Pastor Terry Jones did the nation a service by bringing  a burning issue to the front burner and let it down by failing to fully exploit the issue.  He should have explained in detail why the Qur’an should be burned and  and exhorted people to read it.  He should especially have exhorted preachers to read the most egregious  ayat from their lecterns to educate their congregations.

Jones did another great disservice to the nation and the free world by backing down in the face of Islamic threats and governmental condemnation.  Backing down to threats reinforces those who make the threats.  When we back down, the bullys experience triumph and are encouraged by it to  issue more threats in the future.

There was no need to burn hundreds of Qur’ans and no benefit from it.  Burning one is sufficient for the symbolic act of resistance to Islamic intimidation, infiltration, sedition and conquest.

Had he burned just one English translation of the Qur’an,  he could have answered the hordes of Muslim protesters with a simple statement that he did not burn their sacred book; Muslims do not consider translations to be  sacred.

Another Christian activist and  associates gathered near the White House to protest  Islamic violence.  They  crumpled pages torn from a paperback translation of the Qur’an.  The torn pages were selected for their violent, anti-Christian content.  Think Progress reports that Andrew Beacham did the tearing while Randall Terry explained which  verses were selected and why.  In a radio interview with Sean Hannity, Terry urged listeners to read the Qur’an.  Hannity agreed and announced that he would have a special Qur’an reading hour this week,  possibly as soon as Tuesday September 14.

Randall Terry also gave  the url of his blog, which contains two papers he wrote for one of his courses in a Masters degree program. I did not catch it off the air, but hope I found it with a Google search.  A press release revealed that two papers were distributed at the protest.  Earth Times published a list of the torn ayat.  9:5-6 are listed, 9:29, 30, 33 & 123 are interesting omissions.

1) “Is Islamic Sharia law incompatible with international laws of human rights for freedom of thought, conscience, religion and expression?”

2) “How do the words and deeds of Islamic terrorists, or Muslims who call for acts of terror and violence, emulate the words and deeds of Muhammad?”

There is one thing more important than incinerating a Qur’an: becoming familiar with  its evil content.   Noel Yatom published a list of 164 violent verses. The Calcutta Qur’an Petition lists some critical ayat which establish the doctrine of jihad: offensive conquest.

During his early days in Medina, the Prophet apprehended attacks from the Quraish of Meeca.  So he formed the Muslim-Jewish alliance as a defensive measure.  Allah came forward with “revelations” (22.39-41) permitting the Prophet to fight in self-defence, and promising help.  But no attacks came from Mecca so that the Prophet was left free to break his alliance with the Jews and form his own Muslim Ummah.  Allah obliged immediately by converting the permission into a command (2.216; 4.76-77, 84, 8.39, 66- 66).  War against the Pagans now became obligatory on all Muslims.  Muslims were to go out and attack the infidels in regular military formations (4.71; 8.15; 9.123; 61.4). …Allah had purchased the lives and properties of the Muslims in exchange for dominion in this word and paradise hereafter (2.244-45; 9.111).  Avoiding jihAd became a great sin and violation of the covenant with Allah (2.218; 3.156; 4.74, 77, 95; 9.24, 38-39, 81.84). Becoming a martyr (shahId) became the highest merit for every Muslim (2.154; 3.157, 169-70,195, 198; 22.58; 33.16-17).

Click those links, print the verses, take them to Sunday school, and ask the teacher to identify them, “what part of the Bible is this from”.  Change Allah to God, and you’ll have them stumped.  If that does not get you shunned or disfellowshiped,  spring them on the preacher; ask him to read them in church.

It is not necessary to read the entire Qur’an to discover its true nature nor is there any mystery about it. Allah’s commands are contained in clear verses which are the foundation of the book.  If you read Surahs Al-Anfal & At-Taubah, you will have a pretty good understanding of the bottom line.

The hierarchy of your church probably believes the standard lies, that Islam is a “great religion of peace” and an “equally valid pathway to God”.  They probably believe that Islam reveres Jesus as a Prophet, too.  Of course they don’t know that Islam denies his paternity, divinity, crucifixion, death & resurrection, depicts him as inferior to Muhammad and a genocidal warlord who will “kill the Jews” when he returns.   What if you prove it to them?  My blog post “The Defamation of Jesus Christ“, contains the evidence you need, from the Qur’an, hadith & Tafsir, to show  your church the anti-Christian core of Islam.  Will you do it?  If you won’t. who will?

Originally posted at Ben’s Blog © Dajjal

 

WesternFront America

Shaykh-ul-Islam Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri has issued a 600 page fatwa, written in Urdu, which he hopes to have translated and published in English.

The fatwa is entitled: FATWA ON SUICIDE BOMBINGS AND TERRORISM. I have linked the title to an 88 page English summary in pdf format.  It is likely that when published in English, the fatwa will appear on or near this minhaj books page.

Taken at face value, the fatwa appears to condemn violence against civilian populations without reservation. It places the greatest emphasis on condemning attacks against Muslims, particularly against Mosques.  Unfortunately, I can not accept the fatwa at face value.

Cherry Picking: quote out of context

Beware of trickery: quoting the Qur’an out of context to distort the meaning of an ayeah, giving it a false application.
This occurs on page 52 of the description & summary where, writing about the terrorists, this citation is made:

The Holy Qur’an has vividly described them in this verse:
“It is those whose entire struggle is wasted in worldly life, but they presume they are doing very good works.” (Al-Qur’an, 18: 104)

In fact, that verse describes disbelievers; Jews & Christians. Observe the context. [Hilali & Khan quoted, linked to Pickthall, Shakir & Yusuf Ali; links below to Hilali & Khan and ten parallel translations Emphasis added for clarity.]

18:100. And on that Day We shall present Hell to the disbelievers, plain to view,

18:101. (To) Those whose eyes had been under a covering from My Reminder (this Qur’ân), and who could not bear to hear (it).

18:102. Do then those who disbelieve think that they can take My slaves [i.e., the angels, Allâh's Messengers, 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), etc.] as Auliyâ’ (lords, gods, protectors, etc.) besides Me? Verily, We have prepared Hell as an entertainment for the disbelievers (in the Oneness of Allâh Islâmic Monotheism).

18:103. Say (O Muhammad ): “Shall We tell you the greatest losers in respect of (their) deeds?

18:104. “Those whose efforts have been wasted in this life while they thought that they were acquiring good by their deeds!

18:105. “They are those who deny the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of their Lord and the Meeting with Him (in the Hereafter). So their works are in vain, and on the Day of Resurrection, We shall not give them any weight.

18:106. “That shall be their recompense, Hell; because they disbelieved and took My Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and My Messengers by way of jest and mockery.

Hilali & Khan
Qur’an Browser

Al-Taqeyya

On page 33, a new section begins, entitled “THE QUESTIONS THAT SPRING TO  MIND AND THEIR BRIEF ANSWERS”

Q: The first question in this connection that concerns all relates to use of force to spread beliefs: is it lawful for a group or organisation to use force to promote and put into effect their own creed and beliefs in the name of reforming others’ beliefs and ideologies, presuming themselves to be on the right path? Does Islam allow, somehow, the killing of people because of  ideological differences, looting their wealth and properties and destroying mosques, religious places and shrines?.

A: Islam is a religion of peace and safety that champions love and harmony in society. According to Islamic teachings, only such a person will be called a Muslim at whose hands the lives and properties of all innocent Muslims and non-Muslims remain safe and unhurt. The sanctity of human life and its protection occupies a fundamental place in Islamic law. Taking anyone’s life for  nothing is an act that is forbidden and unlawful. Rather, in some cases, it amounts to infidelity.[...]  [Emphasis added, spelling original.]

Is it lawful for Islam to use force to promote and establish itself’; to make it superior over all other religions? Let us consult Reliance of the Traveller, the handbook of Shari’ah.

O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad

The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,

“Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled” (Koran 9.29),

the time and place for which is before the final descent of Jesus (upon whom be peace). After his final coming, nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus’ descent (upon him and our Prophet be peace), which is the divinely revealed law of Muhammad. The coming of Jesus does not entail a separate divinely revealed law, for he will rule by the law of Muhammad. As for the Prophet’s saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

“I am the last, there will be no prophet after me,”

this does not contradict the final coming of Jesus (upon whom be peace), since he will not rule according to the Evangel, but as a follower of our Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) ). [Emphasis & link added.]

Does Islam allow killing people because they are not Muslims and seizing their  property?  Once again, we turn first to Shari’ah for the answer. Book O, Chapter 9, Section 25 lists  eight duties of subordinate rulers. The last item in the list is of interest to us.

O25.9

-8- and if the area has a border adjacent to enemy lands, an eighth duty arises, namely to undertake jihad against enemies, dividing the spoils of battle among combatants, and setting aside fifth (def: o10.3) for deserving recipients.

Of course that could only refer to established enemies of Islam who have been harassing & attacking Muslims, right?  Wrong!

O9.1The Obligatory Character of Jihad

[...] In the time of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) jihad was a communal obligation after his emigration (hijra) to Medina. As for subsequent times, there are two possible states in respect to non-Muslims.

The first is when they are in their own countries, in which case jihad (def: o9.8) is a communal obligation, and this is what our author is speaking of when he says, “Jihad is a communal obligation,” meaning upon the Muslims each year. [...]

Muslims have an annually recurring communal obligation to attack disbelievers even though they are in their own countries, peacefully attending their own domestic affairs.  Allow killing people and taking their property?  No, it is required, not allowed.

According to the Sheikh, ” Islam is a religion of peace…at whose hands the lives and properties of all …innocent non-Muslims remain safe and unhurt”. The truth is that Allah issued imperatives to wage jihad against pagans until resistance ceases and  Allah has a monopoly; against Jews & Christians until they are subjugated and make annual extortion payments.  When we read Surahs al-Anfal & at-Taubah, we learn that Islam is permanent war.

8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.

9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

So all innocent people remain safe and secure in their property?  Caution!  Words spoken by Muslims do not mean what you want them to mean, their meaning is assigned by the Muslims who speak them. Innocent means Muslim.  If you are not Muslim, you are a rebel against Allah, waging war against him.

Another question and answer, found on pages 36 & 37 respectively,  provides more proof   that the fatwa is malignant maundery.

Q: The third question arises: does Islam offer clear commands on the sanctity of human life? Is it lawful to
kidnap and assassinate foreign delegates and innocent  and peaceful non-Muslim citizens to avenge the
injustices and disruption of the non-Muslim global powers?

A: The importance Islam lays on the sanctity and dignity of human life can be gauged from the fact that
Islam does not allow indiscriminate killing even when Muslim armies are engaged in war against enemy
troops. The killing of children, women, the old, infirm, religious leaders and traders is strictly prohibited. Nor
can those who surrender their arms, confine themselves to their homes and seek shelter of anyone
be killed. The public cannot be massacred. Likewise, places of worship, buildings, crops and even trees
cannot be destroyed. On the one hand, there is a clear set of Islamic laws based on extreme discretion, and on
the other, there are people who invoke the name of Islam to justify the indiscriminate killing of people,
children, and women everywhere, without any distinction of religion or identity. It is a pity that such
barbaric people still refer to their activities as Jihad.

Lets see what Muhammad, the founder of Islam said about the sanctity of human life.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.” Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, “O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?” He replied, “Whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have.”

Our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims and we have no rights until we become Muslim.  Now let us examine the proscription on killing women and children; surely it must  be founded on morality?

Muslim Book 019, Number 4294:
It has been reported from Sulaiman b. Buraid through his father that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him to fear Allah and to be good to the Muslims who were with him. He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war, do not embezzle the spoils; do not break your pledge; and do not mutilate (the dead) bodies; do not kill the children. [...]

Note the acts which would defile and profane a holy war; two of them are relevant to our quest for truth.

• Make a holy war
  • do not embezzle the spoils
  • do not kill the children

What do embezzlement and killing children have in common?  Our first hint will come from Shari’ah.

O9.13

When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.

Is it clear to you yet?  If not, Ibn Taimiyyah  has the final clue for you, from The Religious and Moral Doctrine On Jihad.

As for those who cannot offer resistance or cannot fight, such as women, children, monks, old people, the blind, handicapped and their likes, they shall not be killed, unless they actually fight with words [e.g. by propaganda] and acts [e.g. by spying or otherwise assisting in the warfare].

Some [jurists] are of the opinion that all of them may be killed, on the mere ground that they are unbelievers, but they make an exception for women and children since they constitute property for Muslims.

I emphasized the most critical clause in case there might be some readers with limited comprehension skills. The proscription on killing women and children is economic, not moral.

In the matter of those who surrendered; the Sheikh asserts that they must not be killed. Muhammad’s excellent companions reveal the truth.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 280:

Narrated Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri:

When the tribe of Bani Quraiza was ready to accept Sad’s judgment, Allah’s Apostle sent for Sad who was near to him. Sad came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah’s Apostle said (to the Ansar), “Stand up for your leader.” Then Sad came and sat beside Allah’s Apostle who said to him. “These people are ready to accept your judgment.” Sad said, “I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners.” The Prophet then remarked, “O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah.”

So, what did Muhammad do?

Sunan  Abu Dawud Book 38, Number 4390:
Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:
I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

They surrendered after a long siege, Muhammad decapitated them and threw them into a trench, then he did the same to their adolescent sons. Can you say genocide?  Can you recognize the fact that, like all Muslims, the learned Sheikh is a liar; that his fatwa is  malignant manure?  If not, then do the nation a favor, burn your voter registration card.

Originally posted at Ben’s Blog © Dajjal

 

WesternFront America

Every Muslim is not a terrorist, but every terrorist is a Muslim.

~ Dr. Zakir Naik, president, Islamic Research Foundation

When I first started writing for WorldNetDaily, almost three years ago, I wrote “Is Islam compatible with a republic?” My thesis then was to use the Constitution, reason, history and philosophy out of the Judeo-Christian traditions of intellectual thought, including Natural Law, to state authoritatively why Islam is not compatible with a republic. Why? Because Islam contains none of the essential components of what philosopher Booker T. Washington called the “fundamentals of civilization.”

What are some of the fundamentals of civilization?

• Belief in God (the moon god, Allah, is a very different entity);
• veneration of the intrinsic value of all life;
• the rule of law;
• A written constitution based on truth, equity, liberty and morality;
• laws that don’t discriminate based on race, creed, wealth, gender or national origin;
• Freedom of religion.

These are just a few of the fundamentals of civilization Islam under Shariah law has no conception of and utter contempt for.

Islam is not compatible with a republic.

Last Monday I drove down to Columbus, Ohio, to attend a rally for the 17-year-old Christian convert, Rifqa Bary, who was tricked to come back from Florida where she had fled in mortal fear. She returned to her native Ohio to attend a juvenile court hearing that may force her to move back with her family, who are devout Muslims from Sri Lanka. Rifqa fears that her father will perform an honor killing upon her for “blasphemy against Islam” because of her conversion to Christianity.

Brigitte Gabriel combats politically correct notions about the “religion of peace” in “They Must be Stopped: Why We Must Defeat Radical Islam and How we Can Do It”

The event was organized by my friend, Florida radio host and publisher Pamela Geller. One of the speakers, Nonie Darwish, also a Christian convert from Islam, made this profound statement:

This [Islam] is not religion. It has nothing to do with religion. Religion is a relationship with God. … Islam is a relationship with the State. Islam is a one-party, totalitarian system. It’s a one-party State that will not allow you to speak. And it will kill anybody who challenges or questions.

Islam is not compatible with a republic.

Last Tuesday the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan ordered Lynne Stewart, a convicted terror-coddling civil-rights lawyer, to begin serving her prison sentence.

Stewart, 69, was convicted over four years ago, in February 2005, of conspiracy and providing and concealing material support of terrorism for her actions in smuggling messages from “blind sheik” Omar Abdel-Rahman to his followers in the Islamic terror group Gama’a al-Islamiyya.

As irony would have it, last week President Obama and his attorney general, Eric Holder, brought five terrorists from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to be tried in a criminal court in New York. This act is tantamount to treason and is essentially overturning 230 years of American constitutional law and over 400 years of common-law traditions by permitting enemy combatants caught on foreign territory waging war against American soldiers to have full constitutional rights rather than being speedily tried by a military tribunal.

Last year I wrote a book, “The Nuremberg Trials: Last Tragedy of the Holocaust,” on this very issue of coddling extreme war criminals and clogging up our criminal courts with people as irredeemably wicked as the Nazis, who, after World War II, should have all been tried by a military (not an international) tribunal and summarily hanged in the public square as a lesson to future would-be dictators that the civilized world means business.

They didn’t. Instead, in November 1945 the civilized world at the Nuremberg Trials miserably failed to dispense swift, comprehensive justice against Hitler’s Nazis. Now, their anti-Semitic allies then and now, the Muslims, seek to finish what Hitler started.

Obama and Holder’s decision to bring these religious fanatics to New York is an insane policy that no constitutional lawyer worth his salt could tolerate, but instead of a unified front against this double-crossing policy from the American Bar Association, the National Trial Lawyers Association and the ACLU, all I hear is the sound of shekels jingling in moneybag of Judas as legions of shyster lawyers from NYU, Columbia and Harvard are lining up to become the next Lynne Stewart – the next traitorous terrorist lawyer who will get 24/7 media coverage and a king’s ransom for defending these murderers.

Islam is not compatible with a republic.

The Obama administration at every opportunity is bending over frontwards and backwards to convince the world that America is a nice country since GWB left office and Obama is in charge. Conversely, this Neville Chamberlain policy of appeasement has only demonstrated to the world our societal decadence, our duplicity and our utter lack of moral resolve to fight an avowed enemy like radical Islam with the same passion and merciless tactics they have leveled against the civilized world.

As Nonie Darwish said, Islam is a totalitarian political ideology feigning as a religion; indeed, Islam is anti-religion. It has no belief in a God of love, but in Allah, the pagan moon god that predates the prophet Muhammad and the Quran. Islam has no respect for the intrinsic value of all life, but is a cult of death that celebrates death by promoting homicide bombers and “killing the infidel where you find him.”

America’s republic respects a written Constitution based on God, Natural Law, liberty and truth; therefore, truly just laws should not discriminate based on race, creed, gender or wealth (within biblical traditions, of course). However, Shariah law under Islam openly discriminates against others based on every conceivable difference. In other words, according to the Quran, everyone not a Muslim is considered a second-class citizen or worse, can be abused, sold into slavery or even summarily killed. The Quran commands: “A Muslim must not enslave another Muslim but is free to do so with a non-Muslim.”

And that’s why, in my opinion, Islam is not compatible with a republic.

© Ellis Washington

Ellis Washington, authorized biographer for the conservative intellectual Dr. Michael Savage (see www.MichaelSavage.com), is former editor of the Michigan Law Review and law clerk at The Rutherford Institute. He is a graduate of John Marshall Law School and a lecturer and freelance writer on constitutional law, legal history, political philosophy and critical race theory. He has written over a dozen law review articles and several books, including “The Inseparability of Law and Morality: The Constitution, Natural Law and the Rule of Law” (2002). See his law review article “Reply to Judge Richard Posner.” Washington’s latest book is “The Nuremberg Trials: Last Tragedy of the Holocaust.”

 

WesternFront America

Now comes World Net Daily suggesting that President Obama’s Homeland Security Advisor, John Brennan, seeks a policy of “engagement” with Hezbollah. WND quotes snippets of Brennan’s August 6 address to CSIS, and links to more quotes at Independent Media Review Analysis, which links to a 23 page transcript in  pdf  format.

I addressed a few of the deceptions in Brennan’s address in a previous blog post: Obanination: High Treason, which concentrates on the Al-Qaeda/Islam identity. In this post, I will address the issue of “engagement”   with the “Party of  Allah”.

Observe the cognitive dissonance clearly evident in this excerpt [emphasis added]. Brennan is erecting a false premise: grievance driven terrorism, even while denying it.

The president has been very clear on this. Poverty does not cause violence and terrorism. Lack of education does not cause terrorism. But just as there is no excuse for the wanton slaughter of innocents, there is no denying that when children have no hope for an education, when young people have no hope for a job and feel disconnected from the modern world, when governments fail to provide for the basic needs of their people, then people become more susceptible to ideologies of violence and death.

Extremist violence and terrorist attacks are therefore, often the final, murderous manifestations of a long process rooted in helplessness, humiliation and hatred. Therefore, any comprehensive approach has to also address the upstream factors, the conditions that help fuel violent extremism. Indeed, the counterinsurgency lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan apply equally to the broader fight against extremism.

We cannot shoot ourselves out of this challenge. We can take out all the terrorists we want – their leadership and their foot soldiers – but if we fail to confront the broader political, economic and social conditions under which extremists thrive, then there will always be another recruit in the pipeline, another attack coming downstream. Indeed, our failure to address these conditions also plays into the extremists’ hands, allowing them to make the false claim that the United States actually wants to keep people impoverished and unempowered.

Are Usama bin Ladin, Ayman Al-Zawahiri and Khalid Sheikh Mohammad illiterate, uneducated indigents? No, they are educated professionals, with the potential to earn good incomes and accrue wealth. Usama had inherited wealth.

Ideologies of violence and death? What are those?  Has Brennan read the Qur’an, hadith, Sira or Shari’ah?  Islam is an ideology of violence and death, this fatal fact is clear on the face of the Qur’an. Violence and death are the rule, not the exception.  The elected and appointed leadership of this nation denies objective factual reality in order to promote their Socialist agenda. They pretend that education, development and social welfare programs will prevent ‘radicalization’. They can not explain the fact that the majority of the Magnificent Nineteen came from middle and upper class families in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Brennan attributes Islam’s violence to helplessness, humiliation and hatred, completely ignoring the fact that Allah ordained Jihad in 2:216 and commanded it in 8:39 & 9:29, as he commanded terrorism in 8:12 and exemplified it in 33:26.  Islamic humiliation is the result of loss of empire. Islamic aspiration is the recovery and expansion of empire. Has Brennan read the hadith? If he has read Sunan Abu Dawud 23.3455, then he intentionally ignores its clear lesson: ” When you enter into the inah transaction, hold the tails of oxen, are pleased with agriculture, and give up conducting jihad (struggle in the way of Allah). Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion.”
The clear implication is that remaking Islamic states in our image will prevent them from sponsoring terrorism. The concept is worse than cretinous, it is treacherous. It promotes the waste of blood & treasure without any possible benefit. Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and the rest will engage in Jihad and sponsor terrorism so long as they remain Muslim. There is no other possibility, regardless of how much tribute we pay.  Jihad is a ‘religious obligation’, established in the Qur’an, exemplified in the Sunnah & Sira,  codified in Shari’ah; taught in every Madrassa  and preached in every Mosque. Denial of this fatal fact is suicidal.

If we could succeed in making those states productive, wealthy and prosperous, they would export more, import less, and devote more wealth to Jihad & terrorism.

This is why the president’s approach includes a critical fourth element – the recognition that addressing these upstream factors is ultimately not a military operation, but a political, economic and social campaign to meet the basic needs and legitimate grievances of ordinary people – security for their communities, education for their children, a job and income for parents and a sense of dignity and worth.

Their grievances are loss of empire & our existence. Their needs are weapons of war, material and transportation infrastructure to get them to the battlefront. Their dignity and worth are measured in participation in Jihad, which is the best act a Muslim can perform.

The extremists know this. Wherever governments are unable to provide for the legitimate needs of their people, these groups step into the void. It is why they offer free education to impoverished Pakistani children, where they can recruit and indoctrinate the next generation. It is why Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaze provide so many social services to the poor even as they commit heinous acts of terror. It is why the terrorist warlord in Somalia can so easily recruit a destitute teenager who sees nothing but a future of poverty and despair.

Governments do not provide the needs of people,  the people do. Governments interfere with the creation and enjoyment of wealth through excessive taxation and regulation. Brennan is setting up an alternative outlook on terrorists as social welfare activists.  Hezbollah is a social welfare agency, not a violent terrorism promoter.  In Gaza, the UNRWA provides social welfare programs. Has their provision of food, clothing, shelter, education & medical care reduced the incidence of terrorism against Israel?  Why not?

President Obama understands that successfully defeating these extremists over the long term requires breaking this bond, exposing al-Qaida as nothing but the death cult it is and isolating extremists from the people they pretend to serve. Often, the extremists do this themselves. Time and again, their barbarism, brutality and beheadings have provoked backlashes among ordinary, good people, from Afghanistan under the Taliban to al-Qaida in Iraq, and increasingly in Pakistan today.

There are no extremists. The acts of al-Qaida, Hamas, etc. are standard Islam, not extremism. They were mandated by Allah and exemplified by his messenger. Those who will not read the Qur’an & hadith can not comprehend this crucial fact.  The bond which must be broken is Allah’s yoke of slavery. 9:111 informs us that Allah has purchased the Muslims so that they fight in his cause, kill and are killed in return for the promise of the celestial bordello. The death cult is Islam. Al-Qaida is another name for Islam; same people, same ideology, same actions.

Going forward, people must come to see that it is the likes of al-Qaida and the Taliban, Hezbollah and Hamas, not the United States, that is holding their aspirations hostage. That of all those al-Qaida have killed, most have been Muslims; that the murder of innocent civilians, as the president said in Cairo, is not how moral authority is claimed, but how it is surrendered; that the future offered by extremists is not one of peace, but of violence, not of hope and opportunity but of poverty and despair.

Brennan wants his listeners to believe that Joe Camel aspires to the good life, home, health, happiness, running water, warmth in winter, cool in summer, and a good education for his children. Brennan is a deceiver. Joe Camel aspires to be part of the winning team, to conquer and enslave the entire world and live the high life off of the labor of others through spoils of war and extortion payments. You need to read the Qur’an to comprehend this fatal fact. The people are subject to deception because of  their ignorance.

Governments that provide for basic security and needs of their people, strong and transparent institutions free from corruption, mainstream clerics and scholars who teach that Islam promotes peace, not extremism, and ordinary people who are ready to choose a future free from violence and fear.

Those who do not read the Qur’an & hadith do not realize that Brennan is the worst sort of liar. Standard, off the shelf, orthodox Islam is not a religion of peace, it is a war cult. Mainstream clerics and scholars teach Jihad because that is what Allah commanded and Moe exemplified.

For even as we condemn and oppose the illegitimate tactics used by terrorists, we need to acknowledge and address the legitimate needs and grievances of ordinary people those terrorists claim to represent, which leads to the fifth and final part of the president’s approach – integrating every element of American power to ensure that those upstream factor discourage rather than encourage violent extremism.

The list of tactics which legitimize aggressive world conquest is a null set; there ain’t any. The legitimate needs and grievances of Joe Camel are irrelevant, they are not the motivating factor of Jihad. Jihad is doctrine driven, not grievance driven. To discourage ‘violent extremism’, we must make Islam extinct. There is no other way to accomplish that objective. Islam is Jihad; Jihad is Islam, that identity can not be broken except by breaking Allah’s yoke of slavery. Either we induce mass apostasy, nuke them all or suffer the consequences of allowing a vicious predator to prey upon us. There are no other alternatives.

After all, the most effective long-term strategy for safeguarding the American people is one that promotes a future where young man or woman never even considers joining an extremist group in the first place, where they reject out of hand the idea of picking up that gun or strapping on that suicide vest; where they have faith in the political process and confidence in the rule of law; where they realize that they can build, not simply destroy and that the United States is a real partner in opportunity, prosperity, dignity and peace.

While they are Muslims, they will not reject the idea of Jihad, if they do, they cease to be Muslims and become hypocrites, condemned to eternity in the fire. The political process and rule of law have nothing to do with Jihad. Muslims must obey Allah’s imperatives, regardless of their form of government. Brennan needs to open Reliance of the Traveller to Book O, Chapter 9, Paragraph 1 and familiarize himself with the collective obligation of Jihad. If Jihad is neglected in any year when it was possible, all who knew of it and did nothing are sinners. Please don’t hand me the standard line of crap about Jihad Akhbar/Asghar. Paragraph 0 defines Jihad with extreme clarity as making war upon Kufar.

Islamic prosperity comes from spoils of war and tribute payments. Islamic dignity comes from successful conquest. Peace is the condition after they conquer the entire world.

That is why President Obama is committed to using every element of our national power to address the underlying causes and conditions that fuel so many national security threats,  including violent extremism.

Islam is doctrine driven, not grievance driven. Jihad, terrorism & genocide are driven by Allah’s demonic imperatives and Moe’s excellent example, which are the foundation of Islamic law. Brennan should open Reliance of the Traveller to Book O, Chapter 9, Paragraph 8 and see exactly what drives Jihad.  To fully comprehend the fact that our leaders are treacherous liars, you need to know the fundamental facts of Islam, which you will only learn by reading its canon of scripture, tradition and jurisprudence; that is why I post links to them.

We will use our military power not only to take down al-Qaida and its allies, but to train and build up the capacity of foreign militaries and security forces, as we are doing from Iraq to Afghanistan to Africa, because if these militaries and security forces can uphold the rule of law, if these countries can take responsibility for their own security, then militias, warlords and terrorists will find it harder to win sympathizers and recruits with the false promise of security and stability.

Building up military and ‘security forces’ is a great idea. Tell me how well that is working out in Gaza? When have they been used against terrorists? When have they not been used against Israel?  The concept is the Acme of counter productive idiocy!!

Rule of law? What law? Shari’ah is the source of law in Afghanistan & Iraq. What does Shari’ah say about Jihad? Hint: I gave you a link to it four paragraphs back. It is a huge text file, you will need to use the Windows search function [Ctrl f] to search for O9.0 and start reading.

In the question & answer period, we get down to business: engaging Hamas & Hezbollah.

Q: Good morning, John. I’m Bob Dreyfuss from The Nation magazine. It’s good to see you. You mentioned the long term and the short term. My question is, maybe there’s a medium term in between I wanted you to address. In between al-Qaida and general violent extremists, there are other organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah, even the Taliban, that seem amenable to
the kind of persuasion that you said that al-Qaida, the president believes, is not amenable to. And we’ve discussed this in the past, and you’ve suggested that it might be possible to have a dialogue with Hamas and Hezbollah, and I think the president himself has said the Taliban. So I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about disaggregating these movements, which the Bush administration was so prone to rolling up into one, big Islamo-fascist ball of wax. Talk a little bit about how we could deal with some of the other formations that exist and whether or not it might be prudent to start talking to them, now.

MR. BRENNAN: Well, the two cases that you give, Hamas and Hezbollah, are
interesting case studies. Hezbollah started out as purely a terrorist organization back in the early
’80s and has evolved significantly over time. And now it has members of parliament, in the
cabinet; there are lawyers, doctors, others who are part of the Hezbollah organization.
However, within Hezbollah, there’s still a terrorist core. And hopefully those elements
within the Shia community in Lebanon and within Hezbollah at large – they’re going to continue
to look at that extremist terrorist core as being something that is anathema to what, in fact,
they’re trying to accomplish in terms of their aspirations about being part of the political process
in Lebanon. And so, quite frankly, I’m pleased to see that a lot of Hezbollah individuals are in
fact renouncing that type of terrorism and violence and are trying to participate in the political
process in a very legitimate fashion.

Muslims are not amenable to persuasion. They are obligated by Allah’s command and Moe’s example to attempt to conquer the entire world, eliminating all non-Muslim rule and religion.  What part of 8:39 & 9:29 does Brennan not comprehend? [Links to Ibn Kathir's Tafsir, which includes the Arabic ayeh, translation and explanation of  its meaning.]

Brenan hints that Hezbollah is evolving. So, they have members in the parliament and cabinet; they are succeeding in subverting the government of Lebanon. That does nothing to dilute their zeal for Jihad. They have doctors and lawyers in their ranks, but ‘extremism’ is supposed to be driven by ignorance and poverty. Ayman al-Zawahiri is a doctor, has that stopped him from Jihad?

Terrorist core? It is Islam!!! Nothing special, just Allah’s commands and Moe’s example. These traitors will never tell us the truth. I will repeat it here for the benefit of anyone who has not read my previous posts.

• 8:12. (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”
• 33:26-27. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives. And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches, and a land which you had not trodden (before). And Allâh is Able to do all things.
• Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:
  Narrated Abu Huraira:
  Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).

What did Allah command? What did Allah do? How was Moe made victorious?  If you can’t answer those questions, go back to school for a remedial reading course. If you don’t understand that Islam is terrorism and terrorism is Islam, then ask your proctologist to perform an optorectomy.

Hamas, on the other hand, started out as a very focused social organization that was providing welfare to Palestinians, primarily in Gaza. Over time, it developed an extremist and terrorist element to it that, I think, has unfortunately delegitimized it in the eyes of many, not just throughout the world, but also in the territories. And its continued embrace of violence and terrorism is something that the Palestinian people, I think, have to continue to tell Hamas leaders that this is not going to bring them what they truly deserve, which is a Palestinian state side-byside with Israel.

Has this traitor ever read the Hamas Charter? It is extremely explicit about its provenance, objective & strategy.  The “continued embrace of violence and terrorism” describes Hamas, Hezbollah & Islam.  They do not want a state beside Israel, they want a province instead of Israel. It is all about reconquest; policide & genocide. The Falestinians deserve to be ushered into hell.

So you’re absolutely correct. There are a number of different organizations that have both political and terrorist dimensions to it. Unfortunately, it’s the terrorist dimension that, as I pointed out in my remarks, really holds the aspirations of the people. There are disenfranchised Shia within Lebanon that Hezbollah is trying to represent. But they’re doing it in a corrupted and twisted manner. They’re not going to help to realize those aspirations of the Shia people if they continue to embrace that violence – same thing with Hamas. And I think these aspirations of the people need to be realized, and it’s not going to be through the terrorist agenda.

Terrorism is a tactic, not an agenda. The agenda is reconquest of Israel, followed by regional and world conquest. Jihad is Jihad, whether conducted by massed armies or small bands of terrorists. In either case, innocent people are dispossessed, displaced, killed  or enslaved.  Conquest is not acceptable whether carried out by massed armies or small bands; intensive or low intensity warfare on whatever scope and scale.

Q: So what do we do? What is America’s role?

MR. BRENNAN: I think what we’ve done is to demonstrate both in Lebanon and to the Palestinians that we, the United States, are willing to engage and have a dialogue with any organizations or groups that are, in fact, dedicated to realizing peaceful solutions to existing problems. And I think those elements within Lebanon, be they Hezbollah or others, know that
the United States has tried to be a very honest broker there, providing support to Lebanese institutions.

And those who shun and eschew that terrorism will, in fact, gain favor with the United States. The same thing in the Palestinian community – those Palestinians that are really going to ensure that they pursue a path towards peace that does not bring terrorism to bear are going to be partners with the United States.

The “problem” is the existence of a Jewish state on soil  conquered by Islam in 638. Caliph Umar’s conquest makes the Levant permanently Islamic. Israel’s recovery of a tiny fragment of her ancient patrimony proves Allah to be an impotent idol whose promises are vain.  Muslim pride can’t live with that; they must destroy Israel at any cost, no matter how long it takes or how many lives are spent in the process.  What is the difference if they drive the Jews into the sea with masses of tanks and aircraft or thousands of rockets and hundreds of homicide bombers?  Or one Iranian nuke, that would  be ok with Brennan because it ain’t terrorism. Why is one tactic acceptable and the other to be rejected?

Brenan has admitted that all Hamas & Hezbollah must do to get the Obama regime on their side is make a false declaration rejecting terrorism.  They can do whatever they want, but they must mouth the words for the cameras, then Obama will negotiate with them and hand Israel to them on a silver platter.

 

WesternFront America