Jihad Comes to Wall Street
"Sharia finance" does exactly what it promises, financing the spread of sharia — and terror.
By Alex Alexiev
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjBhMTM5MTlmN2YzNzE0MmFkOTg2OGYxNWM2MGNiNTQ
If you've seen Geert Wilders's film Fitna, you may not have noticed a single headline amongst all the bombings, beheadings, and earnest expressions of Islam's eventual world domination: Halal-fund: investments for Muslims. But the investment vehicles referenced are an essential part of radical Islam's efforts to insinuate itself into Western societies in order to destroy them from within. And Wall Street, barely out of the woods from its disastrous run-in with sub-prime mortgages — and having lost one of its historic investment houses, Bear Stearns, in the process — is now chasing the very kind of "sharia finance" against which Wilders's movie warns, a business line that may eventually wind up being even more calamitous than the subprime-mortgage fiasco.
For the growing army of its acolytes, who salivate at the prospect of tens of billions of dollars in transaction fees from the burgeoning industry, sharia-compliant finance is seen as little more than a cuddly Islamic version of socially conscious investment — with ethical strictures forbidding usury and sin industries, and emphasizing charity. Indeed, a conference on the subject last Fall co-sponsored by the Wall Street Journal was titled just that: "Islamic Ethical Investment." According to this rosy interpretation, sharia finance is a windfall for capital markets — allowing Wall Street to skim some foam off the ocean of petrodollar liquidity in the Middle East, and put it to good use.
Other interpretations are possible, of course. Critics see sharia finance as a massive subversion campaign by radical Islam designed to legitimize sharia in the West, to undermine our markets, and ultimately to imperil our free-enterprise system and national security — all the while exposing banks to financial risks that make the sub-prime fiasco look like a walk in the park. For its proponents and ideological enablers — such as the well known suicide-bombing advocate, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi — sharia finance is nothing less than "Jihad with money." As al-Qaradawi explains, "God has ordered us to fight enemies with our lives and with our money." Unfortunately for Wall Street, it's hard to argue with the good sheikh on that score. Far from being a guide to ethical investment, sharia finance is indistinguishable from sharia itself.
Sharia is a reactionary-to-the-core medieval Islamic doctrine that claims control over every aspect of every Muslim's life. It imposes such "ethical" mandates on Muslims as the obligation to discriminate against women and non-Muslims; to kill homosexuals, adulterers, and apostates; to establish and maintain Muslim rule around the world; and to carry out violent offensive jihad against infidels. Notably, for those Muslims who cannot engage in physical jihad using force of arms, sharia requires that they support jihad financially. This is what sharia finance is all about.
Far from being a legitimate investment vehicle, sharia finance facilitates religiously sanctioned support for terrorist organizations — as well as providing radical Islamists with highly paid sinecures as sharia-finance board advisors in the sanctum sanctorum of capitalism, all the while that they are pursuing a subversive campaign to destroy it.
Predictably, none of this is even remotely disclosed by any of the dozens of Western banks promoting sharia finance today, which obviously exposes them to huge non-disclosure risks ranging from fraudulent misrepresentation, to material support for terrorism.
Consider the board chairman of the Dow Jones Islamic Index (IMANX), one Mufti Taqi Usmani. Mr. Usmani is widely reputed to be one of the world's top experts on sharia finance. Whatever his stockpicking abilities may be, they are dwarfed by his jihadist credentials. A key executive of Pakistan's prominent Deobandi jihadist factory, the madrassa Darul Karoom Karachi (currently headed by his brother, Rafi Usmani), Taqi Usmani has openly advocated jihad by Muslims in the West, and just last month again publicly endorsed suicide bombing and the Taliban.
Since sharia-finance funds like the IMANX may invest in companies that are not completely halal — that derive their profit from interest or other sharia-prohibited activities — returns on investment in those companies must be purified by donating a portion of that ROI to charity. More often than not, it is people like Usmani who are paid lucratively to sit on sharia-finance boards in order to determine what charities will receive the sharia-finance institutions' donations — and it's a fair bet that the March of Dimes is not among them.
IMANX itself is owned and operated by the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), an organization listed as an un-indicted co-conspirator by the Department of Justice in a recent terrorism-finance trial, and the proprietor of hundreds of radical mosques and Islamic institutions in the U.S., including some that have been closed down by the government as criminal enterprises.
The chairman of both NAIT and IMANX, Bassam Osman, has been the top executive of terrorist-funding organizations like the Quranic Literacy Institute (suspected financiers of Hamas whose assets were seized by the U.S. in 1998) and the Islamic Academy of Florida (founded by Sami al-Arian, a convicted financier of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a terrorist criminal enterprise), and is a board member of other un-indicted co-conspirators like the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). Is Dow Jones aware of all this? Is Rupert Murdoch? And if they are not, shouldn't they be?
The IMANX marketing slogan is "Markets Fluctuate. Principles Don't." Judging by the ideological principles of those involved in its leadership, that is precisely what Wall Street — and the West — should fear.
The legitimization of sharia in the West and its gradual imposition in Muslim communities and beyond is a key objective of sharia finance, and there is no doubt it has already made huge strides. Indeed, the precedent of legal sharia-finance transactions was used by the hapless archbishop of Canterbury to buttress his argument that introducing sharia in the United Kingdom was unavoidable.
Given the reality of malignant Islamism now spreading into our own capital markets to the loud cheers of the same Wall Street masters of the universe who gave us sub-prime mortgage securitization, Americans have a right to ask: Where are the U.S. Treasury Department and the SEC, whose job it is to protect our markets? Given the outright fraudulent misrepresentation of the potential liabilities of sharia-finance funds under existing regulations, they should get involved soon.
— Alex Alexiev is vice president for research at the Center for Security Policy.
Click here: Say NO to Shariah Complaint Finance! Petition
WHAT IS SHARIAH LAW AND FINANCE?
WHAT IS SHARIAH LAW?
Understanding Shariah law is integral to understanding the dangers of Shariah-compliant finance. Shariah law is Islamic law dating back to the 9th century and is today the law of the land in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan and the law under which the Taliban operates. However, with a current population of 1.5 billion Muslims, this translates to a huge pool of Jihadist recruits and supporters - a base of approximately 150 - 225 million Muslims.
Shariah law authorities, some of whom are now being paid handsomely by Barclays, Dow Jones, Standard & Poors, HSBC, Citibank, Merrill Lynch, Deutschebank, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, UBS, Credit Suisse and others have the power to dictate Shariah compliance as deemed by "scholarly consensus" on matters of finance, family, penal law, apostasy, and war. Examples of authoritarian Shariah law include: requirement of women to obtain permission from husbands for daily freedoms; beating of disobedient woman and girls; execution of homosexuals; engagement of polygamy and forced child marriages; the testimony of four male witnesses to prove rape; honor killings of those, principally women, who have dishonored the family; death to apostate Muslims who chose to leave Islam; inferior status of non-Muslims, and capital punishment for those "slander Islam."
ISLAMIC FINANCE - WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW:
National Security and Financial Risks: Islamists are attempting to impose Shariah Compliant Finance (SCF) on Western institutions to use our own financial strengths against us. The most serious problem with SCF is that it legitimates and institutionalizes Shariah law (i.e., Islamic law), a theo-political- legal doctrine violently opposed to Western values. With $1 -$2 trillion petrodollars annually looking for an investment home, blind exuberance is driving financial institutions to adopt SCF, without even a minimal baseline for legal compliance. This willful blindness, and lack of both transparency and due diligence may cause SCF to be the next sub-prime crisis, but this time with deadly consequences.
Legal Risks: Western financial institutions which adopt SCF may have criminal and civil exposure to claims of aiding and abetting sedition and the material support of terrorism, securities fraud, consumer fraud, racketeering, and antitrust violations, as well as exposure to tort claims for sedition and terrorism, and for the violation of internationally recognized norms of the law of nations.
Terror Financing Mechanism: SCF as monitored by paid Shariah law advisors to U.S. banking institutions must "purify" certain return on investment (ROI) dollars that do not meet Shariah law standards. This money must be donated to Islamic charities - including some that promote Jihad and support suicide bombing. Investment disclosures state that these profits can be as high as 6% of profits of investments. With $800 billion already in SCF assets, the potential for billions of dollars to be siphoned off for terrorism is real. This would be a serious criminal violation of U.S. law.
Consider this example: Shariah Mutual Funds promote themselves as "ethical funds." To be Shariah-compliant, they donate "tainted" revenues to Shariah-compliant "charities." A post 9-11 U.S. investor in a Shariah-compliant "ethical investment" is not told that Shariah law also requires imposing Shariah as U.S. law, execution of gays and female apartheid. Is he a victim of consumer fraud? Is this same post 9-11 investor unwittingly funding terror? The government has shut down the three largest Shariah-compliant charities in the U.S. - the Holy Land Foundation, Benevolence International Foundation, and the Global Relief Foundation - after proving they funded terrorist organizations. The American taxpayer deserves answers to these questions. The Center for Security Policy (CSP) is meeting directly with members of Congress, U.S. regulatory agencies and Wall Street financial institutions in order to ensure the enforcement of existing U.S. laws on sedition, disclosure, material support of terrorism, and money-laundering. CSP is committed to revealing the civil liability and criminal exposure of Shariah law and Shariah-compliant finance.
Below is a list of Shariah Finance compliant banks. One must come to the conclusion, this is an ever greater threat than Jihadists in America. If our government doesn't take action soon, then our inconvenient "recession" will look like a stroll in the park. In an effort to combat terrorism my family has decided to pull a considerable sum of money and close accounts of the newest Shariah compliant bank Wachovia. We will not have our funds in institutions that support Islamic Terrorism. Become aware of banks and banking institutions that support Shariah law and Finance. By closing accounts you have in those institutions, you will know that you are NOT supporting terrorism against our own people and friends. Note the institutions below to see if you are currently supporting terrorism!
Shariah Compliant Banks:
Asset Acceptance Capital Corporation
Aviva Plc
AXA
Barclays PLC
BNP Paribas Group
Citibank, N.A.
Credit Agricole, S.A.
Deutsche Bank AG
Dow Jones & Company Inc.
Equity Insurance Group Limited
Goldman Sachs Group
HBOS plc
HSBC Holdings plc
INVESCO Perpetual
Julius Baer Group
Maersk Logistics
Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.
Morgan Stanley
NYSE Euronext
Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Click here: Say NO to Shariah Complaint Finance! Petition
Saturday, April 26
Wednesday, April 23
Radical Islam Support Test
This post is from "Dallas-C":
Radical Islam Support Test -- This is from the new book "Inside Jihad" by Dr. Tawfik Hamid.
If you ever have a chance to have a dialogue with a Muslim, ask them these questions.
Remember, it is completely acceptable for a Muslim to lie, to further his cause, so take the answers with a grain of salt. The real benefit in asking these questions are that it might make the Muslim do deeper thinking on the subject than they might normally, and have a chance of changing their views, or having a similar conversation with a Muslim friend who is an Islamofascist.
Remember, these are questions to ask a Muslim who professes to oppose terrorism and radical Islam.
"Apostates": Do you support killing them? Should leaving the faith of Islam be punishable by death?"
Beating Women": Is beating women ever acceptable, and if not, do you reject those decrees of Islamic law that sanction the beating of women? Do you also accept stoning women to death for committing adultery?
"Calling Jews pigs and monkeys": Do you believe that Jews are in any way sub-human and if not, do you reject Quranic interpretations that claim they are?
"Declaring holy war": Do you support declaring war against non-Muslims to subjugate them to Islam? Do you believe that it is fair and reasonable to offer non-Muslims three options: Conversion, Paying the Jizya, or Death?
"Enslavement": Do you support the enslavement of female war prisoners and having sex with them as concubines? If not, do you reject those interpretations in Islamic Law, for "Ma-Malkakat Aymanikum", which justifies such actions?
"Fighting Jews": Do you support perpetual war against Jews to exterminate them, and if not, should those Muslims who incite such war be punished?
"Gays": Do you believe it is acceptable to kill gays, and if not, do you reject those edicts in Sharia Law which claim it is?
Radical Islam Support Test -- This is from the new book "Inside Jihad" by Dr. Tawfik Hamid.
If you ever have a chance to have a dialogue with a Muslim, ask them these questions.
Remember, it is completely acceptable for a Muslim to lie, to further his cause, so take the answers with a grain of salt. The real benefit in asking these questions are that it might make the Muslim do deeper thinking on the subject than they might normally, and have a chance of changing their views, or having a similar conversation with a Muslim friend who is an Islamofascist.
Remember, these are questions to ask a Muslim who professes to oppose terrorism and radical Islam.
"Apostates": Do you support killing them? Should leaving the faith of Islam be punishable by death?"
Beating Women": Is beating women ever acceptable, and if not, do you reject those decrees of Islamic law that sanction the beating of women? Do you also accept stoning women to death for committing adultery?
"Calling Jews pigs and monkeys": Do you believe that Jews are in any way sub-human and if not, do you reject Quranic interpretations that claim they are?
"Declaring holy war": Do you support declaring war against non-Muslims to subjugate them to Islam? Do you believe that it is fair and reasonable to offer non-Muslims three options: Conversion, Paying the Jizya, or Death?
"Enslavement": Do you support the enslavement of female war prisoners and having sex with them as concubines? If not, do you reject those interpretations in Islamic Law, for "Ma-Malkakat Aymanikum", which justifies such actions?
"Fighting Jews": Do you support perpetual war against Jews to exterminate them, and if not, should those Muslims who incite such war be punished?
"Gays": Do you believe it is acceptable to kill gays, and if not, do you reject those edicts in Sharia Law which claim it is?
The Axis of Idiots
This great post is from "Dallas-C":
The Axis of Idiots (Too bad we don't have folks on Capitol Hill willing to speak out like this.)
J.D. Pendry is a retired Marine Command Sergeant Major who writes for Random House. He is eloquent, and he seldom beats around the bush!
Jimmy Carter, you're the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home, and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You're the runner-in-chief.
Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses to the U. S. S. Cole and the First Trade Center Bombing and Our Embassy Bombings emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately, they grew bolder, until 9/11/2001.
John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam. Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. You've accused our Soldiers of terrorizing women and children in Iraq. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the same words you used to describe Vietnam. You're a fake. You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese. Iraq, likeVietnam, is another war that you were for, before you were against it.
John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can't win militarily in Iraq. You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof and said we should redeploy to Okinawa. Okinawa, John? And the Democrats call you their military expert! Are you sure you didn't suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume?
You're a sad, pitiable, corrupt and washed up politician. You're not a Marine, sir. You wouldn't amount to a good pimple on a real Marine's ass. You're a phony and a disgrace. Run away, John.
Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanamo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot, who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned Southeast Asia to the Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was not a good teacher for you, was it? Lord help us! See Dick run.
Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster-sized pictures from Abu Ghraib in front of any available television camera. Al Jazeera quoted you saying that Iraqi's torture chambers were open under new management. Did you see the news, Teddy? The Islamic Nazis demonstrate real torture for you again.
If you truly supported our troops, you'd show the world poster-sized pictures of that atrocity and demand the annihilation of it. Your legislation stripping support from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there. You're a bloated, drunken fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genocidal maniacs. To paraphrase John Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in Washington.
Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Chuck Schumer, the Hollywood Leftist morons, et al, ad nauseam: Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied, that the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers, that we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers -- the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we'll run away again, and all they have to do is hang on a little longer.
American news media, the New York Times particularly: Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one united with the subhuman pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can't strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each timeyou face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.
You are America's "AXIS OF IDIOTS." Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us. Self-serving politics and terrorist-abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers. It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don't ever doubt that.
Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam. If you want our Soldiers home as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies.
Yes, I'm questioning your patriotism. Your loyalty ends with self. I'm also questioning why you're stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing. You don't deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform. You need to run away from this war, this country. Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it.
No, Mr. President, you don't get off the hook, either. Our country has two enemies: Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within. Your Soldiers are dealing with the outside force. It's your obligation to support them by confronting the AXIS OF IDIOTS.
America must hear it from you that these self-centered people are harming our country, abetting the enemy and endangering our safety. Well up a little anger, please, and channel it toward the appropriate target. You must prosecute those who leak national security secrets to the media. You must prosecute those in the media who knowingly publish those secrets.
Our Soldiers need you to confront the enemy that they cannot. They need you to do it now.
J. D. Pendry
Semper Fi
[Bolds &/or color are added by Alma]
The Axis of Idiots (Too bad we don't have folks on Capitol Hill willing to speak out like this.)
J.D. Pendry is a retired Marine Command Sergeant Major who writes for Random House. He is eloquent, and he seldom beats around the bush!
Jimmy Carter, you're the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home, and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You're the runner-in-chief.
Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses to the U. S. S. Cole and the First Trade Center Bombing and Our Embassy Bombings emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately, they grew bolder, until 9/11/2001.
John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam. Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. You've accused our Soldiers of terrorizing women and children in Iraq. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the same words you used to describe Vietnam. You're a fake. You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese. Iraq, likeVietnam, is another war that you were for, before you were against it.
John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can't win militarily in Iraq. You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof and said we should redeploy to Okinawa. Okinawa, John? And the Democrats call you their military expert! Are you sure you didn't suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume?
You're a sad, pitiable, corrupt and washed up politician. You're not a Marine, sir. You wouldn't amount to a good pimple on a real Marine's ass. You're a phony and a disgrace. Run away, John.
Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanamo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot, who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned Southeast Asia to the Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was not a good teacher for you, was it? Lord help us! See Dick run.
Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster-sized pictures from Abu Ghraib in front of any available television camera. Al Jazeera quoted you saying that Iraqi's torture chambers were open under new management. Did you see the news, Teddy? The Islamic Nazis demonstrate real torture for you again.
If you truly supported our troops, you'd show the world poster-sized pictures of that atrocity and demand the annihilation of it. Your legislation stripping support from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there. You're a bloated, drunken fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genocidal maniacs. To paraphrase John Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in Washington.
Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Chuck Schumer, the Hollywood Leftist morons, et al, ad nauseam: Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied, that the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers, that we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers -- the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we'll run away again, and all they have to do is hang on a little longer.
American news media, the New York Times particularly: Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one united with the subhuman pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can't strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each timeyou face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.
You are America's "AXIS OF IDIOTS." Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us. Self-serving politics and terrorist-abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers. It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don't ever doubt that.
Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam. If you want our Soldiers home as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies.
Yes, I'm questioning your patriotism. Your loyalty ends with self. I'm also questioning why you're stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing. You don't deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform. You need to run away from this war, this country. Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it.
No, Mr. President, you don't get off the hook, either. Our country has two enemies: Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within. Your Soldiers are dealing with the outside force. It's your obligation to support them by confronting the AXIS OF IDIOTS.
America must hear it from you that these self-centered people are harming our country, abetting the enemy and endangering our safety. Well up a little anger, please, and channel it toward the appropriate target. You must prosecute those who leak national security secrets to the media. You must prosecute those in the media who knowingly publish those secrets.
Our Soldiers need you to confront the enemy that they cannot. They need you to do it now.
J. D. Pendry
Semper Fi
[Bolds &/or color are added by Alma]
Monday, April 21
McCain On "Islamic" Terror Label
I received this from 3 different Chapter Leaders. Thank you to all.
"Muslims press McCain on 'Islamic' terror label"
By Rowan ScarboroughApril 21, 2008
Sen. John McCain (...) speaks with strategist Steve Schmidt, who defends the presumptive Republican presidential nominee's use of the term "Islamic" as an adjective with "terrorism." Sen. McCain "refers to it that way because that is what it is," Mr. Schmidt said. (Associated Press)
A coalition of American Muslim groups is demanding that Sen. John McCain stop using the adjective "Islamic" to describe terrorists and extremist enemies of the United States.
Muneer Fareed, who heads the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), told The Washington Times that his group is beginning a campaign to persuade Mr. McCain to rephrase his descriptions of the enemy.
"We've tried to contact his office, contact his spokesperson to have them rethink word usage that is more acceptable to the Muslim community," Mr. Fareed said. "If it's not our intent to paint everyone with the same brush, then certainly we should think seriously about just characterizing them as criminals, because that is what they are."
An aide to Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee who is counting on his pro-Iraq war stance to attract conservative voters, said the senator from Arizona will not drop the word.
Steve Schmidt, a former Bush White House aide who is now a McCain media strategist, told The Times that the use of the word is appropriate and that the candidate will continue to define the enemy that way.
"Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda represent a perverted strain of Islam at odds with the great many peaceful Muslims who practice their great faith peacefully," Mr. Schmidt said. "But the reality is, the hateful ideology which underpins bin Ladenism is properly described as radical Islamic extremism. Senator McCain refers to it that way because that is what it is."
Mr. McCain often uses the term "Islamic" to describe terrorist enemies. The two remaining Democrats in the presidential field, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, generally shun such word usage.
President Bush also avoids the term, prompting criticism from some conservative pundits, who say the White-House-coined phrase "war on terror" does not sufficiently identify the enemy. Mr. Bush used the term "Islamic fascists" several times in 2006 and was criticized by Muslims
Mr. McCain, an ex-Navy fighter pilot and leading hawk on the Iraq war, regularly uses the term "Islamic" in major foreign-policy speeches and in news conferences.
In a speech last month to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, Mr. McCain said the formation of an international coalition "will strengthen us to confront the transcendent challenge of our time: the threat of radical Islamic terrorism."
In a Republican debate in January, Mr. McCain turned to then-rival Mitt Romney and said, "I raised it many times, as to whether you have the experience and the judgment to lead this country in the war against radical Islamic extremism."
In a July speech to Christians United for Israel, Mr. McCain said, "Violent Islamic extremists would have us believe that there is only one acceptable religious practice, and that those who diverge from it are not entitled to life or liberty. They are wrong; very, very wrong."
Mr. Fareed, who is ISNA's secretary-general, said such usages are wrong.
"My own take on this is that we tried and failed to stylize this particular onslaught against the United States as one that has religious connotations and regional connotations," said Mr. Fareed, a former associate professor of Islamic studies at Wayne State University.
"I think this is just criminality, fair and square. We should just call them criminals. You want to call them terrorist criminals, fine," he said. "But adding the word 'Muslim' or 'Islamic' certainly doesn't help our cause as Americans. It's counterproductive. It paints an entire community of believers, 1.2 billion in total, in a very negative way. And certainly that's not something that we want to do."
ISNA promotes itself as a voice of moderation that seeks Muslim-Jewish reconciliation and campaigns against what it calls "Islamophobia."
The publication Jewish Week, in an April 2 article, quoted a rabbi as praising ISNA for reaching out to the Jewish community in the United States. "They feel strongly it is time to move forward," the rabbi said.
Some counterterrorism specialists criticize ISNA for failing to condemn terrorist attacks on Israel.
Steven Emerson, who directs the Investigative Project on Terrorism, recently wrote that the silence of ISNA and other Muslim groups after Hamas killed eight Israeli students "shows their unwillingness to condemn the terrorist act and its glorification."
Michael Ledeen, a terrorism analyst at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, backed Mr. McCain's definition of the enemy.
"Islamic terrorism is purely descriptive," he said. "It doesn't group the enemy under the Islamic brush stroke because there are plenty of terrorists and extremists who are not Islamic. So it's just a way of specifying who they are."
Of ISNA's criticism, Mr. Ledeen said, "They're just silly. What a silly thing to say. I talk of Marxist extremists and nationalist extremists. They just don't want people to say there are Islamic terrorists, which there are. Too bad."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080421/NATION/438135169/1001
_____________________________________________________________________
For informational/educational purposes only.
Reprinted under the Fair Use doctrine of international copyright law:
Fair Use: TITLE 17, CHAPTER 1, Sec. 107.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
_________________________________________________________
"Muslims press McCain on 'Islamic' terror label"
By Rowan ScarboroughApril 21, 2008
Sen. John McCain (...) speaks with strategist Steve Schmidt, who defends the presumptive Republican presidential nominee's use of the term "Islamic" as an adjective with "terrorism." Sen. McCain "refers to it that way because that is what it is," Mr. Schmidt said. (Associated Press)
A coalition of American Muslim groups is demanding that Sen. John McCain stop using the adjective "Islamic" to describe terrorists and extremist enemies of the United States.
Muneer Fareed, who heads the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), told The Washington Times that his group is beginning a campaign to persuade Mr. McCain to rephrase his descriptions of the enemy.
"We've tried to contact his office, contact his spokesperson to have them rethink word usage that is more acceptable to the Muslim community," Mr. Fareed said. "If it's not our intent to paint everyone with the same brush, then certainly we should think seriously about just characterizing them as criminals, because that is what they are."
An aide to Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee who is counting on his pro-Iraq war stance to attract conservative voters, said the senator from Arizona will not drop the word.
Steve Schmidt, a former Bush White House aide who is now a McCain media strategist, told The Times that the use of the word is appropriate and that the candidate will continue to define the enemy that way.
"Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda represent a perverted strain of Islam at odds with the great many peaceful Muslims who practice their great faith peacefully," Mr. Schmidt said. "But the reality is, the hateful ideology which underpins bin Ladenism is properly described as radical Islamic extremism. Senator McCain refers to it that way because that is what it is."
Mr. McCain often uses the term "Islamic" to describe terrorist enemies. The two remaining Democrats in the presidential field, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, generally shun such word usage.
President Bush also avoids the term, prompting criticism from some conservative pundits, who say the White-House-coined phrase "war on terror" does not sufficiently identify the enemy. Mr. Bush used the term "Islamic fascists" several times in 2006 and was criticized by Muslims
Mr. McCain, an ex-Navy fighter pilot and leading hawk on the Iraq war, regularly uses the term "Islamic" in major foreign-policy speeches and in news conferences.
In a speech last month to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, Mr. McCain said the formation of an international coalition "will strengthen us to confront the transcendent challenge of our time: the threat of radical Islamic terrorism."
In a Republican debate in January, Mr. McCain turned to then-rival Mitt Romney and said, "I raised it many times, as to whether you have the experience and the judgment to lead this country in the war against radical Islamic extremism."
In a July speech to Christians United for Israel, Mr. McCain said, "Violent Islamic extremists would have us believe that there is only one acceptable religious practice, and that those who diverge from it are not entitled to life or liberty. They are wrong; very, very wrong."
Mr. Fareed, who is ISNA's secretary-general, said such usages are wrong.
"My own take on this is that we tried and failed to stylize this particular onslaught against the United States as one that has religious connotations and regional connotations," said Mr. Fareed, a former associate professor of Islamic studies at Wayne State University.
"I think this is just criminality, fair and square. We should just call them criminals. You want to call them terrorist criminals, fine," he said. "But adding the word 'Muslim' or 'Islamic' certainly doesn't help our cause as Americans. It's counterproductive. It paints an entire community of believers, 1.2 billion in total, in a very negative way. And certainly that's not something that we want to do."
ISNA promotes itself as a voice of moderation that seeks Muslim-Jewish reconciliation and campaigns against what it calls "Islamophobia."
The publication Jewish Week, in an April 2 article, quoted a rabbi as praising ISNA for reaching out to the Jewish community in the United States. "They feel strongly it is time to move forward," the rabbi said.
Some counterterrorism specialists criticize ISNA for failing to condemn terrorist attacks on Israel.
Steven Emerson, who directs the Investigative Project on Terrorism, recently wrote that the silence of ISNA and other Muslim groups after Hamas killed eight Israeli students "shows their unwillingness to condemn the terrorist act and its glorification."
Michael Ledeen, a terrorism analyst at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, backed Mr. McCain's definition of the enemy.
"Islamic terrorism is purely descriptive," he said. "It doesn't group the enemy under the Islamic brush stroke because there are plenty of terrorists and extremists who are not Islamic. So it's just a way of specifying who they are."
Of ISNA's criticism, Mr. Ledeen said, "They're just silly. What a silly thing to say. I talk of Marxist extremists and nationalist extremists. They just don't want people to say there are Islamic terrorists, which there are. Too bad."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080421/NATION/438135169/1001
_____________________________________________________________________
For informational/educational purposes only.
Reprinted under the Fair Use doctrine of international copyright law:
Fair Use: TITLE 17, CHAPTER 1, Sec. 107.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
_________________________________________________________
Sunday, April 20
Unveiling Taqiyya
A Texas Chapter Leader has some great educational information
posted at http://unveilingtaqiyya.blogspot.com/
I highly recommend this site as an oft visited educational blog site.
"Political Islamists in America use four methods to fool Americans into thinking they "are just like us" to avoid anyone looking deeply into their actual 1400-year aims. They will continue to use these methods until their numbers are high enough to simply come out with the truth of their ideology and force those within their vicinity to convert or else. 1) Spread falsehoods and/or whitewash the history of Islam and its hidden agenda for world domination. 2) Infiltrate all levels of government, whether through lawful elections (i.e., becoming . . ." Read More
"American Muslim Oath: Prior to any Muslim being allowed to run for any elected office, I would recommend he be required to swear to this oath. Read Oath
Excellent Definitions:
AHADITH (Hadiths); AL AHZAB; AL QAEDA;
AL TAQIYYA; AL-AQSA MOSQUE, the Farthest Mosque, in Jerusalem;
AL-MASJID AL-ḤARĀM, the Sacred Mosque, in Mecca;
AL-MASJID AL-NABAWI, Mosque of the Prophet.;
ALLAH; AYAH; BURQA; CAIR;
CALIPH/CALIPHATE; DA'WAH; DAR AL-ISLAM;
DAR AL-KUFFIR; EMIR; FATWA; FIQH; HAMAS;
HIJAB; HIZB; HIZBALLAH; IJTIHAD; IMAM;
INFIDEL; INTIFADA; ISLAM; ISLAMOPHOBE; ISNA;
JAHILIYYAH; KITMAN; KUFFIR/KUFFR;
MUFTI/MULLAH; MUHAMMAD;
MUJAHIDEEN; MUJTIHAD; MURTADD (apostate);
MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD; MUTTAWA; NASHK: OIC;
PBUH; QUR'AN; QUTB, SAYYID (1906-1966); SALIFISM;
SHAHID/SHAEED; SHARI'A; SHI'A; SHIEKH:; SIRA/SEERAH;
SUFI; SUNNAH; SUNNI; SURAH; UMMAH;
WAHHABISM/Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab at-Tamimi (1703-1792).
See Definitions
There is also listed:
14 Islamic Reformers (Ijtihid)
And a treasure troves of
Recommended Reading,
Recommended Websites,
DVDs/ movies / documentaries
All of the above are found by scrolling in the right column of
http://unveilingtaqiyya.blogspot.com/
posted at http://unveilingtaqiyya.blogspot.com/
I highly recommend this site as an oft visited educational blog site.
"Political Islamists in America use four methods to fool Americans into thinking they "are just like us" to avoid anyone looking deeply into their actual 1400-year aims. They will continue to use these methods until their numbers are high enough to simply come out with the truth of their ideology and force those within their vicinity to convert or else. 1) Spread falsehoods and/or whitewash the history of Islam and its hidden agenda for world domination. 2) Infiltrate all levels of government, whether through lawful elections (i.e., becoming . . ." Read More
"American Muslim Oath: Prior to any Muslim being allowed to run for any elected office, I would recommend he be required to swear to this oath. Read Oath
Excellent Definitions:
AHADITH (Hadiths); AL AHZAB; AL QAEDA;
AL TAQIYYA; AL-AQSA MOSQUE, the Farthest Mosque, in Jerusalem;
AL-MASJID AL-ḤARĀM, the Sacred Mosque, in Mecca;
AL-MASJID AL-NABAWI, Mosque of the Prophet.;
ALLAH; AYAH; BURQA; CAIR;
CALIPH/CALIPHATE; DA'WAH; DAR AL-ISLAM;
DAR AL-KUFFIR; EMIR; FATWA; FIQH; HAMAS;
HIJAB; HIZB; HIZBALLAH; IJTIHAD; IMAM;
INFIDEL; INTIFADA; ISLAM; ISLAMOPHOBE; ISNA;
JAHILIYYAH; KITMAN; KUFFIR/KUFFR;
MUFTI/MULLAH; MUHAMMAD;
MUJAHIDEEN; MUJTIHAD; MURTADD (apostate);
MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD; MUTTAWA; NASHK: OIC;
PBUH; QUR'AN; QUTB, SAYYID (1906-1966); SALIFISM;
SHAHID/SHAEED; SHARI'A; SHI'A; SHIEKH:; SIRA/SEERAH;
SUFI; SUNNAH; SUNNI; SURAH; UMMAH;
WAHHABISM/Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab at-Tamimi (1703-1792).
See Definitions
There is also listed:
14 Islamic Reformers (Ijtihid)
And a treasure troves of
Recommended Reading,
Recommended Websites,
DVDs/ movies / documentaries
All of the above are found by scrolling in the right column of
http://unveilingtaqiyya.blogspot.com/
Islam Is A Trojan Horse
Islam Is a Trojan Horse
By Amil Imani
Wednesday, 16 April 2008
“Europe will be Muslim in a dozen years,” promises the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Supreme Guide (dictator) who is racing full-speed ahead to make as many bombs as possible with long-range missiles capable of delivering their payload anywhere in the world.This past Friday, Yunis al-Astal, a leading Muslim cleric and Hamas member of the Palestinian parliament, declared on Hamas' Al-Aqsa TV that "the capital of the Catholics, or the Crusader capital," would soon be conquered by Islam and Rome become an advance post for the Islamic conquests, which will spread through Europe in its entirety, and then will turn to the two Americas.”
The Islam hydra, with Saudi Arabia and the oil-money bloated Emirs and Sheiks of the Persian Gulf leading the Sunni charge from one side and the end-of-the-worlder bomb-seeking Shiite of the Islamic Republic of Iran with its proxies of Hamas, Lebanon Hezbollah and the Sadrists in Iraq closing from the other side will devour the free world.
Free people: are you listening?
Free people: do you care?
Free people: are you doing anything?
Disguised as religion, Islam has penetrated the democracies with the aim of replacing civility and liberty with the barbarism of theocracy and Sharia. Islam’s multi-prong attack aims to destroy all that liberty offers.
It is generally assumed that religion addresses issues of importance to daily life as well as matters that transcend it. Religion claims to exercise a civilizing influence by . . . " Read More
By Amil Imani
Wednesday, 16 April 2008
“Europe will be Muslim in a dozen years,” promises the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Supreme Guide (dictator) who is racing full-speed ahead to make as many bombs as possible with long-range missiles capable of delivering their payload anywhere in the world.This past Friday, Yunis al-Astal, a leading Muslim cleric and Hamas member of the Palestinian parliament, declared on Hamas' Al-Aqsa TV that "the capital of the Catholics, or the Crusader capital," would soon be conquered by Islam and Rome become an advance post for the Islamic conquests, which will spread through Europe in its entirety, and then will turn to the two Americas.”
The Islam hydra, with Saudi Arabia and the oil-money bloated Emirs and Sheiks of the Persian Gulf leading the Sunni charge from one side and the end-of-the-worlder bomb-seeking Shiite of the Islamic Republic of Iran with its proxies of Hamas, Lebanon Hezbollah and the Sadrists in Iraq closing from the other side will devour the free world.
Free people: are you listening?
Free people: do you care?
Free people: are you doing anything?
Disguised as religion, Islam has penetrated the democracies with the aim of replacing civility and liberty with the barbarism of theocracy and Sharia. Islam’s multi-prong attack aims to destroy all that liberty offers.
It is generally assumed that religion addresses issues of importance to daily life as well as matters that transcend it. Religion claims to exercise a civilizing influence by . . . " Read More
Obama Nation
Received from ACT! New York Metro
"Too many blogs and loud-mouthed commentators have been critical of Barak Obama and his own (not his preacher's) distorted values. But here's a highly respected, frequently quoted economic journal's comments on the possible Democratic nominee for the highest post in our nation -- maybe even in the world. "
Obama Nation
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Monday, April 14, 2008 4:20 PM PT
"Election 2008: Is Barack Obama's small-town America really a land of bitter gun-toting, Bible-thumping racists? Or are they just God-fearing American patriots? Maybe we should ask his 'typical white' grandmother.
"Many pundits call it a gaffe, but we see Barack Obama's remarks to a bunch of San Francisco Democrats about small town people in Pennsylvania as a revelation. The remarks of our first "post-racial" presidential candidate go a long way towards explaining how he could listen to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright talk about the "United States of White America" for two decades.
Meeting privately with a group of donors in the Bay Area's super-liberal Marin County on April 6, the most eloquent presidential candidate perhaps of all time told them of 'small towns in Pennsylvania' and in the Midwest beset by job losses in a changing economy. He told of how 'they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment' to vent their frustrations.
"On Saturday, talking to the bitter townspeople of Muncie, Ind., he admitted that despite his oratorical skills that many have called inspiring, he 'didn't say it as well as I should have' even though the 'underlying truth of what I said remains.'
"The underlying truth is that people "cling" to their guns and their faith because of a document called the Declaration of Independence, signed in Philadelphia, where church bells rang out on July 4, 1776.
"They "cling" to them not because they aren't multimillionaires like Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, who only as a result of her husband's candidacy suddenly became proud of her country. They cling to them because they believe God gave them freedom and the right to protect it.
In the U.S. Constitution they are given the freedom of religion and the right to bear arms. Their faith, practiced in freedom earned and protected by people with guns, gives them a lasting hope that not even a gifted speaker running for president can provide. They proudly say and sing "God Bless America," not shout "God Damn America," as Obama's pastor of two decades has done.
"They possess guns because the Constitution says they can. They use those guns not just to hunt, but to protect their homes and their families. Many believe, as the late Charlton Heston believed, that their guns will only be taken from their 'cold dead hands.'
"Right now, the U.S. Supreme Court is debating their right to bear arms, and whether the District of Columbia can take them away. As we have noted, Barack Obama's record indicates he would support taking their guns away, something he would call a "common sense restriction" on their rights.
"Perhaps Obama would like to explain his open border beliefs to the "embittered" people of Hazelton, Pa. Feeling the added burden of illegal immigration in terms of crime and economics, they decided to start removing the incentives for illegal immigration.
"Under the leadership of Mayor Louis J. Barletta, Hazelton passed an ordinance penalizing landlords that rent to illegals and businesses that give them jobs. Barletta denies racism is the motive, saying, "What I'm doing here is protecting the legal taxpayer of any race." And American citizens of any race.
"True, not many small-town Pennsylvanians or small-town Americans attended prep schools in Hawaii or live in million-dollar homes. But that does not make them bitter bigots. For a man who was supposed to make stereotyping a thing of the past, he advances a stereotype of his own making."
[Colors & emphasis mine]
___________________________________________
For informational purposes only.
Reprinted under the Fair Use doctrine of international copyright law:
Fair Use: TITLE 17, CHAPTER 1, Sec. 107. http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
"Too many blogs and loud-mouthed commentators have been critical of Barak Obama and his own (not his preacher's) distorted values. But here's a highly respected, frequently quoted economic journal's comments on the possible Democratic nominee for the highest post in our nation -- maybe even in the world. "
Obama Nation
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Monday, April 14, 2008 4:20 PM PT
"Election 2008: Is Barack Obama's small-town America really a land of bitter gun-toting, Bible-thumping racists? Or are they just God-fearing American patriots? Maybe we should ask his 'typical white' grandmother.
"Many pundits call it a gaffe, but we see Barack Obama's remarks to a bunch of San Francisco Democrats about small town people in Pennsylvania as a revelation. The remarks of our first "post-racial" presidential candidate go a long way towards explaining how he could listen to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright talk about the "United States of White America" for two decades.
Meeting privately with a group of donors in the Bay Area's super-liberal Marin County on April 6, the most eloquent presidential candidate perhaps of all time told them of 'small towns in Pennsylvania' and in the Midwest beset by job losses in a changing economy. He told of how 'they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment' to vent their frustrations.
"On Saturday, talking to the bitter townspeople of Muncie, Ind., he admitted that despite his oratorical skills that many have called inspiring, he 'didn't say it as well as I should have' even though the 'underlying truth of what I said remains.'
"The underlying truth is that people "cling" to their guns and their faith because of a document called the Declaration of Independence, signed in Philadelphia, where church bells rang out on July 4, 1776.
"They "cling" to them not because they aren't multimillionaires like Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, who only as a result of her husband's candidacy suddenly became proud of her country. They cling to them because they believe God gave them freedom and the right to protect it.
In the U.S. Constitution they are given the freedom of religion and the right to bear arms. Their faith, practiced in freedom earned and protected by people with guns, gives them a lasting hope that not even a gifted speaker running for president can provide. They proudly say and sing "God Bless America," not shout "God Damn America," as Obama's pastor of two decades has done.
"They possess guns because the Constitution says they can. They use those guns not just to hunt, but to protect their homes and their families. Many believe, as the late Charlton Heston believed, that their guns will only be taken from their 'cold dead hands.'
"Right now, the U.S. Supreme Court is debating their right to bear arms, and whether the District of Columbia can take them away. As we have noted, Barack Obama's record indicates he would support taking their guns away, something he would call a "common sense restriction" on their rights.
"Perhaps Obama would like to explain his open border beliefs to the "embittered" people of Hazelton, Pa. Feeling the added burden of illegal immigration in terms of crime and economics, they decided to start removing the incentives for illegal immigration.
"Under the leadership of Mayor Louis J. Barletta, Hazelton passed an ordinance penalizing landlords that rent to illegals and businesses that give them jobs. Barletta denies racism is the motive, saying, "What I'm doing here is protecting the legal taxpayer of any race." And American citizens of any race.
"True, not many small-town Pennsylvanians or small-town Americans attended prep schools in Hawaii or live in million-dollar homes. But that does not make them bitter bigots. For a man who was supposed to make stereotyping a thing of the past, he advances a stereotype of his own making."
[Colors & emphasis mine]
___________________________________________
For informational purposes only.
Reprinted under the Fair Use doctrine of international copyright law:
Fair Use: TITLE 17, CHAPTER 1, Sec. 107. http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
Hamas Endorses Obama
Received from Dale, a Dallas member:
Hamas Endorses Obama
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/04/020315.php
"On Sunday, Aaron Klein and John Batchelor interviewed Ahmed Yousef, chief political adviser to the Prime Minister of Hamas, on WABC radio. The interview produced a scoop which, for some reason, has not been widely publicized: Hamas has endorsed Barack Obama for President. Yousef said, "We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election." Why? "He has a vision to change America." Maybe Yousef has some insight into what Obama means by all these vague references to "change."Of course, Hamas's taste in American presidents is suspect. Yousef also described Jimmy Carter, who was about to pay a call on Hamas when the interview was taped, as "this noble man" who "did an excellent job as President."Yousef was asked about Obama's condemnation of Carter's visit with Hamas, but didn't seem troubled by it. Hamas, he says, understands American politics; this is the election season, and everyone wants to sound like a friend of Israel. Nevertheless, he hopes that the Democrats will change American policies when they take office."
Received from Dody, a Dallas member
From Christian Ferry,
John McCain's deputy campaign manager:
[Note: this is NOT an endorsement for McCain; it is simply posted as information.]
"Wednesday's Democratic debate provided insight into Barack Obama's positions on key foreign policy issues. As president he says he would immediately withdraw our troops from Iraq- even if he were strongly advised against this by our nation's top military commanders. He would also hold direct talks with the Iranian regime- a regime that does not recognize Israel and is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. Iran's president has even called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."
"During the debate, Barack Obama once again refused to condemn former President Jimmy Carter- who publicly supports Obama- for holding talks with the Hamas terrorist group, a group supported financially, politically and militarily by Iran.
"Barack Obama's foreign policy plans have even won him praise from Hamas leaders. Ahmed Yousef, chief political adviser to the Hamas Prime Minister said, "We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election. He has a vision to change America."
"We need change in America, but not the kind of change that wins kind words from Hamas, surrenders in Iraq and will hold unconditional talks with Iranian President Ahmadinejad."
Hamas Endorses Obama
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/04/020315.php
"On Sunday, Aaron Klein and John Batchelor interviewed Ahmed Yousef, chief political adviser to the Prime Minister of Hamas, on WABC radio. The interview produced a scoop which, for some reason, has not been widely publicized: Hamas has endorsed Barack Obama for President. Yousef said, "We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election." Why? "He has a vision to change America." Maybe Yousef has some insight into what Obama means by all these vague references to "change."Of course, Hamas's taste in American presidents is suspect. Yousef also described Jimmy Carter, who was about to pay a call on Hamas when the interview was taped, as "this noble man" who "did an excellent job as President."Yousef was asked about Obama's condemnation of Carter's visit with Hamas, but didn't seem troubled by it. Hamas, he says, understands American politics; this is the election season, and everyone wants to sound like a friend of Israel. Nevertheless, he hopes that the Democrats will change American policies when they take office."
Received from Dody, a Dallas member
From Christian Ferry,
John McCain's deputy campaign manager:
[Note: this is NOT an endorsement for McCain; it is simply posted as information.]
"Wednesday's Democratic debate provided insight into Barack Obama's positions on key foreign policy issues. As president he says he would immediately withdraw our troops from Iraq- even if he were strongly advised against this by our nation's top military commanders. He would also hold direct talks with the Iranian regime- a regime that does not recognize Israel and is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. Iran's president has even called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."
"During the debate, Barack Obama once again refused to condemn former President Jimmy Carter- who publicly supports Obama- for holding talks with the Hamas terrorist group, a group supported financially, politically and militarily by Iran.
"Barack Obama's foreign policy plans have even won him praise from Hamas leaders. Ahmed Yousef, chief political adviser to the Hamas Prime Minister said, "We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election. He has a vision to change America."
"We need change in America, but not the kind of change that wins kind words from Hamas, surrenders in Iraq and will hold unconditional talks with Iranian President Ahmadinejad."
Friday, April 11
How Islamization Works
I received this in an email. It is quite enlightening and, I think it would be to our advantage to have a command of this information.
Islam is not a religion nor is it a cult. It is a complete system.
Islam has religious, legal, political, economic and military components. The religious component is a beard for all the other components.
Islamization occurs when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their so-called "religious rights."
When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to "the reasonable" Muslim demands for their "religious rights," they also get the other components under the table. Here's how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007)).
As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:
United States -- Muslim 1.0%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1%-2%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%
At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:
Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%
From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.
They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. (United States).
France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.
When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions (Paris -- car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats (Amsterdam -- Mohammed cartoons).
Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 10-15%
After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%
At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:
Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%
From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:
Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%
After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:
Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%I
raq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%S
yria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%
100% will usher in the peace of "Dar-es-Salaam" -- the Islamic House of Peace -- there's supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:
Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 99.9%
Of course, that's not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.
"Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; and the tribe against the world and all of us against the infidel." -- Leon Uris, "The Haj"
It is good to remember that in many, many countries, such as France, the Muslim populations are centered around ghettos based on their ethnicity. Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. Therefore, they exercise more power than their national average would indicate.
-----------
Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat.. www.frontline.org.za/bo oks_videos/sti.htm
____________________________________
For informational purposes only.
Reprinted under the Fair Use doctrine of international copyright law:
Fair Use: TITLE 17, CHAPTER 1, Sec. 107.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
Islam is not a religion nor is it a cult. It is a complete system.
Islam has religious, legal, political, economic and military components. The religious component is a beard for all the other components.
Islamization occurs when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their so-called "religious rights."
When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to "the reasonable" Muslim demands for their "religious rights," they also get the other components under the table. Here's how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007)).
As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:
United States -- Muslim 1.0%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1%-2%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%
At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:
Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%
From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.
They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. (United States).
France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.
When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions (Paris -- car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats (Amsterdam -- Mohammed cartoons).
Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 10-15%
After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%
At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:
Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%
From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:
Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%
After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:
Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%I
raq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%S
yria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%
100% will usher in the peace of "Dar-es-Salaam" -- the Islamic House of Peace -- there's supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:
Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 99.9%
Of course, that's not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.
"Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; and the tribe against the world and all of us against the infidel." -- Leon Uris, "The Haj"
It is good to remember that in many, many countries, such as France, the Muslim populations are centered around ghettos based on their ethnicity. Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. Therefore, they exercise more power than their national average would indicate.
-----------
Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat.. www.frontline.org.za/bo oks_videos/sti.htm
____________________________________
For informational purposes only.
Reprinted under the Fair Use doctrine of international copyright law:
Fair Use: TITLE 17, CHAPTER 1, Sec. 107.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
Tuesday, April 8
Petition to STOP Flight 93 Memorial
From Tom Burnett Sr: A petition to stop the Flight 93 Memorial
Dear Fellow Americans:
The planned Flight 93 Memorial contains extensive Islamic symbolism. It is an insult to my son Tom, and to the other murdered heroes of Flight 93 who stopped Islamic terrorists from destroying the White House or the Capitol that terrible September day.
Please consider signing this online petition that I and some compatriots have put together. It calls for a new memorial design, and for investigation of the present design. If you want to do more, feel free to forward or post this appeal.
For those who are not familiar, the original “Crescent of Embrace” design was laid out in the crescent and star configuration of an Islamic flag:
Outrage over this overt Islamic symbolism forced the Memorial Project to disguise the original crescent with a few additional trees, but every particle of the original design remains completely intact in the so-called redesign. The giant crescent and star flag is still there!
The Memorial Project assumes that any similarity to an Islamic crescent has to be unintentional. Even if it WERE unintentional it would still be intolerable, but how can anyone look at that crescent and star configuration and think that it CAN’T be intentional? That is like seeing an airliner fly into the World Trade Center and thinking that it CAN’T be intentional. Worst of all, the Memorial Project refuses to confront voluminous evidence that the Islamic symbolism IS intentional.
It turns out that a person facing into the giant crescent will be facing Mecca. A crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca is called a “mihrab” and is the central feature around which every mosque is built. The crescent memorial will be the world’s largest mosque!
When TWO airplanes fly into the World Trade Center, even the most naïve person has start taking the possibility of intent seriously, but not the Memorial Project. The Islamic symbolism in Flight 93 Memorial goes on and on, but the Park Service refuses to be concerned.
Architect Paul Murdoch says that the crescent shape comes from the hijacked airplane breaking the circle where it crosses the upper crescent tip. The flight path then continues down to between the crescent tips where Flight 93 crashed. (That’s right: the crash site is the star on the crescent and star flag.)
Along the flight path are to be placed 44 translucent blocks, equaling the number of passengers, crew, AND terrorists:
Left image: The Memorial Wall, traces flight path just above the point of impact. The white line at eye level is a set of 43 glass blocks, 40 to be inscribed with the names of my son and the other passengers and crew, and three (on the near side of the gap) to be inscribed with 9/11 date. Right image: At the upper crescent tip, at the end of the Entry Portal Walkway, sits a huge glass block, the 44th glass block on the flight path. It marks the spot where, in the architect’s description, the terrorists broke our humanitarian circle, turning it into a giant (Islamic shaped) crescent. Inscription: “A field of honor forever.”
I don’t want to celebrate the terrorist’s circle-breaking crescent-creating feat, and I certainly don’t want my son’s name inscribed on that terrorist memorializing block count.
We need to get the word out: the Flight 93 Memorial has been re-hijacked, and this time the whole nation is aboard. We have to get up out of our seats and stop this abomination!
Sincerely,
Tom Burnett Sr.
Northfield Minnesota, March 2008
P.S. Paper petitions are also available (with mailing instructions, and explanatory information on the back). Just open and print.
Online petition: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/HonorFlight93/
Paper petitions and flyer-petition combinations: http://www.crescentofbetrayal.com/PetitionPage.htm
More information: http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2008/03/petition-for-congressional.html
Full exposé: http://www.crescentofbetrayal.com/
Dear Fellow Americans:
The planned Flight 93 Memorial contains extensive Islamic symbolism. It is an insult to my son Tom, and to the other murdered heroes of Flight 93 who stopped Islamic terrorists from destroying the White House or the Capitol that terrible September day.
Please consider signing this online petition that I and some compatriots have put together. It calls for a new memorial design, and for investigation of the present design. If you want to do more, feel free to forward or post this appeal.
For those who are not familiar, the original “Crescent of Embrace” design was laid out in the crescent and star configuration of an Islamic flag:
Outrage over this overt Islamic symbolism forced the Memorial Project to disguise the original crescent with a few additional trees, but every particle of the original design remains completely intact in the so-called redesign. The giant crescent and star flag is still there!
The Memorial Project assumes that any similarity to an Islamic crescent has to be unintentional. Even if it WERE unintentional it would still be intolerable, but how can anyone look at that crescent and star configuration and think that it CAN’T be intentional? That is like seeing an airliner fly into the World Trade Center and thinking that it CAN’T be intentional. Worst of all, the Memorial Project refuses to confront voluminous evidence that the Islamic symbolism IS intentional.
It turns out that a person facing into the giant crescent will be facing Mecca. A crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca is called a “mihrab” and is the central feature around which every mosque is built. The crescent memorial will be the world’s largest mosque!
When TWO airplanes fly into the World Trade Center, even the most naïve person has start taking the possibility of intent seriously, but not the Memorial Project. The Islamic symbolism in Flight 93 Memorial goes on and on, but the Park Service refuses to be concerned.
Architect Paul Murdoch says that the crescent shape comes from the hijacked airplane breaking the circle where it crosses the upper crescent tip. The flight path then continues down to between the crescent tips where Flight 93 crashed. (That’s right: the crash site is the star on the crescent and star flag.)
Along the flight path are to be placed 44 translucent blocks, equaling the number of passengers, crew, AND terrorists:
Left image: The Memorial Wall, traces flight path just above the point of impact. The white line at eye level is a set of 43 glass blocks, 40 to be inscribed with the names of my son and the other passengers and crew, and three (on the near side of the gap) to be inscribed with 9/11 date. Right image: At the upper crescent tip, at the end of the Entry Portal Walkway, sits a huge glass block, the 44th glass block on the flight path. It marks the spot where, in the architect’s description, the terrorists broke our humanitarian circle, turning it into a giant (Islamic shaped) crescent. Inscription: “A field of honor forever.”
I don’t want to celebrate the terrorist’s circle-breaking crescent-creating feat, and I certainly don’t want my son’s name inscribed on that terrorist memorializing block count.
We need to get the word out: the Flight 93 Memorial has been re-hijacked, and this time the whole nation is aboard. We have to get up out of our seats and stop this abomination!
Sincerely,
Tom Burnett Sr.
Northfield Minnesota, March 2008
P.S. Paper petitions are also available (with mailing instructions, and explanatory information on the back). Just open and print.
Online petition: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/HonorFlight93/
Paper petitions and flyer-petition combinations: http://www.crescentofbetrayal.com/PetitionPage.htm
More information: http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2008/03/petition-for-congressional.html
Full exposé: http://www.crescentofbetrayal.com/
Monday, April 7
San Francisco Launches Outreach for Illegals
I am posting this alert from Grassfire.org and asking you to participate by taking the requested action. After the alert I have posted a copy of the blunt email I have already sent to both the San Franciso Mayor and the City Supervisor.
San Francisco launches outreach for illegals
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom is launching an $83,000 outreach campaign designed to attract illegal aliens.
Using television, radio, posters and brochures in five different languages,
Newsom says, "We're going to spend resources, time and energy to do PSA's, to do campaign outreach into community clinics, into public schools, into our police stations to let people know what a sanctuary city is all about ... Newsom says illegal aliens answering his call need not fear deportation. "We are doing the right thing," he said.
xxxxxx, this arrogant thumbing of the nose by SF City officials to the established laws of our land and the blatant disrespect for those citizens who will be required to foot the bill for these illegals is reprehensible, and demands a strong reaction!
That's why I'm asking ALL members of our Grassfire team to take a few minutes to contact Mayor Gavin Newsom and City SupervisorTom Ammiano.
++Action Item -- Contact SF City Leadership
Mayor Gavin Newsom
phone: 415-554-6141
Email: gavin.newsom@sfgov.org
Tom Ammiano, City Supervisor
phone: 415-554-5144
Email: tom.ammiano@sfgov.org
Please contact both of these city leaders and express your outrage over their public outreach effort welcoming illegal aliens. Let them know that their plan is a "ringing dinner bell" that will attract even more illegals--increasing the burden for those living in San Francisco legally! Urge them to do the right thing by enforcing our laws.
====================================================================
Copy of sent email:
Warning: This is a blunt and in-your-face email.
Dear ______,
I am stunned by your arrogant disregard for the laws of this nation. I am equally stunned for your evident lack of caring about the unsustainable economic strain the out of control illegal immigration problem has placed on the American system and citizenry.
I wonder if you have sense enough to realize your sanctuary city will attract even more of those whose illegal entry into our country is for the purpose of destruction.
I am not alone in wondering if your arrogance in thumbing your nose at our federal laws isn't indicative of your willingness to aid and abet those whose purpose is to attack America. Unlike so many who are willfully ignorant of the FACT that TERRORISTS are using our open borders to illegally gain entry into our nation, YOU are in a position to be fully aware of that.
Therefore, since you have knowledge of that fact and yet insist on ignoring federal laws and are actively establishing a so-called sanctuary city then it seems obvious that your allegiance is not to your city or to this country but to whoever has bought you.
With no respect,
xxxxx
Thursday, April 3
A MUST SEE VIDEO--Newt on threat of Islamic Terrorism
Newt Gingrich is right on target. You've got to listen to this video.
Transcript of Speech
(I transcribed it. For ease of reading the "uhs", pauses, etc. have not been included)
Man opening the dialogue:
"When it comes to the War on Terror it's really far more difficult than we've seemed to have believed at this point in time. Could you just elaborate on that a little bit and tell us what we can expect in the next few years in the War on Terror and what we would really have to do to win it eventually?"
Newt Gingrich:
"I am really deeply worried. We have two grandchildren who are six and eight and I believe they are in greater danger of dying from enemy activities than we were in the cold war.
"There are thousnds of people across this planet that get up every morning actively seeking to destroy the United States. They are spreading their poison by sermons, by the internet, by a variety of recruiting devices.
"Tony Blair said it very well. The people who did the London subway bombings spoke English, were British citizens, lived in British housing and had jobs. And had decided because of their relationships that they were engaged in a war against the very country which had given them prosperity and freedom and safety.
"When you see the Taliban kidnap twenty-two Christian South Korean Missionaries who are there to help the people of Afghanistan, and nobody gets up and says this is dispicable. Where in the Muslim world has there been any battle cry saying they should be released? Where has anybody gotten up to condemn?
"When you see a twelve-year-old boy in Pakistan saw off a man's head on video tape, where is the condemnation? When you know that the schools recruit suicide bombers, when you know that the Iranian government ran a cartoon last year for children aimed at recruiting ten-year-olds to be suicide bombers on public television . . . At what point do you have to say enough?
"When you're lectured by the Saudis about being respectful when they do not allow any Jew or any Christian to practice their religion in Saudi Arabia. And we tolerate it?! When do you draw a line?
"Nobody in this society has yet given a speech to outline the scale of this problem -- in terms of senior leadership. And yet it's obvious.
"We haven't won in Afghanistan and we are not currently winning. If you're not winning a guerilla war, you're gradually losing it.
"We have not won in Iraq.
"The Israelis, despite thirty years of war have not won in either Gaza or the West Bank.
"And we're sleep walking.
"And we've now focused on Baghdad as though somehow we can retreat from history and find an elegant way to get out of this and it won't have terrifying consequences.
"I believe we are on the edge of a precipice.
"The Iranians are desperately trying to build nuclear weapons and they will use them. This is a statement. Read what Admadenajab says. He writes poems about being a martyr nation. He gets to wipe out Tel Aviv -- maybe the Israelis use nuclear weapons to wipe out Tehran. He would accept that in a minute. Because he believes that everybody in Tehran goes to heaven and everybody in Tel Aviv doesn't.
"It is very hard for secular elites to understand this. Religiously driven people do things that don't calculate in nice academic faculty surroundings. And they don't calculate at the State Department and they don't calculate in a rational way in most of our bureaucracise . We are in trouble. And somebody better start talking about it in a blunt way. I'm going to give a speech at the American Enterprise Institute on September 10 describing the first six years. And it's driven by a simple model.
"I finished a novel recently, called Pearl Harbor. You look at the Second World War. From December 7, 1941 to August 14, 1945, is less than four years. In less than four years we defeated Nazi Germany, Faschist Italy, and Imperial Japan. Today it takes 23 years to add a fifth runway to the [?] airport.
"We are simply not prepared today to be a serious country, and my fear is, and I gave this speech the way -- I wrote about terrorism and nuclear weapons in a book called 'Window of Opportunity' in 1984. I gave speeches in the 90's on this, I helped create with President Clinton the Hart-Rudman Commission. We warned in March of 2001 about terrorist attacks in American cities -- I've been at this a long time.
"I am genuinely afraid that this political system will not react until we lose a city. And nobody in this country has thought about the threat to our civil liberties the morning after we decide it's that dangerous and how rapidly we will impose ruthlessness on ourselves in that kind of a world. I think those of you who care about civil liberties had better be thinking through how we win this war before the casualties get so great that the American people voluntarily give up a lot of those liberties."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcribed by Alma
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For informational purposes only.
Reprinted under the Fair Use doctrine of international copyright law:
Fair Use: TITLE 17, CHAPTER 1, Sec. 107.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcript of Speech
(I transcribed it. For ease of reading the "uhs", pauses, etc. have not been included)
Man opening the dialogue:
"When it comes to the War on Terror it's really far more difficult than we've seemed to have believed at this point in time. Could you just elaborate on that a little bit and tell us what we can expect in the next few years in the War on Terror and what we would really have to do to win it eventually?"
Newt Gingrich:
"I am really deeply worried. We have two grandchildren who are six and eight and I believe they are in greater danger of dying from enemy activities than we were in the cold war.
"There are thousnds of people across this planet that get up every morning actively seeking to destroy the United States. They are spreading their poison by sermons, by the internet, by a variety of recruiting devices.
"Tony Blair said it very well. The people who did the London subway bombings spoke English, were British citizens, lived in British housing and had jobs. And had decided because of their relationships that they were engaged in a war against the very country which had given them prosperity and freedom and safety.
"When you see the Taliban kidnap twenty-two Christian South Korean Missionaries who are there to help the people of Afghanistan, and nobody gets up and says this is dispicable. Where in the Muslim world has there been any battle cry saying they should be released? Where has anybody gotten up to condemn?
"When you see a twelve-year-old boy in Pakistan saw off a man's head on video tape, where is the condemnation? When you know that the schools recruit suicide bombers, when you know that the Iranian government ran a cartoon last year for children aimed at recruiting ten-year-olds to be suicide bombers on public television . . . At what point do you have to say enough?
"When you're lectured by the Saudis about being respectful when they do not allow any Jew or any Christian to practice their religion in Saudi Arabia. And we tolerate it?! When do you draw a line?
"Nobody in this society has yet given a speech to outline the scale of this problem -- in terms of senior leadership. And yet it's obvious.
"We haven't won in Afghanistan and we are not currently winning. If you're not winning a guerilla war, you're gradually losing it.
"We have not won in Iraq.
"The Israelis, despite thirty years of war have not won in either Gaza or the West Bank.
"And we're sleep walking.
"And we've now focused on Baghdad as though somehow we can retreat from history and find an elegant way to get out of this and it won't have terrifying consequences.
"I believe we are on the edge of a precipice.
"The Iranians are desperately trying to build nuclear weapons and they will use them. This is a statement. Read what Admadenajab says. He writes poems about being a martyr nation. He gets to wipe out Tel Aviv -- maybe the Israelis use nuclear weapons to wipe out Tehran. He would accept that in a minute. Because he believes that everybody in Tehran goes to heaven and everybody in Tel Aviv doesn't.
"It is very hard for secular elites to understand this. Religiously driven people do things that don't calculate in nice academic faculty surroundings. And they don't calculate at the State Department and they don't calculate in a rational way in most of our bureaucracise . We are in trouble. And somebody better start talking about it in a blunt way. I'm going to give a speech at the American Enterprise Institute on September 10 describing the first six years. And it's driven by a simple model.
"I finished a novel recently, called Pearl Harbor. You look at the Second World War. From December 7, 1941 to August 14, 1945, is less than four years. In less than four years we defeated Nazi Germany, Faschist Italy, and Imperial Japan. Today it takes 23 years to add a fifth runway to the [?] airport.
"We are simply not prepared today to be a serious country, and my fear is, and I gave this speech the way -- I wrote about terrorism and nuclear weapons in a book called 'Window of Opportunity' in 1984. I gave speeches in the 90's on this, I helped create with President Clinton the Hart-Rudman Commission. We warned in March of 2001 about terrorist attacks in American cities -- I've been at this a long time.
"I am genuinely afraid that this political system will not react until we lose a city. And nobody in this country has thought about the threat to our civil liberties the morning after we decide it's that dangerous and how rapidly we will impose ruthlessness on ourselves in that kind of a world. I think those of you who care about civil liberties had better be thinking through how we win this war before the casualties get so great that the American people voluntarily give up a lot of those liberties."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcribed by Alma
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For informational purposes only.
Reprinted under the Fair Use doctrine of international copyright law:
Fair Use: TITLE 17, CHAPTER 1, Sec. 107.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, April 2
Libel Terrorism Protection Act Passes NYS Legislature
From ACT! New York Metro
TO ALL CHAPTERS:
The New York State Legislature today unanimously passed the "Libel Terrorism Protection Act" (S.6687/A.9652), sponsored by Assemblyman Rory Lancman (D-Queens) and Senate Deputy Majority Leader Dean G. Skelos (R-Rockville Centre).
That means that both houses of the New York State legislature have now passed what some are calling "Rachel's Law." It provides protection to American authors against "libel terrorism," seeking to enforce judgments in New York State that were granted in other countries without our level of free speech protections. The law now just awaits signing by NYS's new governor, David Paterson.One of the co-sponsors of the law, Senator Skelos, says, "The truth is a critically-important component in the War on Terror…This important new law will protect American authors and journalists who expose terrorist networks and their financiers.
"The New York - Long Island Chapter of ACT! for America may take a small share of the credit for this speedy and unanimous passage of the bill. Led by one of our most ACT!vist members, Madeline, members of our chapter lobbied for its passage in front of the New York Public Library on Fifth Avenue and 42nd Street and in other locations. Leaflets were prepared, passed out, and tourists were told the danger to our Freedom of Speech by our members. Several legislators were contacted and all responded positively, assuring us of their cooperation.
As Madeline wrote: "Rachel Ehrenfeld and other courageous writers who expose jihad tactics can now be assured they will be protected by their (natural and Constitution given) First Amendment rights to free speech. Previously, Rachel Ehrenfeld, who wrote Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed - and How to Stop It, was threatened by a bogus libel suit by a jihadist she exposed. The law suit would have ruined her financially and silenced her and future efforts to expose the evil of jihad.
"There are still legal battles for Ms Ehrenfeld as her case traverses the courts, but at least now the legislation is in place to enable her to win her lawful struggle in New York State against the foreign terrorists.
It is now imperative for other chapters to take up this battle in every state and in Congress, where a Federal version of the bill should be enacted.
LAN ASTASLEM
I will NOT submit!
-- Allan, Chapter Director
ACT For America. (NY & LI)
TO ALL CHAPTERS:
The New York State Legislature today unanimously passed the "Libel Terrorism Protection Act" (S.6687/A.9652), sponsored by Assemblyman Rory Lancman (D-Queens) and Senate Deputy Majority Leader Dean G. Skelos (R-Rockville Centre).
That means that both houses of the New York State legislature have now passed what some are calling "Rachel's Law." It provides protection to American authors against "libel terrorism," seeking to enforce judgments in New York State that were granted in other countries without our level of free speech protections. The law now just awaits signing by NYS's new governor, David Paterson.One of the co-sponsors of the law, Senator Skelos, says, "The truth is a critically-important component in the War on Terror…This important new law will protect American authors and journalists who expose terrorist networks and their financiers.
"The New York - Long Island Chapter of ACT! for America may take a small share of the credit for this speedy and unanimous passage of the bill. Led by one of our most ACT!vist members, Madeline, members of our chapter lobbied for its passage in front of the New York Public Library on Fifth Avenue and 42nd Street and in other locations. Leaflets were prepared, passed out, and tourists were told the danger to our Freedom of Speech by our members. Several legislators were contacted and all responded positively, assuring us of their cooperation.
As Madeline wrote: "Rachel Ehrenfeld and other courageous writers who expose jihad tactics can now be assured they will be protected by their (natural and Constitution given) First Amendment rights to free speech. Previously, Rachel Ehrenfeld, who wrote Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed - and How to Stop It, was threatened by a bogus libel suit by a jihadist she exposed. The law suit would have ruined her financially and silenced her and future efforts to expose the evil of jihad.
"There are still legal battles for Ms Ehrenfeld as her case traverses the courts, but at least now the legislation is in place to enable her to win her lawful struggle in New York State against the foreign terrorists.
It is now imperative for other chapters to take up this battle in every state and in Congress, where a Federal version of the bill should be enacted.
LAN ASTASLEM
I will NOT submit!
-- Allan, Chapter Director
ACT For America. (NY & LI)
=====================
Hey, TEXAS, how about it?
This is an outstanding victory for all of us. The ball is in our court now. Let's roll!
Monday, March 31
SR: Islamic Prayer
Knowers,
Demands for prayer rooms, public praying, prayer at certain times, and footbaths is a strategy for ultimate Islamic Victory.
It is very important that Islam not set precedent with public prayers and footbaths. Every Islamic achievement is a "Victory for Islam" in Islam's Civilization Jihad. Every victory is the necessary step for a bolder victory, and it is obligatory to Moslems, when achievable, to kill those who attempt to diminish Islamic advancements, along with those who do not "submit" to Islam.
Prayer times are for uniformity and consistency, and all Moslems should try to do the prayers within the time allotment. However, prayers can be postponed to a time or place more comfortable. If it is uncomfortable or inappropriate to pray somewhere, to conceal the religion, if publicly awkward, if at work, school, or even a social event, Moslems can, and do, postpone the required prayers, and make them up later in the privacy of their own homes. Prayer debt can accumulate for days or even years if necessary.
The only demand on prayer time is, Moslems can make-up missed prayers but they cannot do prayers in advance.
Praying together is reinforcing, encouraging. It may be enlightening for some, nevertheless, attending a Friday Group Prayer is optional. Moslems are supposed to try to establish a group prayer on Fridays if there is a large enough Moslem population to attend, and if the hosting society and circumstances permit. It is not a sin if they cannot establish a group prayer. It is only a sin if they do not try. A group prayer does not have to be public. It can be in a home, a mosque, private property, or anywhere feasible. They know they will not go to hell if they cannot achieve their "goals".
It is customary in the modern era to combine the noon and afternoon prayers together, then the evening and night prayers together; so the five prayers are completed within three prayer sessions/washings per day, breaking down to a "morning prayer", an "afternoon prayer", and a "night prayer." Even under Shariah Law, people usually pray at home, and it is not uncommon for a person to postpone prayers for convenience or necessity. They pray in mosques occasionally, and on Fridays some enjoy praying at a Friday Group Prayer, where they perform the same daily prayers they perform at home.
When I was in Iran, I saw no public footbaths anywhere, but mosques often had fountains. Everyone usually does the ritual washing at home before leaving for a Friday prayer. At a mosque, they may choose to use the fountain. Interestingly, they can use dirt or sand whenever necessary, if clean water is not available.
Public praying in Democratic societies is provocative. It is an empowering and a luxurious tactic toward Islamic victory. It is comparable to bullying, and at least annoying, intimidating, and expensive for most sensible non-Moslems in a Western society, i.e. Europe and America.
The Real Purpose for Prayer Rooms, Public Prayers and Footbaths in theWest:
The Muslim Brotherhood May 22, 1991 Memorandum accepted into evidence in the U.S. vs. Holy Land Foundation (HLF) case, titled "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America", includes an Attachment with a Muslim Brotherhood explanation:
" In order for Islam and its Movement to become "a part of the homeland" in which it lives, "stable" in the land, "rooted" in the spirits and minds of its people, "enabled" in the lives of its society and has firmly-established "organizations" on which the Islamic structure is built and with which the testimony of the civilization is achieved, the Movement must plan and struggle to obtain "the keys" and the tools of this process in carry out this grand mission as a "Civilization Jihadist" responsibility which lies on the shoulders of Muslim and – on top of them – the Muslim Brotherhood in this country."
SR
An earlier writing about Islamic Praying:
Dear Knowers,
Before we bend over backwards to embolden moslems by giving them prayer time and space, we should know that the moslem prayer schedule is much more flexible than we in the West are led to believe. Moslems are not ever required to pray in public, but when prayers are performed, they are required to be recited out loud (so that everyone can hear). But that is variable too; it can be whisper like if necessary.
I was married to a moslem Iranian from 1978-1987 and practiced Islam. When I finally denounced my Islamization, a divorce immediately ensued. "X" filed first, falsely claiming that I cheated on him. I know a lot about Islamic subtleties; and public praying and prayer rooms is a BIG SHOW.
It is OK for moslems to postpone the scheduled daily prayer times. They do not have to pray on the exact schedule. Prayer time is established for uniformity and consistency but can be postponed to a time or place where prayers can be performed comfortably and satisfactorily. If it is uncomfortable or inappropriate to pray, if they do not want to expose their religion, or if they are in public, at work, school, or even a social event, moslems can (and do) skip the required prayers and make them up in the privacy of their own homes, preferably as soon as possible. Prayer debt can accumulate for days or even years if necessary. Praying together is reinforcing and encouraging. It is not required.
In addition, it is customary in the modern era to combine two of the prayers into a single set twice a day, so the combined five prayers can be completed during three prayer sessions/washings per day. It is customary to combine the noon prayer with the mid-afternoon prayer, and the evening prayer with the night prayer. The rule is: moslems can make-up missed prayers (even for days on end), but they cannot do prayers in advance. X never prayed in public, unless it was with his fellow MSA cohorts at Utah State University, where they held meetings in an auditorium on Friday nights(1978-1980), or at a private home gathering.
I travelled to Iran when it was under Sharia Law (1981). People usually prayed at home, frequently postponing prayers. They pray in mosques occasionally, and they pray at the OPTIONAL Friday prayer. There were no public footbaths anywhere, with the exception that mosques often had fountains. Everyone usually does the ritual washing before leaving home for Friday prayers. At a mosque they may choose to use the fountain. Interestingly, they can use dirt or sand whenever necessary, in place of water.
The islamic public praying is a BIG SHOW. It is an emboldening luxury for Islam, and purposeful intimidation and expense for Americans. That is its real purpose. It is very important that Islam be exposed as the hypocritical religion that it is, and stopped from imposing public precedent, especially when not even required.
SR
Demands for prayer rooms, public praying, prayer at certain times, and footbaths is a strategy for ultimate Islamic Victory.
It is very important that Islam not set precedent with public prayers and footbaths. Every Islamic achievement is a "Victory for Islam" in Islam's Civilization Jihad. Every victory is the necessary step for a bolder victory, and it is obligatory to Moslems, when achievable, to kill those who attempt to diminish Islamic advancements, along with those who do not "submit" to Islam.
Prayer times are for uniformity and consistency, and all Moslems should try to do the prayers within the time allotment. However, prayers can be postponed to a time or place more comfortable. If it is uncomfortable or inappropriate to pray somewhere, to conceal the religion, if publicly awkward, if at work, school, or even a social event, Moslems can, and do, postpone the required prayers, and make them up later in the privacy of their own homes. Prayer debt can accumulate for days or even years if necessary.
The only demand on prayer time is, Moslems can make-up missed prayers but they cannot do prayers in advance.
Praying together is reinforcing, encouraging. It may be enlightening for some, nevertheless, attending a Friday Group Prayer is optional. Moslems are supposed to try to establish a group prayer on Fridays if there is a large enough Moslem population to attend, and if the hosting society and circumstances permit. It is not a sin if they cannot establish a group prayer. It is only a sin if they do not try. A group prayer does not have to be public. It can be in a home, a mosque, private property, or anywhere feasible. They know they will not go to hell if they cannot achieve their "goals".
It is customary in the modern era to combine the noon and afternoon prayers together, then the evening and night prayers together; so the five prayers are completed within three prayer sessions/washings per day, breaking down to a "morning prayer", an "afternoon prayer", and a "night prayer." Even under Shariah Law, people usually pray at home, and it is not uncommon for a person to postpone prayers for convenience or necessity. They pray in mosques occasionally, and on Fridays some enjoy praying at a Friday Group Prayer, where they perform the same daily prayers they perform at home.
When I was in Iran, I saw no public footbaths anywhere, but mosques often had fountains. Everyone usually does the ritual washing at home before leaving for a Friday prayer. At a mosque, they may choose to use the fountain. Interestingly, they can use dirt or sand whenever necessary, if clean water is not available.
Public praying in Democratic societies is provocative. It is an empowering and a luxurious tactic toward Islamic victory. It is comparable to bullying, and at least annoying, intimidating, and expensive for most sensible non-Moslems in a Western society, i.e. Europe and America.
The Real Purpose for Prayer Rooms, Public Prayers and Footbaths in theWest:
The Muslim Brotherhood May 22, 1991 Memorandum accepted into evidence in the U.S. vs. Holy Land Foundation (HLF) case, titled "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America", includes an Attachment with a Muslim Brotherhood explanation:
" In order for Islam and its Movement to become "a part of the homeland" in which it lives, "stable" in the land, "rooted" in the spirits and minds of its people, "enabled" in the lives of its society and has firmly-established "organizations" on which the Islamic structure is built and with which the testimony of the civilization is achieved, the Movement must plan and struggle to obtain "the keys" and the tools of this process in carry out this grand mission as a "Civilization Jihadist" responsibility which lies on the shoulders of Muslim and – on top of them – the Muslim Brotherhood in this country."
SR
An earlier writing about Islamic Praying:
Dear Knowers,
Before we bend over backwards to embolden moslems by giving them prayer time and space, we should know that the moslem prayer schedule is much more flexible than we in the West are led to believe. Moslems are not ever required to pray in public, but when prayers are performed, they are required to be recited out loud (so that everyone can hear). But that is variable too; it can be whisper like if necessary.
I was married to a moslem Iranian from 1978-1987 and practiced Islam. When I finally denounced my Islamization, a divorce immediately ensued. "X" filed first, falsely claiming that I cheated on him. I know a lot about Islamic subtleties; and public praying and prayer rooms is a BIG SHOW.
It is OK for moslems to postpone the scheduled daily prayer times. They do not have to pray on the exact schedule. Prayer time is established for uniformity and consistency but can be postponed to a time or place where prayers can be performed comfortably and satisfactorily. If it is uncomfortable or inappropriate to pray, if they do not want to expose their religion, or if they are in public, at work, school, or even a social event, moslems can (and do) skip the required prayers and make them up in the privacy of their own homes, preferably as soon as possible. Prayer debt can accumulate for days or even years if necessary. Praying together is reinforcing and encouraging. It is not required.
In addition, it is customary in the modern era to combine two of the prayers into a single set twice a day, so the combined five prayers can be completed during three prayer sessions/washings per day. It is customary to combine the noon prayer with the mid-afternoon prayer, and the evening prayer with the night prayer. The rule is: moslems can make-up missed prayers (even for days on end), but they cannot do prayers in advance. X never prayed in public, unless it was with his fellow MSA cohorts at Utah State University, where they held meetings in an auditorium on Friday nights(1978-1980), or at a private home gathering.
I travelled to Iran when it was under Sharia Law (1981). People usually prayed at home, frequently postponing prayers. They pray in mosques occasionally, and they pray at the OPTIONAL Friday prayer. There were no public footbaths anywhere, with the exception that mosques often had fountains. Everyone usually does the ritual washing before leaving home for Friday prayers. At a mosque they may choose to use the fountain. Interestingly, they can use dirt or sand whenever necessary, in place of water.
The islamic public praying is a BIG SHOW. It is an emboldening luxury for Islam, and purposeful intimidation and expense for Americans. That is its real purpose. It is very important that Islam be exposed as the hypocritical religion that it is, and stopped from imposing public precedent, especially when not even required.
SR
SR: Persian Empire Uniform Museum in Iran
Persian Empire Uniform Museum in Iran
Dear Knowers,
One day in Iran, X took me to a museum. I do not recall the exact name of the museum, but it was a museum that displayed about a hundred ancient Persian Empire military uniforms. Each uniform looked like the ancient Persian uniforms we see in ancient Persian and Turkish miniature paintings, complete with turbins, slipper shoes, jackets, baggy pants, and swords. It was amazing and shocking to see that they had kept them for so long.
I do not remember the exact dates that were on each uniform case, or the wars where they were worn in. I knew basically nothing about the historical wars described on each uniform display, and I was surprised that the ancient uniforms included uniforms from the Crusades. I only had a vague idea of what the Crusades were, from very few pages of text in public school history books. I did not know that Persia had anything to do with the Crusades until that day, and I thought the Crusades were long over and forgotten.
Most revealing and surprising to me was X's reaction to the uniforms. I had never seen him look so proud. A strong emotional bond with the historic Persian military was more than obvious as X stood to the right of each display with unmistakable pride. He expressed a serious, confident, proud, arrogant, and superior character at each display that I had not seen before. I thought to myself, "Wow, he sure is proud of the Persian Empire military history!" I was uncomfortable about the substantiation that the Persian Empire was still very grand and real for him.
I had not previously heard X talk about conquests other than "Islamic" conquests, though X often talked about the fact that "Iran" is the modern name for Persia, means "Arian." He proudly told me that the original Persians were Caucasian Arians. X was very proud of his Arian Persian heritage, which he distinguished from the Arabs, who supposedly have blood that is more African. X also told me that Persians do not really like Arabs, including Iraqi Arabs.
At the uniform museum, it became obvious to me that X still thought of Iran as a Superpower. I thought to myself that he was disillusioned. I now know that I was the one who was disillusioned.
SR
Dear Knowers,
One day in Iran, X took me to a museum. I do not recall the exact name of the museum, but it was a museum that displayed about a hundred ancient Persian Empire military uniforms. Each uniform looked like the ancient Persian uniforms we see in ancient Persian and Turkish miniature paintings, complete with turbins, slipper shoes, jackets, baggy pants, and swords. It was amazing and shocking to see that they had kept them for so long.
I do not remember the exact dates that were on each uniform case, or the wars where they were worn in. I knew basically nothing about the historical wars described on each uniform display, and I was surprised that the ancient uniforms included uniforms from the Crusades. I only had a vague idea of what the Crusades were, from very few pages of text in public school history books. I did not know that Persia had anything to do with the Crusades until that day, and I thought the Crusades were long over and forgotten.
Most revealing and surprising to me was X's reaction to the uniforms. I had never seen him look so proud. A strong emotional bond with the historic Persian military was more than obvious as X stood to the right of each display with unmistakable pride. He expressed a serious, confident, proud, arrogant, and superior character at each display that I had not seen before. I thought to myself, "Wow, he sure is proud of the Persian Empire military history!" I was uncomfortable about the substantiation that the Persian Empire was still very grand and real for him.
I had not previously heard X talk about conquests other than "Islamic" conquests, though X often talked about the fact that "Iran" is the modern name for Persia, means "Arian." He proudly told me that the original Persians were Caucasian Arians. X was very proud of his Arian Persian heritage, which he distinguished from the Arabs, who supposedly have blood that is more African. X also told me that Persians do not really like Arabs, including Iraqi Arabs.
At the uniform museum, it became obvious to me that X still thought of Iran as a Superpower. I thought to myself that he was disillusioned. I now know that I was the one who was disillusioned.
SR
SRs Story: Muslim Ex-Wife Speaks Out-3
03 March 2008
Fathers get custody of the children after a divorce in Islam.
Fathers get custody of the children after a divorce in Islam," my "X" often told me during our marriage. I was thankful we lived in America. We divorced after I told X that I could no longer practice Islam. X told me he could not be married to me if I was not a Moslem. X fought very unfairly for our children, and he wanted FULL custody. When he filed for our divorce, he demanded a trial by jury. We picked the jury and within the first hour of the trial, the redheaded judge yelled angrily at him. X falsely claimed that I had been unfaithful to him. He also relied on irrelevant, inaccurate, or hearsay information concerning my past to discredit me further. In an outburst, the judge said all the information was irrelevant. I was relieved as we dismissed for a break. Immediately after the break, X and his attorney requested, and granted a mis-trial.
A week or so later, we picked the second jury and the new judge listened to everything. During the trial, the new book "Not Without My Daughter" was in the headlines everywhere. Under oath, X accused my family and me of arranging the timely coincidence! He also accused my mother of seducing the first judge (that yelled at him) in the first "mis-trial!"
After a 5 day trial, the weary jury awarded me the primary custody of our children. Then the judge proceeded to give X our home (along with its $700 monthly payments). He ordered X to pay me $400/ month child support, and a $10,000 community property settlement. He was also ordered to pay a recent $10,000 IRS fine. I never received a cent.
I rented an apartment and worked as an artist at home. It was before the "Dead Beat Dad" laws and X never paid any child support. Unfortunately, my lawyer only helped me get a one-time check for $500. It was at our first Hearing, which was six months after our separation, and three months before our divorce was final. My lawyer, who I owed $20,000, forgot to get my name changed back to my maiden name during the final divorce. The divorce was extremely devastating and financially draining for me.
I was required to wait until a child-support payment was three months late before I could file a complaint. Then a trial would be scheduled for three months later. At the long awaited trial, X asked for, and received a 6-month postponement.
A few months later, I gave in and regretfully agreed to let X have the children during the week, and I on the weekends. He happily agreed and produced papers for me to sign within the week. I lived very close to X and I began to pick up my children every Friday and return them on Sunday evenings. About six weeks into the new arrangement, I found the house empty when I arrived on Friday to pick them up. An unsigned note on the door in X's handwriting read, "Votre X-Famile". An unknown phone number written below turned out to belong to one of his brothers who lived out-of-state, in California. California was a possible destination for us when we left Iran. X knew that I did not want to live in California, and it would be expensive for me to visit. I did not know that the house was in foreclosure.
After a few months, I was finally able to talk to my children on the phone. X always listened on another line and my children became less talkative within a few conversations. At the beginning of one of those phone conversations, my youngest son exclaimed playfully upon hearing my voice, "Hi, Kick-Head!"
X would not let them come back to visit me even when my family offered to pay for their flights. When I sent my children the bicycles they left behind, X did not accept the delivery. Instead he returned them and I received a bill for return shipment. Each conversation ended in days of fresh tears and depression. I cried daily for two years. During that time, I used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain a mailing address for my children. Eventually I was financially able to go visit them at least once a year. X told me "he thought he was rid of me forever" when I arrived unannounced one day. From that visit on, X would never let us leave his sight. I went to several attorneys, but could never raise the funds required to go back to court.
When my children were 16, each of them came to stay with me. They all returned to California after about one year. The youngest, now 21, claimed recently he is a Moslem. I did not know he was planning a trip to Mecca in December when I spoke to him last. I will not give up on him though; my daughter says that he is also rebellious toward X, and I should not take it personally. My middle son is very considerate of both me and X, and he tries to understand what is going on. My daughter now has a 3yr. old son. Prior to the baby's birth, X tried to persuade her to give the new baby a Moslem name. Thankfully, my grandson's father did not agree.
SR
Fathers get custody of the children after a divorce in Islam.
Fathers get custody of the children after a divorce in Islam," my "X" often told me during our marriage. I was thankful we lived in America. We divorced after I told X that I could no longer practice Islam. X told me he could not be married to me if I was not a Moslem. X fought very unfairly for our children, and he wanted FULL custody. When he filed for our divorce, he demanded a trial by jury. We picked the jury and within the first hour of the trial, the redheaded judge yelled angrily at him. X falsely claimed that I had been unfaithful to him. He also relied on irrelevant, inaccurate, or hearsay information concerning my past to discredit me further. In an outburst, the judge said all the information was irrelevant. I was relieved as we dismissed for a break. Immediately after the break, X and his attorney requested, and granted a mis-trial.
A week or so later, we picked the second jury and the new judge listened to everything. During the trial, the new book "Not Without My Daughter" was in the headlines everywhere. Under oath, X accused my family and me of arranging the timely coincidence! He also accused my mother of seducing the first judge (that yelled at him) in the first "mis-trial!"
After a 5 day trial, the weary jury awarded me the primary custody of our children. Then the judge proceeded to give X our home (along with its $700 monthly payments). He ordered X to pay me $400/ month child support, and a $10,000 community property settlement. He was also ordered to pay a recent $10,000 IRS fine. I never received a cent.
I rented an apartment and worked as an artist at home. It was before the "Dead Beat Dad" laws and X never paid any child support. Unfortunately, my lawyer only helped me get a one-time check for $500. It was at our first Hearing, which was six months after our separation, and three months before our divorce was final. My lawyer, who I owed $20,000, forgot to get my name changed back to my maiden name during the final divorce. The divorce was extremely devastating and financially draining for me.
I was required to wait until a child-support payment was three months late before I could file a complaint. Then a trial would be scheduled for three months later. At the long awaited trial, X asked for, and received a 6-month postponement.
A few months later, I gave in and regretfully agreed to let X have the children during the week, and I on the weekends. He happily agreed and produced papers for me to sign within the week. I lived very close to X and I began to pick up my children every Friday and return them on Sunday evenings. About six weeks into the new arrangement, I found the house empty when I arrived on Friday to pick them up. An unsigned note on the door in X's handwriting read, "Votre X-Famile". An unknown phone number written below turned out to belong to one of his brothers who lived out-of-state, in California. California was a possible destination for us when we left Iran. X knew that I did not want to live in California, and it would be expensive for me to visit. I did not know that the house was in foreclosure.
After a few months, I was finally able to talk to my children on the phone. X always listened on another line and my children became less talkative within a few conversations. At the beginning of one of those phone conversations, my youngest son exclaimed playfully upon hearing my voice, "Hi, Kick-Head!"
X would not let them come back to visit me even when my family offered to pay for their flights. When I sent my children the bicycles they left behind, X did not accept the delivery. Instead he returned them and I received a bill for return shipment. Each conversation ended in days of fresh tears and depression. I cried daily for two years. During that time, I used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain a mailing address for my children. Eventually I was financially able to go visit them at least once a year. X told me "he thought he was rid of me forever" when I arrived unannounced one day. From that visit on, X would never let us leave his sight. I went to several attorneys, but could never raise the funds required to go back to court.
When my children were 16, each of them came to stay with me. They all returned to California after about one year. The youngest, now 21, claimed recently he is a Moslem. I did not know he was planning a trip to Mecca in December when I spoke to him last. I will not give up on him though; my daughter says that he is also rebellious toward X, and I should not take it personally. My middle son is very considerate of both me and X, and he tries to understand what is going on. My daughter now has a 3yr. old son. Prior to the baby's birth, X tried to persuade her to give the new baby a Moslem name. Thankfully, my grandson's father did not agree.
SR
SRs Story: Muslim Ex-Wife Speaks Out-2
28 Feb 2008
Subject: Islamic Experience
Dear Knowers,
I received responses today requesting that I write about more of my experiences. Thank you for your very kind messages and your interest. I would love to share experiences and answers to some of the questions that you asked, and I hope that it will be helpful.
I finished high school a semester early and left for college on my 18th birthday. During the very first semester I met "X" in a class. (I will refer to my moslem x-huband as X from now on.) Years later, he said that he liked me right away because I winked at him. I thought it strange that he would say that because I do not remember winking at him.
He had very good ideas in the class and they were impressive. I am an artist, so we worked on several projects together with great results. That is how we met.... We did not date till a year later, and we were not serious or engaged for yet another 2-3 years. I did not know that X was a Moslem; we never really talked about religion. He told me he was half Sweedish. His father was Sweedish he said, and his mother, Persian. I fell in love with him and we became engaged eventually. Once we were committed, he told me that I would have to convert to Islam to marry him because his family would never allow him to marry a non-Moslem. I thought I could do it for him. He assured me that we shared the same Old Testament. I thought Islam merely could not grasp the idea of the trinity, and I would see what it offered.. I did not know the story of Ishmael because Catholics (I was raised as) mainly study the life of Jesus. I only knew about Isaac. I would later learn the story of Hagar and Ishmael for the first time from a Moslem!
I thought that Islam might be enlightening so I decided to give it a try. I did not realize what a committment it was, but I really tried to be a good Moslem. It turns out that I never felt very comfortable about Islam from the beginning. I thought to myself that if Islam is true than I will feel enlightened. I never did feel enlightened and I did not ever feel it in my heart to be wonderous thing. I saw how X reacted to the embassy takeover in Teheran when I was pregnant with our first child. I thought perhaps he will lighten up someday. I became sick of regular insulting inferences to "unbelievers", Jews, Americans, my non-moslem friends, and to my own family eventually! He tried to make me think that my father was in the CIA (thus an enemy of the world). I became insulted and very hurt. I came to wonder why X had come here if he thought that way about all of us, something he could never answer satisfactorily.
When I was pregnant with our second child, X decided we must move to Iran after the baby was born. To keep the family unity, I went to Iran, against mine and my family's wishes. We took everything we had of value. I took everything that was important to me including precious family photos and keepsakes, most of which was left behind, when we returned nine months later. I was not very appreciative of the trip to Iran. On the first day there, his brother scheduled an outing for us. We went to a part of town where they were having a mass demonstration. Thousands of people paraded down the street with banners, shouting "Death to America" The stream did not end while we watched , and would not end until all the people in our vicinity would fall into it also. X's brother was in the army, and he watched my every expression. He wanted me to witness and someday tell the Americans about the hate they have for us; thinking I was sympathetic, when I was really bewildered.
The second day in Iran, we went to the Cemetary of the Martyrs to watch the bodies arrive on pick-up trucks and flat beds. Three - five bodies at a time arrived about every 5 minutes on a truck. They were wrapped in white fabric, ready for buriel, "martyred" in the Iran-Iraq War. They called it the "American Imposed War". Again, the brother wanted me to see, and he watched my expressions carefully.
That brother never ate at the table with the rest of the family while I was in Iran. He and his wife always sat on the floor to eat.
I was very disapointed that I had agreed to practice Islam and travel to Iran. X did not really like it in Iran after all. Life was much harder in Iran after the Revolution that brought in Ayatollah Khomeini. It was not the Iran he had bragged about incessantly to me. So we began making plans to return to the US, after he met with all the people he wanted to meet with while in Iran. Those people included Imams and Gov. Officials. It was my understanding that X was trying to get a Gov. contract to build solar villages in Iran. Nevertheless, he decided to return to the US since they did not give him the desired contract in Iran , nor one to work on from the US. He told me that they wanted him to live in Iran and receive a home and Gov. salary, but if he returned to the US, he should behave as a good moslem, and establish himself in the US for the day when Islam would reign supreme. (I always doubted that it would, thinking it a childish "pipe dream"), even though I knew by then, how much they really hated us.
After I finished reading The Koran, I wanted to tell X that I did not like Islam. However, I kept up the practice through my third child who was born after we returned to America. During part of the pregnancy, I lived with my Grandmother, but returned to X because of the hardship, resuming an Islamic lifestyle.
When my third child was 6 month old, X did not want us to go to my mother's house for Christmas any longer "because she had a dog". In Islam your prayers are not accepted if you have dog hair on you or your prayer space. I would therefore track dog hair into our house from hers, and his prayers would not be accepted.
I knew I must leave X to escape Islam, besides, I was very unhappy with him too. So I eventually gathered the required courage and gave him the news that I could no longer practice Isalm; that it was hypocritical of me to do so because I did not feel it in my heart. (A Sufi Muslim British convert once told me that you should feel Islam in your heart, and I took that to heart) X said that a moslem must obey Allah and follow only Islam no matter what. If you are not right with Islam in your heart, then you are doing something wrong, and you should try to correct it!. He had also often told me that the penalty was death to leave Islam. I knew by then that there is no compulsion in the religion, they will just kill you! Upon receiving the news of my denouncement, X raised his arm in the air as if to strike me, but then he stopped and walked away. The next morning before he left for an appointment, he spit on each of my cheeks. I left that day, but he filed for a divorce before I did, claiming I was unfaithful.
I hope that I can help with my experiences. I am so thankful to Briggitte Gabriel and thankful for the ACT! For America members because you know what is really happening.
SR
Subject: Islamic Experience
Dear Knowers,
I received responses today requesting that I write about more of my experiences. Thank you for your very kind messages and your interest. I would love to share experiences and answers to some of the questions that you asked, and I hope that it will be helpful.
I finished high school a semester early and left for college on my 18th birthday. During the very first semester I met "X" in a class. (I will refer to my moslem x-huband as X from now on.) Years later, he said that he liked me right away because I winked at him. I thought it strange that he would say that because I do not remember winking at him.
He had very good ideas in the class and they were impressive. I am an artist, so we worked on several projects together with great results. That is how we met.... We did not date till a year later, and we were not serious or engaged for yet another 2-3 years. I did not know that X was a Moslem; we never really talked about religion. He told me he was half Sweedish. His father was Sweedish he said, and his mother, Persian. I fell in love with him and we became engaged eventually. Once we were committed, he told me that I would have to convert to Islam to marry him because his family would never allow him to marry a non-Moslem. I thought I could do it for him. He assured me that we shared the same Old Testament. I thought Islam merely could not grasp the idea of the trinity, and I would see what it offered.. I did not know the story of Ishmael because Catholics (I was raised as) mainly study the life of Jesus. I only knew about Isaac. I would later learn the story of Hagar and Ishmael for the first time from a Moslem!
I thought that Islam might be enlightening so I decided to give it a try. I did not realize what a committment it was, but I really tried to be a good Moslem. It turns out that I never felt very comfortable about Islam from the beginning. I thought to myself that if Islam is true than I will feel enlightened. I never did feel enlightened and I did not ever feel it in my heart to be wonderous thing. I saw how X reacted to the embassy takeover in Teheran when I was pregnant with our first child. I thought perhaps he will lighten up someday. I became sick of regular insulting inferences to "unbelievers", Jews, Americans, my non-moslem friends, and to my own family eventually! He tried to make me think that my father was in the CIA (thus an enemy of the world). I became insulted and very hurt. I came to wonder why X had come here if he thought that way about all of us, something he could never answer satisfactorily.
When I was pregnant with our second child, X decided we must move to Iran after the baby was born. To keep the family unity, I went to Iran, against mine and my family's wishes. We took everything we had of value. I took everything that was important to me including precious family photos and keepsakes, most of which was left behind, when we returned nine months later. I was not very appreciative of the trip to Iran. On the first day there, his brother scheduled an outing for us. We went to a part of town where they were having a mass demonstration. Thousands of people paraded down the street with banners, shouting "Death to America" The stream did not end while we watched , and would not end until all the people in our vicinity would fall into it also. X's brother was in the army, and he watched my every expression. He wanted me to witness and someday tell the Americans about the hate they have for us; thinking I was sympathetic, when I was really bewildered.
The second day in Iran, we went to the Cemetary of the Martyrs to watch the bodies arrive on pick-up trucks and flat beds. Three - five bodies at a time arrived about every 5 minutes on a truck. They were wrapped in white fabric, ready for buriel, "martyred" in the Iran-Iraq War. They called it the "American Imposed War". Again, the brother wanted me to see, and he watched my expressions carefully.
That brother never ate at the table with the rest of the family while I was in Iran. He and his wife always sat on the floor to eat.
I was very disapointed that I had agreed to practice Islam and travel to Iran. X did not really like it in Iran after all. Life was much harder in Iran after the Revolution that brought in Ayatollah Khomeini. It was not the Iran he had bragged about incessantly to me. So we began making plans to return to the US, after he met with all the people he wanted to meet with while in Iran. Those people included Imams and Gov. Officials. It was my understanding that X was trying to get a Gov. contract to build solar villages in Iran. Nevertheless, he decided to return to the US since they did not give him the desired contract in Iran , nor one to work on from the US. He told me that they wanted him to live in Iran and receive a home and Gov. salary, but if he returned to the US, he should behave as a good moslem, and establish himself in the US for the day when Islam would reign supreme. (I always doubted that it would, thinking it a childish "pipe dream"), even though I knew by then, how much they really hated us.
After I finished reading The Koran, I wanted to tell X that I did not like Islam. However, I kept up the practice through my third child who was born after we returned to America. During part of the pregnancy, I lived with my Grandmother, but returned to X because of the hardship, resuming an Islamic lifestyle.
When my third child was 6 month old, X did not want us to go to my mother's house for Christmas any longer "because she had a dog". In Islam your prayers are not accepted if you have dog hair on you or your prayer space. I would therefore track dog hair into our house from hers, and his prayers would not be accepted.
I knew I must leave X to escape Islam, besides, I was very unhappy with him too. So I eventually gathered the required courage and gave him the news that I could no longer practice Isalm; that it was hypocritical of me to do so because I did not feel it in my heart. (A Sufi Muslim British convert once told me that you should feel Islam in your heart, and I took that to heart) X said that a moslem must obey Allah and follow only Islam no matter what. If you are not right with Islam in your heart, then you are doing something wrong, and you should try to correct it!. He had also often told me that the penalty was death to leave Islam. I knew by then that there is no compulsion in the religion, they will just kill you! Upon receiving the news of my denouncement, X raised his arm in the air as if to strike me, but then he stopped and walked away. The next morning before he left for an appointment, he spit on each of my cheeks. I left that day, but he filed for a divorce before I did, claiming I was unfaithful.
I hope that I can help with my experiences. I am so thankful to Briggitte Gabriel and thankful for the ACT! For America members because you know what is really happening.
SR
SR's Story: Muslim Ex-Wife Speaks Out-1
SR's story is an unpretentious revealing view of an American woman who married a Muslim man, converted to Islam, and ultimately got divorced. For safety reasons her identity is protected and she will only be known as "SR"
27 Feb 2008
Moslem Prayers
Dear Knowers,
Before we bend over backwards to embolden moslems by giving them prayer time and space, we should know that the moslem prayer schedule is much more flexible than we in the West are led to believe. Moslems are not ever required to pray in public, but when prayers are performed, they are required to be recited out loud (so that everyone can hear). But that is variable too; it can be whisper like if necessary.
I was married to a moslem Iranian from 1978-1987 and practiced Islam. When I finally denounced my Islamization, a divorce immediately ensued. "X" filed first, falsely claiming that I cheated on him. I know a lot about Islamic subtleties; and public praying and prayer rooms is a BIG SHOW.
It is OK for moslems to postpone the scheduled daily prayer times. They do not have to pray on the exact schedule. Prayer time is established for uniformity and consistency but can be postponed to a time or place where prayers can be performed comfortably and satisfactorily. If it is uncomfortable or inappropriate to pray, if they do not want to expose their religion, or if they are in public, at work, school, or even a social event, moslems can (and do) skip the required prayers and make them up in the privacy of their own homes, preferably as soon as possible. Prayer debt can accumulate for days or even years if necessary. Praying together is reinforcing and encouraging. It is not required.
In addition, it is customary in the modern era to combine two of the prayers into a single set twice a day, so the combined five prayers can be completed during three prayer sessions/washings per day. It is customary to combine the noon prayer with the mid-afternoon prayer, and the evening prayer with the night prayer. The rule is: moslems can make-up missed prayers (even for days on end), but they cannot do prayers in advance. X never prayed in public, unless it was with his fellow MSA cohorts at Utah State University, where they held meetings in an auditorium on Friday nights (1978-1980), or at a private home gathering.
I travelled to Iran when it was under Sharia Law (1981). People usuallyprayed at home, frequently postponing prayers. They pray in mosques occasionally, and they pray at the OPTIONAL Friday prayer. There were no public footbaths anywhere, with the exception that mosques often had fountains. Everyone usually does the ritual washing before leaving home for Friday prayers. At a mosque they may choose to use the fountain. Interestingly, they can use dirt or sand whenever necessary, in place of water.
The Islamic public praying is a BIG SHOW. It is an emboldening luxury for Islam, and purposeful intimidation and expense for Americans. That is its real purpose. It is very important that Islam be exposed as the hypocritical religion that it is, and stopped from imposing public precedent, especially when not even required.
27 Feb 2008
Moslem Prayers
Dear Knowers,
Before we bend over backwards to embolden moslems by giving them prayer time and space, we should know that the moslem prayer schedule is much more flexible than we in the West are led to believe. Moslems are not ever required to pray in public, but when prayers are performed, they are required to be recited out loud (so that everyone can hear). But that is variable too; it can be whisper like if necessary.
I was married to a moslem Iranian from 1978-1987 and practiced Islam. When I finally denounced my Islamization, a divorce immediately ensued. "X" filed first, falsely claiming that I cheated on him. I know a lot about Islamic subtleties; and public praying and prayer rooms is a BIG SHOW.
It is OK for moslems to postpone the scheduled daily prayer times. They do not have to pray on the exact schedule. Prayer time is established for uniformity and consistency but can be postponed to a time or place where prayers can be performed comfortably and satisfactorily. If it is uncomfortable or inappropriate to pray, if they do not want to expose their religion, or if they are in public, at work, school, or even a social event, moslems can (and do) skip the required prayers and make them up in the privacy of their own homes, preferably as soon as possible. Prayer debt can accumulate for days or even years if necessary. Praying together is reinforcing and encouraging. It is not required.
In addition, it is customary in the modern era to combine two of the prayers into a single set twice a day, so the combined five prayers can be completed during three prayer sessions/washings per day. It is customary to combine the noon prayer with the mid-afternoon prayer, and the evening prayer with the night prayer. The rule is: moslems can make-up missed prayers (even for days on end), but they cannot do prayers in advance. X never prayed in public, unless it was with his fellow MSA cohorts at Utah State University, where they held meetings in an auditorium on Friday nights (1978-1980), or at a private home gathering.
I travelled to Iran when it was under Sharia Law (1981). People usuallyprayed at home, frequently postponing prayers. They pray in mosques occasionally, and they pray at the OPTIONAL Friday prayer. There were no public footbaths anywhere, with the exception that mosques often had fountains. Everyone usually does the ritual washing before leaving home for Friday prayers. At a mosque they may choose to use the fountain. Interestingly, they can use dirt or sand whenever necessary, in place of water.
The Islamic public praying is a BIG SHOW. It is an emboldening luxury for Islam, and purposeful intimidation and expense for Americans. That is its real purpose. It is very important that Islam be exposed as the hypocritical religion that it is, and stopped from imposing public precedent, especially when not even required.
Saturday, March 29
FISA -- It's deadly
Our enemies, both those here and abroad, love the stalling and obfuscating rhetoric that has hijacked the security of this nation and that of our GIs fighting in war zones. Pelosi and her crowd need to get off the far-left high horse and do what is right. If your allegiance to any big money lobbyists (lawyers, for one) leads to complicity in the deaths of American soldiers you should be impeached and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
I don't like giving up any of my freedoms. And my right to privacy is something I cherish. I do not, however, consider it an invasion of my privacy for my government and its military to be able to monitor the phone calls & electonic transmissions of our enemies. Get real, the old law was written before cell phones and the internet. It doesn't take a genius to understand it needs to be updated to reflect 21st century communications technology! Is Congress that dumb?!?
Worse than the dumbies in Congress are the enemy sympathizers. Coddling the enemy is tantamount to being in collusion with him for the defeat of this nation. We Are At War! It is a global war and we are actually powerless to end it. The Islamic Jihadists are waging this war in numerous fronts all over the world. Their stated objective is to destroy the West and totally dominate the world and establish Sharia law world wide. What part of that do the anti-American radical leftists not understand?
(c) Alma
I don't like giving up any of my freedoms. And my right to privacy is something I cherish. I do not, however, consider it an invasion of my privacy for my government and its military to be able to monitor the phone calls & electonic transmissions of our enemies. Get real, the old law was written before cell phones and the internet. It doesn't take a genius to understand it needs to be updated to reflect 21st century communications technology! Is Congress that dumb?!?
Worse than the dumbies in Congress are the enemy sympathizers. Coddling the enemy is tantamount to being in collusion with him for the defeat of this nation. We Are At War! It is a global war and we are actually powerless to end it. The Islamic Jihadists are waging this war in numerous fronts all over the world. Their stated objective is to destroy the West and totally dominate the world and establish Sharia law world wide. What part of that do the anti-American radical leftists not understand?
(c) Alma
Fitna--The Video
It is very difficult to believe in Islam as a religion of peace when the current worldwide action and historical evidence show so convincingly that it is not. In all fairness to the moderate Muslims I understand that not all Muslims are bloodthirsty barbarians seeking world domination. But the extremism of the Islamic Jihadists drowns out the voice of reason.
Fitna by Geert Wilders came out a couple days ago. As of yesterday LiveLeak was forced to remove it because of multiple and credible threats to the lives of the staff members and their families. This is an example of a peaceful religion?
These extremists are enemies to us all: moderate Muslims as well as Christians, Jews, atheists, humanists, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. Let those of us who pray follow the teaching of Jesus and pray for our enemies. The Jihadists pray for death to all who do not serve Allah. True Christians pray for the salvation of their enemy.
CONSIDER THIS:
True Christians live by the teachings and examples of Christ. Even non-believers respect the life affirming teachings of Jesus. He clearly teaches that we are to, "Love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us and despitefully us." He also teaches a clear & life-altering fundamental difference between Himself & Satan: "The Enemy comes only to steal, to kill, & to destroy. But I am come to give you life to the fullest" [my paraphrase, in King James "Enemy" is "thief"; Matthew 5:44; John 10:10].
Another clear reason why we pray for our enemies, including radical jihadists, is stated by the Apostle Peter, "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). And the Apostle Paul told us that our God is One "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4). There is a great difference between light & darkness and between love & hate.
Consider 1 John 2: 9-11 -- "He who says he is in the light, and hates his brother, is in darkness until now. He who loves his brother abides in the light, and there is no cause for stumbling in him. But he who hates his brother is in darkness and walks in darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes." (New King James Version of the Holy Bible)
(c) Alma, Act4Freedom
Fitna by Geert Wilders came out a couple days ago. As of yesterday LiveLeak was forced to remove it because of multiple and credible threats to the lives of the staff members and their families. This is an example of a peaceful religion?
These extremists are enemies to us all: moderate Muslims as well as Christians, Jews, atheists, humanists, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. Let those of us who pray follow the teaching of Jesus and pray for our enemies. The Jihadists pray for death to all who do not serve Allah. True Christians pray for the salvation of their enemy.
CONSIDER THIS:
True Christians live by the teachings and examples of Christ. Even non-believers respect the life affirming teachings of Jesus. He clearly teaches that we are to, "Love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us and despitefully us." He also teaches a clear & life-altering fundamental difference between Himself & Satan: "The Enemy comes only to steal, to kill, & to destroy. But I am come to give you life to the fullest" [my paraphrase, in King James "Enemy" is "thief"; Matthew 5:44; John 10:10].
Another clear reason why we pray for our enemies, including radical jihadists, is stated by the Apostle Peter, "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). And the Apostle Paul told us that our God is One "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4). There is a great difference between light & darkness and between love & hate.
Consider 1 John 2: 9-11 -- "He who says he is in the light, and hates his brother, is in darkness until now. He who loves his brother abides in the light, and there is no cause for stumbling in him. But he who hates his brother is in darkness and walks in darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes." (New King James Version of the Holy Bible)
(c) Alma, Act4Freedom
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
