Omar Ahmad declared, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant." He added, "The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."

People's Truth Forum

In 2005, The Georgetown Marriott refused to host a symposium on counterterrorism sponsored by America's Truth Forum (ATF), formerly known as People's Truth Forum, a non-profit organization dedicated to educating Americans about national security threats. The ATF hosts a website featuring articles from mainstream media sources and had planned a series of panels featuring top experts in the field of counterterrorism. ATF's conference was rejected by the Georgetown Marriott Conference Center on the grounds that the organization was too controversial, the venue was inappropriate for the topic and heightened security would be necessary to protect hotel guests. The following statement was issued by Marriott's corporate office: "Due to the high density of Muslim students on campus, we're afraid of the potential for violent protests, injured employees and damage to the facility."

Shortly thereafter, CAIR hosted its 11th Annual Banquet at the Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington, Virginia. Not only have several CAIR officials been convicted and deported by the United States for terrorist activity, but a 2005 invited speaker, Siraj Wahhaj, is an unindicted co-conspirator in the first World Trade Center bombing of 1993. Apparently, a group with established connections to terrorism is a non-controversial organization for the Marriott Corporation.

Conclusions

It is unconscionable in 2009 that an acceptable forum in America today is a conference entitled, "The Fall of Capitalism and the Rise of Islam," with a goal of strategizing the demise of the bedrock of our democracy—the free enterprise system—and the replacement of our constitution with a theo-political-legal system that subjugates women, murders homosexuals, confers non-person status on non-Muslims, permits slavery and kills apostates. At the same time, attempts to discuss Islamic doctrine and educate the American public about this very threat are increasingly verboten. In many recent instances, accurate speech is being deemed inflammatory due to fear of retaliation by those who want to silence critics of Islam who engage in legitimate discussion of a serious threat to our nation.

How this threat plays out in everyday life can be illustrated by the city of Nashville, Tennessee, which provides an interesting example of the exercise of one-way free speech and the accompanying extreme accommodation of those with whom we disagree. Thanks to the largesse of the State department's Refugee Resettlement Program, which offers housing, jobs, welfare and an abundance of social services for program recipients, at least 50% of whom are Muslim, Nashville has over 20,000 Muslims from Iraq, Somalia and the Sudan. Six known mosques exist in Nashville, a doses a Muslim graveyard, a madrassa, a Muslim Boy Scout troop and chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Muslim Student Association and Muslim American Society. According to a local psychiatrist, the Nashville Muslim community has evidenced polygamy, child marriage, female genital mutilation and wife beating. Crimes such as drug-dealing, money-laundering, murder, rape and Medicare and grant fraud are occurring at alarming rates. Many of these behaviors are grounded in value systems that are contrary to our own, yet anyone pointing this out would be subject to accusations of "intolerance."

In this and other ways, attempts to curtail the speech and assembly of critics of Islam portends a grave threat to the First Amendment protections that are vital to preserving our cherished liberty and freedom and safeguarding us from totalitarianism and tyranny. If we are unable to speak freely and openly about the radical Islamic threat presently confronting our country while Islamists are given the freedom to gather and plot the overthrow of our system of government and spout hateful rhetoric and propaganda, an Islamic government under Shari'ah law will surely be our fate.

Read it all.

MITT AND BARCK'S ERROR IN JUDGMENT

BARACK OBAMA AND MITT ROMNEY SAID WHAT this week? What is wrong with these people? Let's go to the videotape in deferring to one man who knows his history—Israeli, American AND Islamic—the formidable Benjamin Netanyahu, the only Winston Churchill caliber statesman on the scene in the West today.

What we have here is not a failure to communicate, but a failure of nerve to defend what is the resilient nature and exercise of liberty sprung free from the constraints of a misnamed social construction called political correctness.

If only America had such a leader right now...

But as long as some of the more duplicitous "agents of change" around the horn are quoting Majid Khadouri's War and Peace in the Law of Islam to further their idea that Islam is just another religion, let's start small to see if those same Islamic apologists can twist and gnarl these excerpts into a generously perfumed bouquet with which to flummox the West:

"The state which is regarded as the instrument for universalizing a certain religion must perforce be an ever expanding state. The Islamic state, whose principal function was to put God’s law into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world. It refused to recognize the coexistence of non-Muslim communities, except perhaps as subordinate entities, because by its very nature a universal state tolerates the existence of no other state than itself. Although it was not a consciously formulated policy, Muhammad’s early successors, after Islam became supreme in Arabia, were determined to embark on a ceaseless war of conquest in the name of Islam. The jihad was therefore employed as an instrument for both the universalization of religion and the establishment of an imperial world state. [page 55]

"Thus the jihad may be regarded as Islam’s instrument or carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers, if not in the prophethood of Muhammad (as in the case of the dhimmis), at least in the belief in God. The Prophet Muhammad is reported to have declared “some of my people will continue to fight victoriously for the sake of the truth until the last one of them will combat the anti-Christ.” Until that moment is reached the jihad, in one form or another, will remain as a permanent obligation upon the entire Muslim community. It follows that the existence of a dar al-harb is ultimately outlawed under the Islamic jural order; that the dar al-Islam is permanently under jihad obligation until the dar al-harb is reduced to non-existence; and that any community which prefers to remain non-Islamic—in the status of a tolerated religious community accepting certain disabilities—must submit to Islamic rule and reside in the dar al-Islam or be bound as clients to the Muslim community." [page 64]

Thanks to "gmccal" for these snippets. This book is an invaluable resource for those finally waking to the act that a seventh century ideology has no place in the 20th century without serious reforms. The book, according to my source, is organized as follows:

Book 1 Fundamental Concepts of Muslim Law
Chap 1. Theory of the State
a. Society and the State
b. The Juridical Basis of the State
c. A Divine Universal Nomocracy

Chap 2. Nature and Sources of Law
a. Customary Law and Islamic Law
b. Nature of Islamic Law
c. Sources of Law
d. Schools of Law
e. The Shia Doctrine

Chap 3. The Muslim Law of Nations

Book II The Law of War: The Jihad
Chap 4. Introduction

Chap 5. The Doctrine of Jihad
a. The Meaning of Jihad
b. Jihad as Bellum Justum
c. Jihad as Permanent War
d. The Shi'i and Khariji Doctrines of the Jihad
e. The Jihad and Secular War

Chap 6. Types of Jihad
a. The Jihad Against Polytheists
b. The Jihad Against Apostasy
c. The Jihad Against Baghi (an attempt at dissention)
d. The Jihad Against Deserters and Highway Robbers
e. The Jihad Against Scripturaries (Jews, Sabians and Christians)
f. The Ribat (Safeguarding the frontiers of dar al'Islam)

Chap 7. Military Methods
a. The Jihadists
b. Command of the Jihadists
c. Conduct of Fighting

Chap 8. The Initiation of War
a. The Call for Fighting
b. Necessity of "Invitation"
c. Negotiation

Chap 9. Land Warfare
a. Prohibited Acts
b. Treatment of Enemy Prisoners
c. Spies
d. Treatment of the Dead

Chap 10. Maritime Warfare
a. Islam and Sea Power
b. Muslim Law and the Sea
c. Rules and Practices of Naval Warfare
d. Naval Organization

Chap 11. Spoils of War
a. Meaning and Nature of the Spoils
b. Division of the Spoil
c. Immovable Property
d. Prisoners of War
e. Slaves

Chap 12.Termination of Fighting

Book III The Law of Peace
Chap 13. Introduction
Chap 14. Jurisdiction
a. Persons: Believers
b. Persons: Kafirs (Unbelievers) and Murtadds (Apostates)
c. The Head of State: The Imam
d. Muslim Territory: Dar al-Islam
e. Classification of Muslim Territory

Chap 15. Foreigners in Muslim Territory: Harbis and Musta'mins
a. Foreigners and Muslim Law
b. The Harbi (One who belings to dar al-harb)
c. The Aman (Pledge of Security)
d. The Muista'min;s Rights and Obligations
e. Termination of Aman
f. Importance of Aman

Chap 16. Muslims in Non-Muslim Territory
a. Non-Muslim Terriroty: Dar al Harb
b. Conduct of the Muslim in a Non-Muslim Territory Under Aman
c. Conduct of the Muslim in Non-Muslim Territory Without Aman
d. Muslim Prisoners

Chap 17. Status of Dhimmis
a. Islam and Non-Muslim Subjects
b. Meaning of Dhimmi
c. Dhimmi Compact with Muhammad
d. The Legislation of "Umar
e. Jizya and Kharaj
f. The Covenant of `Umar
g. Dhimmi Rights and Obligations
h. Conclusion

Chap 18. Treaties
a. Treaty Making Power
b. Legal Nature of Treaties
c. Prophet Muhammad's First Treaty
d. The Hudaybiya Treaty
e. Dhimmi Pacts as Constitutional Charters
f. Muslim Treaties Under Muhammad's Successors
g. General Characteristics of Treaties
h. Termination of Treaties

Chap 19. Commercial Relations
a. Islam and Commerce
b. Non-Muslim Trade with Dar al'Islam
c. Muslim Trade with Dar al'Harb
d. Significance of Foreign Trade

Chap 20. Arbitration
a. Arbitration Before Islam
b. Islam and Arbitration
c. Arbitration between Ali and Mu'awiya
d. Significance of Arbitration

Chap 21. Diplomacy
a. Muslim Conception of Diplomacy
b. Emissaries
c. Reception of Emissaries
d. Functions of Diplomatic Missions
e. Muslim Diplomacy and World Politics
f. Importance of Diplomacy

Chap 22. Neutrality
a. Islam and Neutrality
b. The Status of Ethiopia
c. Nubia
d. Cyprus

Chap 23. Epilogue
a. Changes in the Character of Dar al'Islam
b. Recognition of Christendom by Islam Under Ottoman Rule
c. Christendom's Attitude Toward the Ottoman Empire
d. The Ottoman Empire and the Modern Law of Nations
e. Integration of Islam into the Family of Nations
f. The Secularism of Law and State
g. Conclusion

Glossary of Terms
Bibliography (Supplies the original sources and the
fundamental "modern" studies that have a direct
bearing on the subject of war and peace in Islam)
Index

Over all, this 1955 publication, reprinted in June of 2007, will be an invaluable reference for contemporary analysts and researchers who dare to resist the disinformation and propaganda that is emanating from all ends of the globe about the historical, and now revived threat this pernicious Islamic ideology presents to civilization.

ANDALUSIAN MYTH, EURABIAN REALITY

INVENTING THE PAST, and denying the present. In an encore presentation we salute the original 2004 Jihad Watch essay by Bat Ye'or and Andrew G. Bostom:

On Sunday, April 18, 2004, this revealing exchange took place between outgoing Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, and interviewer Chris Wallace of Fox News:

Chris Wallace: “In the apartment that was blown up, police found a videotape in which the bombers referred to Spain as Andalusia, what it was called by the Muslim Moors before they were driven out in 1492.”

Jose Maria Aznar (through the translator): “So this means that Iraq, for them, was just a pretext. In the eyes of Islamic terrorism, it looks at the West, and Spain is a very special part of this parcel, because they feel that to recover Spain is to get back some of their territory.”

Islamic scholar Mordechai Nisan recently discussed the contention by the founder of the Institute of Islamic Education, M. Amir Ali, that Medieval Spain had actually been "liberated" by Muslim forces, who "deposed its tyrants". Nisan extrapolated this ahistorical narrative line, and pondered:

"Reflecting on March 11, as Muslim terrorism killed 200 and wounded 1,400 in Madrid, one wonders whether one day this event will also not be commemorated as a liberating moment. "

Events surrounding the completion of the new Granada Mosque, which was marked by celebratory announcements July 10, 2003 of a “…return of Islam to Spain”, were also consistent with Nisan's dark musings. At a conference entitled “Islam in Europe” that accompanied the opening of the mosque, disconcerting statements were made by European Muslim leaders. Specifically, the keynote speaker at this conference,

Umar Ibrahim Vadillo, a Spanish Muslim leader, encouraged Muslims to cause an economic collapse of Western economies (by ceasing to use Western currencies, and switching to gold dinars), while the German Muslim leader Abu Bakr Rieger told Muslim attendees to avoid adapting their Islamic religious practices to accommodate European (i.e., Western Enlightenment?) values.

Shortly after this event, a Wall Street Journal editorialist in a grossly distorted encomium to Muslim Spain, mentioned the “pan-confessional humanism” of Andalusian Islam, and even asserted: "one could argue that the oft-bewailed missing ‘reformation’ of Islam was under way there until it was aborted by the Inquisition."

María Rosa Menocal, Yale Professor of Spanish and Portuguese, in her 2002 hagiography of Muslim Spain, The Ornament of the World, has further maintained that "the new Islamic polity not only allowed Jews and Christians to survive, but following Qur’anic mandate, by and large protected them."

We believe that reiterating these ahistorical, roseate claims about Muslim Spain abets the contemporary Islamist agenda, and retards the evolution of a liberal, reformed “Euro-Islam” fully compatible with post-Enlightenment Western values.

Iberia (Spain) was conquered in 710-716 AD by Arab tribes originating from northern, central and southern Arabia. Massive Berber and Arab immigration, and the colonization of the Iberian peninsula, followed the conquest. Most churches were converted into mosques. Although the conquest had been planned and conducted jointly with a strong faction of royal Iberian Christian dissidents, including a bishop, it proceeded as a classical jihad with massive pillages, enslavement, deportations and killings.

Toledo, which had first submitted to the Arabs in 711 or 712, revolted in 713. The town was punished by pillage and all the notables had their throats cut. In 730, the Cerdagne (in Septimania, near Barcelona) was ravaged and a bishop burned alive. In the regions under stable Islamic control, Jews and Christians were tolerated as dhimmis - like elsewhere in other Islamic lands - and could not build new churches or synagogues nor restore the old ones. Segregated in special quarters, they had to wear discriminatory clothing. Subjected to heavy taxes, the Christian peasantry formed a servile class attached to the Arab domains; many abandoned their land and fled to the towns. Harsh reprisals with mutilations and crucifixions* would sanction the Mozarab (Christian dhimmis) calls for help from the Christian kings. Moreover, if one dhimmi harmed a Muslim, the whole community would lose its status of protection, leaving it open to pillage, enslavement and arbitrary killing.

By the end of the eighth century, the rulers of North Africa and of Andalusia had introduced Malikism, one of the most rigorous schools of Islamic jurisprudence, and subsequently repressed the other Muslim schools of law. Three quarters of a century ago, at a time when political correctness was not dominating historical publication and discourse, Evariste Lévi-Provençal, the pre-eminent scholar of Andalusia, wrote: "The Muslim Andalusian state thus appears from its earliest origins as the defender and champion of a jealous orthodoxy, more and more ossified in a blind respect for a rigid doctrine, suspecting and condemning in advance the least effort of rational speculation."

The humiliating status imposed on the dhimmis and the confiscation of their land provoked many revolts, punished by massacres, as in Toledo (761, 784-86, 797). After another Toledan revolt in 806, seven hundred inhabitants were executed. Insurrections erupted in Saragossa from 781 to 881, Cordova (805), Merida (805-813, 828 and the following year, and later in 868), and yet again in Toledo (811-819); the insurgents were crucified, as prescribed in Qur’an 5:33*.

The revolt in Cordova of 818 was crushed by three days of massacres and pillage, with 300 notables crucified and 20 000 families expelled. Feuding was endemic in the Andalusian cities between the different sectors of the population: Arab and Berber colonizers, Iberian Muslim converts (Muwalladun) and Christian dhimmis (Mozarabs). There were rarely periods of peace in the Amirate of Cordova (756-912), nor later.

Al-Andalus represented the land of jihad par excellence. Every year, sometimes twice a year, raiding expeditions were sent to ravage the Christian Spanish kingdoms to the north, the Basque regions, or France and the Rhone valley, bringing back booty and slaves. Andalusian corsairs attacked and invaded along the Sicilian and Italian coasts, even as far as the Aegean Islands, looting and burning as they went. Thousands of people were deported to slavery in Andalusia, where the caliph kept a militia of tens of thousand of Christian slaves brought from all parts of Christian Europe (the Saqaliba), and a harem filled with captured Christian women. Society was sharply divided along ethnic and religious lines, with the Arab tribes at the top of the hierarchy, followed by the Berbers who were never recognized as equals, despite their Islamization; lower in the scale came the mullawadun converts and, at the very bottom, the dhimmi Christians and Jews.

The Andalusian Maliki jurist Ibn Abdun (d. 1134) offered these telling legal opinions regarding Jews and Christians in Seville around 1100 C.E.: "No…Jew or Christian may be allowed to wear the dress of an aristocrat, nor of a jurist, nor of a wealthy individual; on the contrary they must be detested and avoided. It is forbidden to [greet] them with the [expression], ‘Peace be upon you’. In effect, ‘Satan has gained possession of them, and caused them to forget God’s warning. They are the confederates of Satan’s party; Satan’s confederates will surely be the losers!’ (Qur’an 58:19 [modern Dawood translation]). A distinctive sign must be imposed upon them in order that they may be recognized and this will be for them a form of disgrace."

Ibn Abdun also forbade the selling of scientific books to dhimmis, under the pretext that they translated them and attributed them to their co-religionists and bishops. In fact, plagiarism is difficult to prove since whole Jewish and Christian libraries were looted and destroyed. Another prominent Andalusian jurist, Ibn Hazm of Cordoba (d. 1064), wrote that Allah has established the infidels’ ownership of their property merely to provide booty for Muslims.

In Granada, the Jewish viziers Samuel Ibn Naghrela and his son Joseph, who protected the Jewish community, were both assassinated between 1056 to 1066, followed by the annihilation of the Jewish population by the local Muslims. It is estimated that up to five thousand Jews perished in the pogrom by Muslims that accompanied the 1066 assassination. This figure equals or exceeds the number of Jews reportedly killed by the Crusaders during their pillage of the Rhineland, some thirty years later, at the outset of the First Crusade.

The Granada pogrom was likely to have been incited, in part, by the bitter anti-Jewish ode of Abu Ishaq, a well known Muslim jurist and poet of the times, who wrote: "Put them back where they belong and reduce them to the lowest of the low..turn your eyes to other [Muslim] countries and you will find the Jews there are outcast dogs...Do not consider it a breach of faith to kill them...They have violated our covenant with them so how can you be held guilty against the violators?"

The Muslim Berber Almohads in Spain and North Africa (1130-1232) wreaked enormous destruction on both the Jewish and Christian populations. This devastation—massacre, captivity, and forced conversion—was described by the Jewish chronicler Abraham Ibn Daud, and the poet Abraham Ibn Ezra. Suspicious of the sincerity of the Jewish converts to Islam, Muslim “inquisitors” (i.e., antedating their Christian Spanish counterparts by three centuries) removed the children from such families, placing them in the care of Muslim educators. Maimonides, the renowned philosopher and physician, experienced the Almohad persecutions, and had to flee Cordoba with his entire family in 1148, temporarily residing in Fez—disguised as a Muslim—before finding asylum in Fatimid Egypt.

Indeed, although Maimonides is frequently referred to as a paragon of Jewish achievement facilitated by the enlightened rule of Andalusia, his own words debunk this utopian view of the Islamic treatment of Jews: "..the Arabs have persecuted us severely, and passed baneful and discriminatory legislation against us...Never did a nation molest, degrade, debase, and hate us as much as they.."

A valid summary assessment of interfaith relationships in Muslim Spain, and the contemporary currents responsible for obfuscating that history, can be found in Richard Fletcher's engaging Moorish Spain. Mr. Fletcher offers these sobering, unassailable observations:

"The witness of those who lived through the horrors of the Berber conquest, of the Andalusian fitnah in the early eleventh century, of the Almoravid invasion- to mention only a few disruptive episodes—must give it [i.e., the roseate view of Muslim Spain] the lie. The simple and verifiable historical truth is that Moorish Spain was more often a land of turmoil than it was of tranquility...Tolerance? Ask the Jews of Granada who were massacred in 1066, or the Christians who were deported by the Almoravids to Morocco in 1126 (like the Moriscos five centuries later)…

In the second half of the twentieth century a new agent of obfuscation makes its appearance: the guilt of the liberal conscience, which sees the evils of colonialism—assumed rather than demonstrated-foreshadowed in the Christian conquest of al-Andalus and the persecution of the Moriscos (but not, oddly, in the Moorish conquest and colonization). Stir the mix well together and issue it free to credulous academics and media persons throughout the western world.

Then pour it generously over the truth…in the cultural conditions that prevail in the west today the past has to be marketed, and to be successfully marketed it has to be attractively packaged. Medieval Spain in a state of nature lacks wide appeal. Self-indulgent fantasies of glamour...do wonders for sharpening up its image. But Moorish Spain was not a tolerant and enlightened society even in its most cultivated epoch."

The socio-political history of Andalusia was characterized by a particularly oppressive dhimmitude that is completely incompatible with modern notions of equality between individuals, regardless of religious faith. At the dawn of the 21st century, we must insist that Muslims in the West adopt post-Enlightenment societal standards of equality, not "tolerance," abandoning forever their hagiography of the brutal, discriminatory standards practiced by the classical Maliki jurists of "enlightened" Andalusia.

Read it all.

Pity the poor liberals whose minds have been mismanaged with great skill, who also refuse to snap to the simple fact that not everyone frames the world according to Karl Marx. In fact, one point two billion Muslims frame the world in entirely different terms, and are demanding that you take notice, and will kill you if you don't, no matter how peaceful one thinks one is, or they think they are. Dismissing what we know of this pernicious ideology with the wave of a feted hand because one thinks religion is, yawn, "the opium of the people" just doesn't win the day, nor the war that is creeping down your neck and mine.

It's time to take this fight to the Left. They've earned it.

OF FIRST AND LASTING IMPRESSIONS

IS ISLAM A PEACEFUL religion, or as the Netherlands politician Geert Wilders says, a malevolent, political ideology similar to, or worse than, Nazism? Consider the following, shocking to politically-correct Infidels (non-Muslims), but common knowledge and acceptable to Muslims:

1. Muslims must instill terror into non-Muslims (Koran 8:12) as Mohammed said, "I've been made victorious through terror" (Bukhari 4:52:220).
2. Non-Muslims (Infidels) are sworn enemies (inveterate foes) of Muslims and Islam. (Koran 4:101)
3. Muslims' have the holy right, authority, and requirement to kill non-Muslims. (Koran 9:5 - known as the "Verse of the Sword").
4. Infidels (non-Muslims) are forbidden from killing Muslims (Koran 4:92).
5. Muslims are forbidden from having non-Muslims as friends. (Koran 5:51).
6. Muslims offer non-Muslims 3 choices regarding religion (Koran 9:5): 1. convert 2. die 3. be persecuted as 2nd class citizens (Dhimmis) and pay extortion tax (Jizya).
7. Muslims can lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam and this is called Taqiyya (Koran 3:28, 16:106).
8. Muslims can omit the truth to non-Muslims to advance Islam and this is called Kitman.
9. Muslims believe they are the best (Koran 3:110) and non-Muslims are the vilest of creatures and deserve NO mercy (Koran 98:6).
10. 9/11 was justified by the "Kill AND be killed for Allah verse" (Koran 9:111).
11. Mohammed (51) married his favorite wife Aisha at 6. The marriage was consummated when he was 54 and she was 9.
12. Muslim men can marry anyone, up to 4 wives. Muslim women must ONLY marry Muslim men (4:3) thereby ensuring Islam does not weaken.
13. Only Mohammed had permission from Allah to marry as many wives as he wanted to (Koran 33:50).
14. Allah ordered Mohammed to marry his beautiful daughter-in-law called Zaynab bint Jahsh (Koran 33:37), yet cursed his aunt and uncle to hell (Koran entire Chapter 111).
15. Marriage AND divorce to pre-pubescent girls (not yet having 1st menstruation) is OK. (Koran 65:4)
16. Sex Slaves (concubines) were, and are today, legal in Islam (Koran 4:23-24).
17. Domestic Violence is OK, not husband beating, but only wife beating and sex slave beating, (Koran 4:34).
Chapter 4 is called Women and goes into great detail about how women and girls should be treated and mistreated.
18. To prove rape in Islamic law or Sharia law, Muslim females need four male Muslim witnesses in good standing (Koran 24:13).
Note: non-Muslims under Sharia (Islamic) law can't even accuse Muslims of any crimes.
19. Islamic heaven is an unlimited whorehouse of regenerating virgins (Koran 37:40-48, 44:51-55, 52:17-20, 55:56-58, 70-77, 56:7-40, and 78:31).
20. Islamic heaven also allows sodomy of young boys (Koran 52:24, 56:17, and 76:19).
21. Beheading is OK (Koran 47:4, 8:12) Mohammed personally help behead between 600 - 900 Qurayza Jews in Medina in 627 A.D. in one day.
22. Robbery and Theft of non-Muslim property is OK (The entire Chapter 8 of the Koran is known as Booty or Spoils).
23. Muslims that leave Islam (apostacy) MUST be killed. (Bukhari 4:52:260) Quoting Mohammed: "...if a Muslim discards his religion, kill him."
24. Mohammed is considered the ideal man to be imitated by Muslims, yet sinful. (Qur'an 47:21 and Qur'an 110)
25. The Koran has 114 Chapters called Surahs and is not presented in chronological order, but chapter length order, from longest (Chapter 1) to shortest (Chapter 114).
26. Many verses in the Koran conflict, so the concept of abrogation (Koran 2:106) applies. This means, later occurring verses may cancel out the earlier verses. AGAIN: earlier verses may be in a later chapter as the chapters are not presented in chronological order, but in order of size, larger to smaller.
27. The last chapter written in the Koran, Chapter 9, is extremely violent. It is also the only chapter of 114 that does not start off with the blessing "In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful."
28. Muslims are forbidden from doubting that the Koran is the actual word of Allah, "This book is not to be doubted." (Koran 2:1)
29. There are more than 100 verses in the Koran urging Muslims to make war against non-Muslims.
30. Even man's best friend (dogs) aren't safe in Islam, as Mohammed had many killed because the "angel Gabriel" didn't enter houses with dogs and/or pictures. (Bukhari 4:448)

HISTORICAL ISLAMIC INFLUENCE ON WEST

PERHAPS RATHER THAN LOOKING BACK, as has become fashionable in our time, to all the “splendid gifts” the West supposedly received from Islam during the Middle Ages (“science”, "philosophy", "medicine", “algebra”, and if you read certain discredited Muslim apologists, practically everything civilized), our historical attention should focus instead on the barbarity that Muslims might have passed along to those Westerners who endured centuries of rule under Muslims: Slavs, Greeks, Italians, Spanish—perhaps that explains, for example, some of the brutality of the Conquistadores? It can hardly be a coincidence that they had only recently emerged out of a culture that had been under more than 700 years of Islamic rule?

Ditto this for the Sicilian Mafia and other pathologies of Sicilian culture—Sicily had been conquered by Muslims and ruled by them for some 200 years.

Considering Sicily and the influence of Islam on it—it seems that the Norman who re-conquered Sicily, King Roger and his son Roger II, who ruled Sicily were typical of modern dhimmis—they had the power, but they chose to “respect” Muslims and allowed them to inter-weave their Islam into Sicilian sociopolitical culture:

Though King Roger I (1093-1101 A.D.) put an end to Islamic rule in Sicily, he did not harm its Muslim people; on the contrary , he provided them with protection, and recognized their religion and legislation and allowed them their own judges, if they chose. He also allowed them to celebrate their religious occasions in public. In addition, he abstained from participation in the crusades in spite of the Pope's pressure. This shows that Sicily during his rule was a half-lslamic kingdom in religion and in its administrative and military system.

Roger II (1101-1154 A.D.) succeeded his father and followed his tradition in protecting Muslims through his influence and laws; some Muslims wrongly believed that he was a secret Muslim. An example of the King's tolerance and his love of justice and equality is that he inscribed all Sicilian coins in Arabic, Latin and Greek, the languages used by his citizens. He is also reported to have imitated the Muslims rulers in their loose clothes and the Roman Caesars and the European emperors in a clear indication of his lack of bias.

His court in Palermo contained a large number of Muslim poets and scientists...

Read it all but be sure to throw in a few grains of salt.

MUSLIM BULLIES THREATEN UK SCHOOLS

This from the fog-infested British Isles where Islam has reached numbers enough to put spring into their own hollow steps and a special venom on their taquiyya-torqued tongues.

"Erica Connor claims her bosses did nothing as a group of Muslim governors tried to force her to change the school curriculum." She also says she was “harassed” by the four-strong team as they demanded the pupils be taught more about Allah and Islam. And they tried to “railroad” her into linking up with the local mosque and focusing on Muslim worship, says the 57-year-old head, who has taken her fight to London’s High Court."

Read more HERE.

The more Muslims in one's nation the more intimidation, even for control of the schools. Then there's that awesome matter of the loss of freedom of speech that's being pushed through the IOC and UN behind the unified tactics of the 57 Muslim nations.

The United States should abandon the impotent Islamic tool called the United Nations like the League of Nations before it, and close the New York City apparatus down. Frankly, to scan the global politik, sniff the air, and come to one's clearest sensibilities, it is no large leap to realize we in the West are living in a post UN world.