Tuesday, March 04, 2008

THE FALLACY OF SHARED VALUES

The following essay was written by Janet Levy and is part of the ACT for America! campaign to educate Americans to the threat of "slow" and "fast" Jihad under the regime of Islam. If you don't already know the difference, you are undereducated or intentionally miseducated about the totalitarian regime's prime directive which is to conquer the entire planet for Allah, one ignorant people, one scrap of turf at a time. Read on:

AT A TIME WHEN 40% of young Muslims in the United Kingdom want to impose sharia law on the country and 36% favor executing apostates of Islam, the head of the Church of England called for the selective application of sharia law in Britain in the interest of social cohesion.

On February 7, 2008, Dr. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury and symbolic head of the worldwide Anglican Communion, issued what amounts to a capitulation to the encroachment of Islam and an accommodation to sharia. This Islamic theo-political-legal doctrine assigns second class status to Christians and Jews, utilizes a medieval system of justice that sanctions cruel and unusual punishments and mandates the inequality of women and non-Muslims.

Archbishop Williams' suggestion is not unexpected given his 2003 speech at Princeton University, "Islam versus the West: Challenges Facing the Human Family." In that address, the Archbishop called for the cultivation of an "enduring partnership based on shared values that make us human beings, that make us capable of receiving God's gift of love and peace."

But an examination of the intersection of Islam and traditional Western or Judeo-Christian societies reveals very little evidence of any "shared values." Instead, glaring conflicts between the two are evident in the role and practice of religion in society, the concepts of moral behavior, the value of human life, personal responsibility and civil and legal rights.

Church and State

The most dramatic of these conflicts is the difference over the power religion holds in matters of state. Theologies shape societies, but the extent of their ability to control human interactions is in direct proportion to the extent of their mandate.

In the West, democratic governments preside over affairs of state and the church's domain is subordinate to the rule of the land. Christ's instruction to "render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" embodies the separation of these realms from a theological standpoint. Separation of church and state is the underlying civil principle.

However, within Islam's all-encompassing religiopolitical ideology, no dichotomy exists between the civil world of government and the theological world of religion. Unelected religious clerics, who enjoy lifelong reign, issue binding rulings on every aspect of people's lives. Such rulings are indisputable and represent the will of Allah as interpreted from the Islamic teachings.

Democracy vs. Theocracy

From these two differing theological and civil positions, two vastly different methods of governing are derived. In most Western democracies, government is "of, by and for the people" or some approximation thereof. In essentially pluralistic participatory democracies, the populace decides by a majority vote who among them will best represent their interests and will advance the most beneficial policies for the nation as a whole. A political leader who doesn't perform according to the will of the people can be voted out of office.

But in Islamic nations, rigid theocracies, for the most part, rule in accordance with Islamic scriptures. Religious practices and laws are enforced under the watchful eye of religious police, empowered to beat or imprison violators. Clerical leaders control all aspects of life, with the primary concern obedience to the words of Allah and Mohammed. Religious leaders strictly interpret the Islamic doctrine and dissent is prohibited and viewed as un-Islamic.

Equality vs. Supremacy

The Western concept of rule by the general populace led to the logical extension and development of human rights. Equality under the law regardless of race, religion, sex, or ethnicity is a cornerstone of democratic societies. Government agencies monitor human rights violations and prosecute violators of existing statutes. Affirmative action programs often mitigate perceived disadvantages of identified minority groups. Violence against women is prohibited by law and spousal abuse is prosecuted and viewed as morally abhorrent by society.

By contrast, within Islamic societies, in which the individual is subordinate to God's rule, no concept of human rights exists and no acceptance of differences, particularly religious differences, exists. Instead, Muslims are viewed as superior to and more privileged than non-Muslims. In many Islamic countries, non-Muslims are slighted for not embracing Islam, treated like second class citizens and are frequently prohibited from practicing their religions. Inequality also exists between men and women, with men having greater standing and worth than women. Women are under the control of male relatives. The movements, careers and marital choices of women are often restricted. Women who are not obedient may be dutifully beaten by their husbands as a God-sanctioned corrective measure and responsibility under Islamic teachings.

Acceptance vs. Elitism

Western and Islamic societies also differ in their approach to treatment of others. Key moral features of any society are the rules delineating how others should be treated.

In Western societies, the expected standard for human interaction can be summarized from the universally accepted Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." Thus, a reasonable expectation exists that others will treat you the way in which they would like to be treated and that you will reciprocate in kind.

Islam, however, lacks the concept of the Golden Rule. Instead, the world is divided into believers in Allah, the Dar al Islam, and the world of kafirs, the evil unbelievers, known as the Dar-al-Harb or world of war. Behaviors prohibited against fellow Muslims, such as lying, cheating or stealing can be used with impunity and are considered permissible against kafirs. Even in murder, the acceptability of the act is judged by the victim's status. Killing a fellow Muslim is a serious crime, but the murder of an infidel is justified by his non-belief in Allah.

Religious Freedom vs. Religious Coercion

The practice of religion itself also differs dramatically in Western and Muslim societies. In the West, religion is freely chosen and practiced according to an individual's desired level of orthodoxy. Religion is viewed as a guide for living a moral life, based on reason and interpretations of the word of God. God is perceived as a just, loving and forgiving divine presence and a human-divine relationship exists. Religious scriptures are "divinely inspired" and open to interpretation, with doctrine allowed to evolve over time.

In Christianity, the messenger of God, Jesus Christ, is depicted on earth as an ethical, honest, compassionate human being who works for the common good of mankind. The Bible is considered a "how-to" guide for living an ethical existence. Practitioners of Christianity and Judaism endeavor to live peacefully alongside believers of other religions and the highest level of religious expression is to serve all mankind and establish harmony in the world. Western religions are not at war with other religions and strive to live in peace with the rest of the world.

Islam, however, dictates all facets of life and allows no room for interpreting the words of Allah and Mohammed. According to Islamic teachings, Allah dictated the Koran verbatim and it must not be interpreted or altered. For Muslims, Allah's messenger or prophet, Mohammed, is viewed as the ideal man whose life is to be emulated. His actions included advocating the mass murder of kafirs or non-believers, use of deception or taquiya to further the goals of Islam and subjugation of non-Muslims and women. Allah is represented as a revengeful, rigid and condemning god who demands that followers conquer the world for Islam. Any concept of a God-human partnership is alien.

Further, the Koran and Sunnah contain no concept of equal justice for all and focus on revenge and warmongering. Islam is in conflict with other religions and the highest level of devotion to Allah is waging jihad and defeating those who do not embrace Islam. Muslims who leave Islam are considered to be apostates and are threatened with death. The Koran is a manual for life that must be followed literally. Islam is viewed as superseding Judaism and Christianity, which are nullified by Allah's final revelations in the Koran.

Abhorrence vs. Embrace of War

In democratic societies, war is viewed as a necessary evil to protect fellow countrymen and preserve liberty and freedom. Citizens, government representatives and military officers view loss of life as tragic and regret the carnage and destruction of war. Efforts are made to protect innocent citizens and military strategies are developed accordingly.

In Islam, war against infidels is a noble, divinely commanded mission against those deserving of death for their unbelief. The death of non-Muslims - men, women or children - is a cause for celebration and a certain route to Paradise. Young children are indoctrinated to hate non-believers, are required to participate in military training and are taught to revere martyrs.

Justice vs. Honor

Finally, Islamic and Western societies differ in their application of laws and punishment. Western societies operate under the rule of law and a set of equally applied legal standards. Murder, for even an unpremeditated crime of passion, is condemned, punishment is demanded for the perpetrator and the victim is mourned and often memorialized. In instances of attempted assault or murder, the intended victim is protected by authorities and generally receives support and sympathy from the public at large.

But in traditional Islamic societies, murder is viewed as honorable if it is committed to enforce social control and adherence to Islamic or sharia law. Women who violate required behavioral, social norms can end up the victims of honor killings. They can be killed for failing to wear proper clothing, being in the company of an unrelated male without a chaperone, dating, marrying a person deemed unacceptable or leaving an abusive, forced marriage. Women who commit such offenses are shunned, prompting murder as a response to defend family honor. As such, it is a purposeful, planned event often committed with the collusion of family members. Upon the completion, the murderer is celebrated and the victim promptly erased from memory.

Given these dramatic and irreconcilable differences between Western and Islamic beliefs, the quest by the Archbishop of Canterbury to identify a common ground of shared values is obviously a hollow and futile enterprise. While Western societies endeavor to accommodate to the demands of Muslim immigrants and cultivate interfaith understanding, Muslims are continually looking for ways to overcome the West.

Acceptance of sharia law is thus not a step in the direction of recognizing shared values. It is a step toward capitulation to Islam, the subjugation of women and the state of dhimmitude, or creation of minority and unequal status for non-Muslims. Instead of calling on Muslims to integrate into the mainstream of British society and for all UK citizens to follow the law of the land, Rowan Williams is wrong headedly suggesting that British citizens recognize and accommodate Islamic law. Already, Britain has accepted polygamy, halal meat in public schools and sharia finance. With honor killings, forced marriages and female genital mutilation rampant in the United Kingdom, the Archbishop should be speaking out about the preservation of cherished Western values of democracy and freedom.

Labels: , , , ,

Saturday, September 15, 2007

THE COMING CONQUEST OF ROME


Religion of peaceniks armed with tools to proselytize Infidels

Spain will host OSCE conference on Muslim discrimination.

A juicy headline. Wonderful news. Finally, a serious breakthrough, a fierce blow against the anemic dhimmitude of Europe's socialist leadership. Wait a minute! Oops, reality reveals another wishful misreading of the text. At first glance, the headline seemed to suggest that indeed a miracle had occurred, that some fact-finding authority was finally set to investigate why Muslims seemed to discriminate against everyone under the sun, including those of opposition sects within their own ranks. And Spain was leading the way. Wrong!

Instead, on October 9-10 a conference will be held in the Spanish city of Cordoba under the aegis of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation (OSCE) in Europe to ponder why indigenous peoples are resisting the aggressive Islamization and set asides for the Islamization of their towns, cities, and nations.

"The meeting will investigate the "roots of intolerance towards Muslims..."

Let's see. Here's the voice of Robert Spencer.

"Will the continuing violence committed by Muslims in the name of Islam be on the agenda as one of the contributing factors, and possibly the most important contributing factor, of this intolerance? Will the imperialistic boasts by Muslim leaders about the impending Islamic conquest of Europe be on the agenda?"

Like Spencer, I doubt that either one will be discussed. But why not?

In many articles written by Islamic clerics, the clerics herald the imminent conquest of Rome by Islam, in accordance with the prophecy of Muhammad. The issue is also discussed in Friday sermons. Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, one of the most influential clerics in Sunni Islam, often makes this claim in his religious rulings and on his television programs. The following are remarks made by Al-Qaradhawi and other Muslim clerics:

Al-Qaradhawi: "Islam will Return to Europe as a Conqueror"
In a fatwa posted on thewebsite in response to a reader's question, Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi wrote of the "signs of the victory of Islam," citing a well-known Hadith: "… The Prophet Muhammad was asked: 'What city will be conquered first, Constantinople or Romiyya?' He answered: 'The city of Hirqil [i.e. the Byzantine emperor Heraclius] will be conquered first'—that is, Constantinople… Romiyya is the city called today 'Rome,' the capital of Italy. The city of Hirqil [that is, Constantinople] was conquered by the young 23-year-old Ottoman Muhammad bin Morad, known in history as Muhammad the Conqueror, in 1453. The other city, Romiyya, remains, and we hope and believe [that it too will be conquered]."

"This means that Islam will return to Europe as a conqueror and victor, after being expelled from it twice - once from the South, from Andalusia, and a second time from the East, when it knocked several times on the door of Athens."

Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi qualified his statement: "I maintain that the conquest this time will not be by the sword but by preaching and ideology…"

Al-Qaradhawi made similar statements on other occasions, on his weekly religious program on Al-Jazeera. He declared: "This means that the friends of the Prophet heard that two cities would be conquered by Islam, Romiyya and Constantinople, and the Prophet said that 'Hirqil [i.e. Constantinople] would be conquered first.' Romiyya is Rome, the capital of Italy, and Constantinople was the capital of the state of Byzantine Rome, which today is Istanbul. He said that Hirqil which is Constantinople, would be conquered first and this is what happened…"

"All right, Constantinople was conquered, and the second part of the prophecy remains, that is, the conquest of Romiyya. This means that Islam will return to Europe. Islam entered Europe twice and left it… Perhaps the next conquest, Allah willing, will be by means of preaching and ideology. The conquest need not necessarily be by the sword… [The conquest of Mecca] was not by the sword or by war, but by a [Hudabiyya] treaty, and by peace… Perhaps we will conquer these lands without armies. We want an army of preachers and teachers who will present Islam in all languages and in all dialects…"

Another time, Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi said, "The Hadith says that the city of Constantinople, the city of Heracles, will be conquered first. We conquered Constantinople and the second part of the prophecy remains—the conquest of Romiyya. The conquest of Romiyya means that Islam will return to Europe. In one of my previous programs, I said that I think that this conquest would not be by the sword or armies, but by preaching and ideology. Europe will see that it suffers from materialistic culture, and will seek an alternative, it will seek a way out, it will seek a lifeboat. It will find no lifesaver but the message of Islam the message of the muezzin who gives it religion but does not deny it this world, brings it to Heaven, but does not uproot it from Earth. Allah willing, Islam will return to Europe and the Europeans will convert to Islam. Then they themselves will be able to be the ones to disseminate Islam in the world, more than we ancient Muslims. This is within Allah's capabilities."

Saudi Sheikh: "We Will Control the Land of the Vatican"
The Saudi Sheikh Muhammad bin Abd Al-Rahman Al-'Arifi, imam of the mosque of King Fahd Defense Academy,[5] discussed this Hadith in an article posted on the Kalemat website. Under the headline "Don't be sad, Allah is with us," the article read: "… We will control the land of the Vatican; we will control Rome and introduce Islam in it. Yes, the Christians, who carve crosses on the breasts of the Muslims in Kosovo - and before then in Bosnia, and before then in many places in the world - will yet pay us the Jiziya [poll tax paid by non-Muslims under Muslim rule], in humiliation, or they will convert to Islam…"

In a sermon at the Al-Nour Mosque in Khobar, Sheikh Naser Muhammad Al-Naser quoted the sage Al-Albani, who said: "The first conquest was carried out, as is known, by Muhammad the Ottoman conqueror, 800 years after the Prophet told of it, and the second conquest [that of Rome] will be carried out, Allah willing, and it is inevitable…"

In another sermon, Sheikh Al-Naser said: "This Hadith predicts that the two cities will be conquered. The first was already conquered, remained under the control of the Muslims for a time, and then was again stolen [by Ataturk]. There are signs that it will again be conquered and will return to the hands of the Islamic state. Rome also will be conquered…"

PA Deputy Minister: When Islam Reaches Its End, the Sun and Stars will Extinguish

In a sermon at the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the Palestinian Authority's Deputy Minister of Awqaf, Sheikh Yousef Juma'a Salameh said: "Romiyya is Rome, the capital of Italy, and Constantinople is today Istanbul, known in Islamic history by the name of Islam-Boul… The great conquest [of Constantinople] was carried out two centuries after the Tatars entered Baghdad and after the fall of the Caliphate. The people thought that Islam had reached its lowest point… and forgot that Islam had not reached its end in the world, because on the day it reaches its end, there will be no world: the sun will be extinguished, the stars will go out…"

Sudanese Sheikh: "Rome Will be Conquered"
In a sermon at a mosque in Khartoum, Sudan, Sheikh Muhammad Abd Al-Karim said: "…The Prophet said that the Muslims would take India, saying: 'Allah saved two groups of my nation from the fire of Hell: one group that would attack India and a second group that would be with Jesus the son of Mary [in the battle of Judgment Day].' The Prophet Muhammad told us of the conquest of Constantinople, the capital of the Byzantine state, and of the conquest of Rome, where the Vatican is situated… Some of what the Prophet said has already come to pass. The Muslims conquered Persia, the Muslims conquered Byzantium… the Muslims attacked India and Allah conquered it for us, until they reached the borders of China. The Muslims conquered Constantinople, where Eastern Christianity is situated, and in the future, a mighty king will arise for the Muslims; through him, Islam will spread and Rome will be conquered…"

I realize most of America is too busy watching Paris, Britney, Rosie, or rushing off to golf, tennis, or car racing events in a frenzy of constitutionally bestowed pursuit of happiness to even notice what the mainstream media is not telling us about the Islamic forces around the world today, while puffing up the smokescreen with a few radicals hijacking the religion of peace, but let's get pell back the onion here.

Nothing any priest has done in secret against the wishes of religion and civilization compares with what the Ayatollah Khomeini (following Mohammed's lead, of course) confirmed as acceptable practice for everyday Muslims, not just the mullahs or muftis with long gray beards. Read this from one of the Grand Ayatollah's books written after the Iranian Revolution in 1979:

"A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels and so on. However he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village, however selling the meat to the next door village should be fine."

Don't stop there. He also penned the words in his Little Green Book:

"A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however is prohibited from having intercourse with a girl younger than nine, other sexual acts such as foreplay, rubbing, kissing and sodomy is allowed. A man having intercourse with a girl younger than nine years of age has not committed a crime, but only an infraction, if the girl is not permanently damaged. If the girl, however, is permanently damaged, the man must provide for her all her life. But this girl will not count as one of the man's four permanent wives. He also is not permitted to marry the girl's sister."

It only gets worse: This Muslim cleric goes on to suggest that if this man does force his penis into her tiny vagina he is obligated to pay for any surgical repairs that may be required. If those repairs are deemed insufficient you may work out a financial settlement to compensate you for his trivial infraction. No big deal. Muslim boys will be Muslim boys. And, after all, she is only a girl. Yes, this is all part of the sharia law these crackpots so stealthly wish to install across the West.

Another technique used by Muslim men is called "thighing". The child's legs are pressed together and the abuser inserts his penis between the thighs of the little boy or girl. As this was how Mohammed had sex with his wife, Aisha, from the time she was six years old the practice, of course, was approved of by Ayatollah Khomeini who in his Little Green Book asserted “It is not illegal for an adult male to 'thigh' or enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his penis between her thighs, and to kiss her.”

This is not inneuendo. Sources all over the web can be found. Muslims do not deny these rules for daily life. They excuse them by pointing out how stable their marriages are as a result of these "holy" admonitions.

But one particular Arab woman vigorously denounces this vile practice in the following video clip from Bahrain TV. Her denunciation of the "thighing" of infants and young girls comes towards the end of the interview. The subtitles are both in a strange English and a language I presume to be classic or contemporary Arabic, while the actual speech of both participants more probably is of some local dialect.


Arab woman fearlessly confronts ruthless misogynistic lies of Arab men

This practice flourishes in Muslim countries where women are ruthlessly oppressed and normal sexual development systematically suppressed. That would include the Arab world, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Deny men wholesome and natural sexual outlets and they will find unwholesome and unnatural alternatives.

The Grand Ayatollah's full ruling on marriage can be found here. The institution of "temporary marriage" appears to be designed to facilitate prostitution. Yes, Islam is a full service religion.

Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, August 07, 2007

NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION, SAYS WHOM

TEL AVIV – Hamas-linked militants kidnapped and forcibly converted to Islam a female Christian professor in the Gaza Strip, according to the professor's family and officials from Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah organization. Hamas members denied the accusations, accusing rival Fatah of spreading lies even though the professor, Sana al-Sayegh of Gaza City's Palestine International University, has indicated she was converted against her will.

Sayegh, head of the university's Science and Technology Department, disappeared June 24, failing to show up at work where she serves as the Gaza Strip's only female doctorate in her field.

After several days, co-workers and Sayegh's parents informed Gaza security officials of the professor's disappearance.

According to sources close to her family, about five days after she disappeared Sayegh caller her parents to say she was being held against her will in order to marry a Muslim man, who was also a professor at the university.

Sayegh's family declined to speak to WND directly, explaining interviews about the matter could endanger the professor.

"Sayegh said she couldn't talk," said a source. "It was very clear she had been abducted and was made to do things she didn't want to do."

A few days later, the family said it received a copy of a conversion document certifying Sayegh had become a Muslim. The document was signed by two witnesses, as required. One witness was Zaher Khail, president of the Palestine International University, who, according to Palestinian security officials is an Islamist close with Gaza-based terror groups, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

Fatah officials say Khail assisted in kidnapping Sayegh, whose family stated she would "never" convert willingly to Islam. Fatah officials also accused Hamas leaders directly of overseeing Sayegh's "forced" conversion.

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, July 19, 2007

WINDS OF WAR: IS ISLAMIZATION THE NEW FINLANDIZATION?

Our national poet from Minnesota, who carved out a career slicing and dicing up both the Left and the Right, and anybody else who didn't quite get the whole picture, once sang, "It doesn't take a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."

So let's go to the videotape. Is a new form of the old Soviet technique of "Findlandization" becoming the same powerful threat in the West it once was seen to be in the previous confrontation of East versus West, of Communism versus Capitalism? Read more of this intriguing but very real possibility here in a captivating article shining a light onto Norman Podhoretz's new book World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism.

Labels: , ,