Snooper’s Friends

Defamation of Religions: Preliminary Vote

nobody@vox.com(Ben) — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 04:23:56 -0800

WND reports that the Third Committee held a preliminary vote Nov. 12 on the Defamation of Religions resolution: 81:55:43. Support declined by 5 votes, opposition increased by 2 and abstentions increased by 1. The present level of support indicates that the General Assembly will pass the resolution.

The good news is that, while the resolution will pass, it will not become enforcible law. The bad news is that it will give the UN stamp of approval to blasphemy laws used by Pakistan and other nations to suppress and persecute Christians and other minorities. The resolution calls on member states to enact and enforce legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam.

The Department of State expresses opposition to inclusion of references to defamation of religions, but it supports inclusion of negative stereotypes, as included in the recent Freedom of Belief and Expression resolution. Examine the relevant text from that document. [Emphasis added.]

Also expresses its concern that incidents of racial and religious intolerance, discrimination and related violence, as well as of negative racial and religious stereotyping continue to rise around the world, and condemns, in this context, any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, and urges States to take effective measures, consistent with their obligations under international human rights law, to address and combat such incidents;

This sample is from last year's draft resolution.

Expresses deep concern at the negative stereotyping of religions and manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religion or belief still evident in the world;

The following sample is from Pakistan's submission to the Ad Hoc Committee for Elaboration of Complementary Standards.

legal prohibition of publication of material that negatively stereotypes, insults, or uses offensive language in matters regarded by followers of any religion or belief as sacred or inherent to their dignity as human beings, with the aim or protecting their fundamental human rights,

What are they really complaining about? We can get a hint from their latest Islamophobia report, which contains a list of "Islamophobic incidents".

Political and Social Campaigns against Islam and Muslims

Campaign Warns Americans about Looming Shariah Code – Detroit billboard said religious law imposed by Islam threatened rights. Members of the United American Committee (UAC) stated that Shariah might be spreading around the world, but it was not going to be established in the United States without opposition. Officials had reportedly erected a 48-foot-long billboard just outside of Detroit, home to one of the largest groups of Muslims in the U.S.

Danish Muhammad Cartoonist Returns with New Work – Kurt Westergaard, the Danish caricaturist forced into hiding after the publication of his depiction of the Prophet Muhammad in the newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2005, was set to return with a new set of potentially controversial drawings. According to a Report in the Copenhagen Post, Westergaard was expected to have 26 illustrations in a new book that compiled the
sardonic columns by Danish writer Lars Hedegaard for the Berlingske Tidende newspaper.
Wilders plans second anti-Islam film – Rightwing MP Geert Wilders has told De Telegraaf newspaper that he was planning to make a follow-up to his controversial anti-Islam film, Fitna. The new piece, expected to be released in 2010, will deal with the negative effects of what Wilders called the advance of Islam in Western countries.

If those examples do not make it clear to you, examine this quote from a letter sent by the OIC to the Chairman of the Ad Hoc Cmte. in October.

For instance, the British National Putty leader Nick Grffin has referred to Islam as a "a vicious and wicked religion"; some in Switzerland are strongly opposed to the construction of minarets on mosques as symbols of Islam; while in Denmark and the Netherlands the personality of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) has been deliberately ridiculed with the intention to violate the sentiments of Muslims. These are only some of the clear examples not just of discrimination against Muslims as individuals but of Islam as a religion as well as well as its revered personalities and sacred symbols. Accordingly, the contention that human rights standards should apply only to individuals is not credible. Therefore, the OIC ls advocating the need to address these concepts in a holistic and legal manner: to avoid their negative impact on the fundamental rights and freedoms to be enjoyed by the individuals, groups of individuals and communities. [Emphasis added. ]

It becomes clear that Islam will not tolerate any criticism whatsoever. Islam seeks to criminalize all criticism, regardless of the truth thereof. The obvious references to Fitna and the Danish cartoons leave no doubt. Fitna displayed the hate speech & violence which fill the Qur'an along with their effects in the Arab street. The Cartoons depict Moe as a terrorist, which he was even though he never possessed a bomb. He said that he was "made victorious with terror."

What can we do about this situation? Nothing directly, but we can sign and promote two on line petitions opposing the resolution and one that counter attacks.

Open Doors has a Free To Believe campaign.
ACLJ has a petition campaign of their own and is lobbying the European delegations.
The International Qur'an Petition is a good counter attack. Sign it send it to everyone you can influence. Exhort the recipients to sign and forward the petition.
A sense of the House resolution opposing the OIC censorship campaign languishes in the Foreign Affairs Cmte. It has gained two more co-sponsors, but it needs to be voted on before the final vote in the General Assembly.

H.Res. 763: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United Nations resolutions on the "defamation of religions" are incompatible with the fundamental freedoms of individuals to freely exercise and peacefully express their religious beliefs.

Sign those petitions and solicit the support of everyone you can hope to influence. Urge your Congressman to sign onto H. Res. 763 as a co-sponsor and work to get it to the floor for a vote. If you know your Zip Code, you can use the email form at http://www.congress.org/ .

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Ben’s Blog about the Obvious Concerning Islam

nobody@vox.com(theway2k) — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:42:44 -0800

What You Should Know

Jihad Denial Syndrome is still rampant among the MSM. Ben’s Blog does an awesome job in refuting the syndrome.

JRH 11/12/09

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Dr. Nidal Hasan's Outline of Islam and Andrew Bolt's Questions

nobody@vox.com(Ben) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:06:07 -0800

The Herald Sun published an article by Andrew Bolt in which he stated critical facts which had been ignored by some journalists and propounded certain rhetorical of a most critical nature. The article included a link to his blog, where I discovered a link to Dr. Hasan's slide show at the Washington Post.

It has been reported that Dr. Hasan's assignment was to deliver a lecture on a medical topic. Instead, he lectured about Islam and its potential effect on servicemen and the Army. In retrospect, the advice given in the last slide should have been applied in his case.

The slide show presents a basic outline of Islam, hitting the most essential highlights. Most of the slides display Qur'an verses or hadith. I have no doubt that the lecture elaborated upon the military application of those slides.

The information presented in the slide show is basically accurate, with the exception of two areas where error has crept in. Slide #36, pertaining to peace & forgiveness, overlooks the fact that those verses have been abrogated by Surah At-Taubah. #38 & 39 misrepresent 9:38 & 9:39 as relating to defense though they are contained in a Surah dedicated to excoriating Muslims who refused to join the ghazwat against Tabuk. Ibn Kathir's Tafsir confirms the obvious.

I hope that you will click the link to the slide show, view it and consider its contents carefully. Its implications for military recruitment & retention policy are clear. Neither the Muslim who shrinks from conflict with fellow Muslims nor one who anticipates an opportunity to turn against friendly forces should be recruited or retained. I doubt the possibility of accurately identifying all members of those two classes of Muslims.

The critical questions propounded by Mr. Bolt are listed below, followed by my answers.

How much of a threat is Islam to a secular, multi-ethnic society like America's - and ours?
How sure can we be of the loyalty of Muslim troops in a war against a Muslim country?
Have we become so fearful of asking such questions that even a Hasan, with his record for hate-preaching, is not just allowed to serve in the US military, but is promoted to the rank of major by people apparently too scared to seem racist to object?
And can you trust journalists to even tell you the facts you need to reach the right answers?

Islam is an existential threat, immediately to random individuals as in the massacre of '02 in Metropolitan Washington D.C. and to the nation in the long term if we don't wise up and defend ourselves adequately and effectively by eliminating it. We can no more tolerate Islam in our midst than rattlesnakes and copper heads in our homes. All three are venomous, aggressive and predatory.

We can be sure of the past loyalty of Muslim troops after the war is ended without treacherous behavior on their part. We can never be sure of their future loyalty. We now know that Dr. Hasan is extremely disloyal.

The question about fearing accusations of hate/racism answered itself, it does not require amplification.

Journalists can only report what they know. In the early hours of any incident, that knowledge base will be small, growing over time as new information comes to light . But many journalists have agendas, as do the publications that employ them. We can not trust all of them all of the time; we must not become dependent on a single source of information about current events.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Major Hasan's act of Worship

nobody@vox.com(Ben) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:05:50 -0800

In an article at NewsMax cites an FBI estimate saying that 10% of American Mosques teach jihad, Ron Kessler made the following statement.

On the other hand, those who condemn Muslims in general because of the actions of Hasan and others like him are engaging in prejudice that has no place in America. Indeed, such stereotyping sets back the war on terror, because we need moderate Muslims on our side.

The problem is not the Quran, which is no more incendiary than some passages in the Bible. (Deuteronomy, for example, prescribes stoning to death for those who “served other gods and worshipped them.”) The problem is the radical element that uses the Quran as an excuse to engage in terrorism and the failure of many moderate Muslims to condemn the extremists.

It is Islam we condemn in general, not Muslims. Most Muslims are victims of Islam. There are Muslims in name only, who do not practice Islam, but there are no moderate Muslims because there is no moderate Islam. Those who assert otherwise are suffering from extreme cognitive dissonance.

Islam has a standard set by Moe's preaching and practice. Islam is what he said and did in Allah's name. The Qur'an's Surah Al-Anfal contains an imperative to fight disbelievers, specifically the Pagan Meccans, until all resistance ceases and only Allah is worshiped. Hilali & Khan offer this bracketed clarification: "[in the whole of the world ]". Abdullah Yusuf Ali uses a different expression: "faith in God altogether and everywhere".

Surah At-Taubah has an imperative to fight people with scriptural religions until they are subjugated and extorted. Those imperatives are outcome oriented, with neither chronological nor geographic limits.

The Old Testament enjunctions to fight were limited to particular people and places, they were not unlimited. Jesus Christ neither preached nor practiced warfare. Jews and Christians are not engaged in wars of conquest. While Judaism and Christianity have reformed and become passive, Islam is not reformed nor can it. Islam is aggressively attempting to conquer or reconquer on several battlefronts.

The Qur'an is given as Allah's word, transmitted to Moe by Jibril. Allah's religion is perfected for Muslims; perfection can only be defiled, not improved. Allah's word can not be changed. When Allah abrogated a verse, he replaced it with something better; Surah At-Taubah was revealed next to last, it abrogates earlier, more tolerant and passive verses. Since Moe was Allah's final and greatest 'Prophet', Allah has no messenger, his word is immutable, fixated in the 7^th century.

Moe testified that he was "ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.'", confirming the imperatives cited above. Muhammad fought in 19 battles. Muslims assert that those battles were defensive, not offensive but only two of them were. Moe dictated and dispatched extortion letters, which he followed up with his army if the recipients did not comply with his demands. His letter to the Chiefs of Aqaba is the most explicit, it leaves no doubt about his intentions.

Allah described his relationship with Muslims as that of master: slave, the slave's mission being to fight in his cause, killing and being killed. Jihad is mandatory, "ordained" for Muslims. The penalty for refusing to fight is "painful torment", a hint of Hellfire. The "commerce that will save you from a painful torment" is "that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with your wealth and your lives". According to Allah, any step the believers take to anger or injure disbelievers will be "written to their credit as a deed of righteousness.".

Islam's canon of jurisprudence is the ultimate confirmation. Reliance of the Traveller, is the handbook of fiqh. Its Book O is the book of Justice. Its ninth chapter lays down the law of Jihad, defining it, describing its obligatory nature and explaining the obligation: "Jihad is a communal obligation, meaning upon the Muslims each year. ". Al-Shafi'i clarified the issue with this ruling.

"The least that the imam must do is that he allow no year to pass without having organised a military expedition by himself, or by his raiding parties, according to the Muslims' interest, so that the jihad will only be stopped in a year for a (reasonable) excuse."

I will quote the first sentence from each of the two sections which confirm the obvious.

O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad

The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9:29).
O9.9
The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim (O: because they are not a people with a Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax (jizya) ) .

Islamic law clearly confirms Allah's Jihad imperatives and Moe's testimony that he was ordered to fight. The caliph has a duty to make war on Kuffar in every year, if possible, until the entire world is conquered. Of course, the caliph's order or permission is required to mount an attack, unless there is no caliph. (O9.6).

Contrary to Mr. Kessler's assertion, condemnation of Islam is not prejudicial and the Qur'an is the root of the problem. Muslims whose personal morality conflicts with orthodox Islamic doctrine should remove Allah's yoke of slavery from their necks and become freemen. If you do not want to kill Kuffar, rape their widows and enslave their orphans, why are you Allah's slave? Emancipate yourself and rejoin humanity.

In remarks uttered at a memorial service for the servicemen slain at Fort Hood, President Obama said this.

It may be hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy. But this much we do know -- no faith justifies these murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favor. For what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice -- in this world, and the next.

A Muslim is not permitted to fight and kill another Muslim except in the authorized enforcement of Islamic law. Major Hasan was reluctant to go into battle against his brethren, but not to go into battle against his comrades. Muslims chant Allah-hu Akbar when slaughtering sacrificial animals and attacking Kuffar. Major Hasan shouted takbir because he was engaging upon the slaughter of his enemies, transferring his fear from himself to them and praising Allah

Murder can not be justified, it is unjust, but Islam rationalizes it. We learn from Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387 that the blood of Kuffar is not sacred to Muslims. Kuffar are considered rebels against Allah, and therefore not innocent. They are fair prey, targets of opportunity. . Islam divides the world into Dar ul-Islam where Allah's writ runs, and Dar ul-Harb, where Kuffar rule. Dar al-Harb is the land of war. It must be attacked until the entire world is Dar al-Islam.

Allah is sovereign over the world, its divine ruler because, as its creator, he owns it all. Where men are governed by man made law, they are in rebellion against Allah, depriving him of his divine right to rule. Allah has commanded Muslims to overthrow the rebels and extend Allah's rule over the entire world. Allah has promised them success in that mission. You can verify these facts by reading 13:41, 14:15, 40:51 and 61:9.

We're a nation that guarantees the freedom to worship as one chooses.

Major Hasan chose to worship Allah by sacrificing 13 Kuffar soldiers. That is his right because Jihad is a mandatory sacrament, being ordained by Allah. Allah said "Slay them wherever you find them'". Is that cherry picking? Is that out of context? If it is, tell it to the Shafi'ite jurists who wrote Reliance of the Traveller; that quote is part of the scriptural basis of jihad given in O9.0.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Don’t be Surprised by Ft Hood Massacre

nobody@vox.com(theway2k) — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:01:52 -0800

Muslim or Crazy

Islam Inspired Nidal Hasan

Thursday Islam turned a man who says he is a Muslim first and an American second into a person who intended to be a homicidal-suicide killer. He did not succeed with suicide in the Islamic cowardly style however. After killing 13 Americans and sending over 20 to the hospital with bullets in their bodies a lady cop ended the Muslim’s reign of homicidal evil. Make no mistake about it; Major Nidal Malik Hasan very much intended to kill kafir American soldiers in the name of Mohammed’s Allah.

Believe it or not I don’t have a problem with the concept of Muslim first and American second. I feel the same way about Christianity.

As a Christian first I am told to honor the King (national authority) and all those in authority in order to live a peaceable life. Add to this the Christian concept of the Golden Rule: Do to others as you have them do to you. Or perhaps even love your neighbor. Or again do not render evil for evil. Do Christians now and in the past adhere to these demands of faith?

No, they do not or have not. Muslims, Jews, Secular Humanists and atheists are quick to point out the travesties of history perpetrated in the name of Christianity and/or Jesus Christ. Western Christians spent years of military movements toward the Holy Land after being fed up with Islamic brutal conquest, raids and humiliation of Christians in the grasp of Muslim control. Those military movements have become known in history as the Crusades. Crusaders unfortunately took a Just War cause and exacted violence and massacres of fellow Christians, Jews and Muslims along the way. This breaking of at least the “do not render evil for evil” Christian principle should not have exacted evil for Muslim hatred, slavery, sex-slavery, Christian humiliation of those choosing to live the life of paying the jizya tax for so-called Muslim protection to allow the practice the Christian faith.

There are a host of other atrocities executed in the name of Christianity. The next in the sphere of atrocity after the Crusades is the Inquisition in which Protestants, Jews, Muslims were tortured to death or convert to Christianity (Roman Catholic style). The Inquisition went after people suspected of practicing the dark arts such as witchcraft (which was more the case of hysteria of Roman Church greed). The Protestants are not off the hook either. Under the inspiration of otherwise great Christians (e.g. Martin Luther) Jews suffered horrendously. I am sure I have made my point even though there are more instances of acts of violence or massacre that can be dug up to accuse Christianity as being equally guilty of violence as Islam.

Yet is Islam or are Muslims a victim or possibly just simply having a comparable history similar to Christian abuses contrary to Scripture? As I said earlier acts of violence and atrocity exacted in the name of Christianity was absolutely contrary to the principles of Christianity.

Islam on the other hand exacted atrocities, violence, genocide and often the choice between converting to Islam, the humiliation of dhimmitude or death as traditional course of action as prescribed by Muslim founder Mohammed and the traditions of the Hadith and Sira (or is it Sunnah? I haven’t gotten two down yet.).

There is no Golden Rule in Islam especially toward a non-Muslim enemy or person (aka kafir).

Here are some Quranic Suras that demonstrate that Islam is NOT a religion of peace. The Suras are taken from an article written by Muslim Dr. Sami Alrabaa:

O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people. (Sura 5, verse 51)

And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah DESTROY them; how they are turned away! (Sura 9, verse 30)

And the Jews will not be pleased with you, nor the Christians until you follow their religion. Say: Surely Allah's guidance, that is the (true) guidance. And if you follow their desires after the knowledge that has come to you, you shall have no guardian from Allah, nor any helper. (Sura 2, verse 120)

And KILL them (the unbelievers) wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers. (Sura 2, verse 191)

They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them (the unbelievers) friends until they flee (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and KILL them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper. (Sura 4, verse 89)

At this point a Muslim or Muslim Apologists think they have a great point to claim the Bible has the same enjoinders to kill non-Jews to make room for the Chosen People to receive the Land prepared by God. (Of course a Muslim would not say “Chosen People” or “God”). Let me point out that the order of God to kill everything in the Promised Land was based on the inhabitants being at the point of no-return in their moral arena. This people disowned the Creator in favor for false gods, committed sex sins (homosexuality and temple prostitution in their various polytheistic beliefs), infanticide of babies either unwanted or in human sacrifice and you get the idea.

Here is another point about the Old Testament Jews: the order to kill everything was not perpetual. Indeed it became obvious the Jews would not complete their God-ordained mission and time ran out on the task. It became the beginning of the constant error of forsaking God’s Law in favor of the same acts of the people they were to eliminate. Thus when the Jews of the Northern Kingdom of Israel followed by the Southern Kingdom of Judah were to the point of no-return, God removed them from the control of the Promised Land. Hence history has the Assyrian diaspora and the Babylonian diaspora (aka Babylonian Captivity). Upon a return to piety in foreign lands the Hand of God began repatriating Jews back to their Promised Land.

On the other hand Muslim holy writings have a perpetual command to kill the infidel (kafir) until they become Muslim. This command indeed stretches to the Quranic “People of the Book” (i.e. Jews and Christians). It is vague when the full throttle of the inclusion of convert or die for the “People of the Book” takes place; however it is a certainty that radical Islam acts as if this day is the age of extermination.

Another favorite rejoinder by Muslims and Muslim Apologists is this Quranic Sura:

“There is no compulsion in religion” (Quran Sura 2 verse 256).

In light of the Quranic verses above this is quite a deceptive ploy utilized by Muslim Apologists. The verse appears to promote the paradigm of tolerance but further reading of the Quran, Hadith or Sira would demonstrate there no compulsion in the sense of choice for the People of the Book. The non-Muslim is not viewed as being compelled when given the choice of convert, become a second class humiliated dhimmi or die. There is no compulsion when “choice” is involved is there?

There is also a difference between Christianity and Islam in points of view. Via Christianity the West has developed a unitary sense of logic. For example if something is valid then its opposite is invalid. If something is true then the opposite is false. If what goes up must come down then one does not jump off a tall building without some kind mechanical device that overrides the simple law of gravity.

Islamic logic is NOT the same. Islam is all about duality. This duality means two opposites can be the same under various man-molded ethics. This duality comes strait from the Quran.

For instance the “There is no compulsion in religion” Sura is an attributed to Mohammed during his Mecca and pre-flight to Medina days. Mohammed attempted the Christian path of persuasion to gain converts until he got the boot from the Arab polytheists (a few Christians and Jews) from Mecca. Mo developed a more martial concept of ~~winning~~ forcing converts in Medina where the Jewish Arabs would not hear that Mohammed was one of the long line of Prophets as well as being the last and final prophet which heard from God Almighty. Yet the Jews and polytheists of Medina did not desire early on to harm Mo as long as he stuck to his Mecca message.

Mo gained more adherents in Medina who he began to train militarily. As Mo became stronger the Jewish Arabs became a bit more resistant to the Muslim message. This all led to the slaughter of Medina Jews and the eventual conquest of Mecca. The die had been cast on how to spread Islam to the world. Hence Muslim violence and conquest is the continuation rather than the contrary of Muslim holy writings.

It is obvious that Christian atrocity is contrary to Christian principles and Muslim atrocities are ordained by Muslim principles. Thus we have one Nidal Malik Hasan going on an Islamic inspired killing spree.

JRH 11/9/09 (Originally written 11/7/09)

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Homeland Security or Insecurity?

nobody@vox.com(theway2k) — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 09:05:30 -0800

Leftist at Optometrist

Ben of Ben’s Blog operates several blogs as many of us bloggers do including me. Many such blogs operate under a pseudonym to avoid be a target in their personal life. I suspect Ben may be a pseudonym. I mention this out of clarification rather than as an exposé.

Ben has written a post which demonstrates that organized Islamic terrorism is still trying to make hits on American soil. Home grown Islamic terrorism comparable to Major Nidal Hasan’s killing spree on American soil might be the result of an individual snapping at the perceived insult to Islam; however organized efforts representing foreign radical Muslims continues as well.

Ben’s Blog writes about such an occasion.

JRH 11/8/09

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Homeland Security or Insecurity?

nobody@vox.com(Ben) — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 04:31:52 -0800

Freedom Ain't Free welcomes the Department of Homeland Security, who began reading snooper.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/al-nafisi-incites-terrorism/ shortly after noon Nov. 6, '09 and hung around through 3am Nov. 8.

The Washington D.C. office loaded that single post 33 times while the Laredo TX. office made 45 page loads, reading a few other posts in addition to the post about Sheikh Nafisi.

In April, when the post was fresh, it was viewed 62 times. It had 9 hits in August, 7 in September and 9 in October, with 124 hits in November. Why did a post which averaged less than one hit per day in recent months suddenly spike to 77, 41,2 three days in November? What accounts for the multiple page loads? Did multiple staffers load the page in succession?

A search for the Sheikh's name did not turn up any relevant news using Google and Bing. Searches for recent crop duster and anthrax related stories also came up empty. There were two search engine referrals involving al-Nafisi. There was one page load for that post that was not directly attributable to the DHS. I assume that DHS had some reason for searching for that name. What I do not understand is why they did not click through to MEMRI to view the source of the material I posted.

Is there some indication of a renewed potential for an anthrax attack? That is just what we need with a flu epidemic under way; if every cough and sneeze raised fears of anthrax inhalation, the emergency rooms would be swamped with panicked patients.

Our government needs to come clean with us, drop the pretenses and admit the fact that Islam is our enemy, having declared and prosecuted war against us. The Bush / Obama blather about a "great religion of peace, hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists" is counterproductive, as is their policy of leaving our southern border wide open to a flood of illegal immigrants, including a substantial number of "other than Mexicans". .

If I recall correctly, several GIs were killed in Iraq by a grenade tossed by a Muslim colleague. The Fort Hood Massacre was perpetrated by a Muslim whose conduct and expressions had raised red flags. Two cases do not form a clear pattern, but they do present a warning sign. Our servicemen must not be placed at risk by mixing enemy forces into their ranks.

The time has come to purge our armed forces of Muslims. The time has come to weed them out of clerical, administrative and decision making positions in the federal bureaucracy. A Muslim is one who submits to and obeys Allah. What did he command them to do? What did Muhammad exemplify for them to emulate? Expressions such as "fight them", "fight those who" and "cast terror" come to mind immediately. Regular readers of my posts are familiar with them and their sources. The shooter was praising Allah while murdering his comrades. Once is enough.

Did the army enlist American Nazis in WW2? Why not? Weren't they harmless moderates, patriotic Americans? Would ANP members have experience conflict if sent to Europe to fight the Germans? Who would they have aimed at? Maj. Hasan was conflicted about fighting his Muslim brethren. Who did he aim at?

The time has come to drop the pretense & fantasy and observe the facts in the cold clear light of reason. If the Congress & President we elected won't do what is right, then we need to replace them in the next election cycle.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Choices, Choices

nobody@vox.com(theway2k) — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 07:58:04 -0800

Religion of Peace

Have you heard or read from a Muslim, a Muslim apologist or a kafir who has befriended a Muslim a statement similar to this:

“Islam is no different than Christianity or Judaism. They both have bloodshed – one in the Quran and the other in the Bible. Muslims worship the same god as Christians and Jews.”

I have heard this often from friends and family who question my criticism of Islam (Mohammedanism is a better word) as being hate-speech or racism.

Bill Warner of Political Islam has posted the best rebuttal to the accusation my blog(s) are full of hatred toward Islam and Muslims.

JRH 11/7/09

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Ft Hood – Islam – Nidal Hasan

nobody@vox.com(theway2k) — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:28:38 -0800

Ft Hood, TX map

What happened at Fort Hood yesterday is a demonstration of the influence of Mohammed’s Islam on an individual. Regardless of what the Politically Correct Mainstream Media (MSM), the typical Leftist or the majority of so-called non-violent Muslims will you; Mohammed’s religion was created on the back of theo-political conquest as well as harshly securing the conquest by humiliating or killing the conquered.

The peace found in Islam is by those who submit to the theo-political dogma of Islam as inspired by Mohammed (its author), the Quran (the so-called words of Allah as delivered by Mo), the Hadith, Sunnah and various other Islamic commentary writings.

The so-called peace is submerged by the violence called for when Islam is offended either from within (Muslims) or outside (kafir).

As more and more info becomes available about Muslim U.S. Army psychiatrist Major Nidal Hasan, we will become aware that Islam played a huge part in his decision to go on a bloodthirsty psycho-spree.

A blog on the New York Times has been keeping track with updates at Fort Hood and Nidal Hasan. I am going repost the updates in reverse order up to the time of this writing. I have know idea when the updates will discontinue however I am certain a few more will arrive at the blog so go there to get caught up or possibly a location not quite as politically correct as the New York Times.

JRH 11/6/09

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Defamation of Religions Draft 10-29-09

nobody@vox.com(Ben) — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 03:33:35 -0800

United Nations A/C.3/64/L.27 Combating defamation of religions tabled in the third committee. by Belarus, Syrian Arab Republic* and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of):
{A/C.3/64/L.28 Combating defamation of religions is embargoed, I can not determine if it is a competing draft or whether it is related in any way. }

*for the OIC.
The draft resolution is in the form of a 7 page, 56kb pdf consisting of an enumerated list of 25 items, the substantial parts begin on page 2.

Since Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in remarks introducing the current Religious Freedom Report, rejected the concept of defamation of religions and accepted the concept of negative stereotyping:

Now, some claim that the best way to protect the freedom of religion is to implement so-called anti-defamation policies that would restrict freedom of expression and the freedom of religion. I strongly disagree. The United States will always seek to counter negative stereotypes of individuals based on their religion and will stand against discrimination and persecution.

I will begin with references to those concepts.

Defamation occurs twelve times in the draft resolution, beginning with the title.

Stressing that the defamation of religions is a serious affront to human dignity leading to the illicit restriction of the freedom of religion of their adherents and incitement to religious hatred and violence,

That section implies a cause : effect relationship between defamation of religions, restriction of freedom & hatred and violence. Did Christians who viewed the Danish Cartoons subsequently assault Muslims and destroy their property as a result?

Stressing also the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general,

How do they plan to combat the defamation of Judaism and Christianity in the Qur'an wherein Allah expresses anger toward us, curses us and declares perpetual war against us? Is that really part of their program of action?

Noting with concern that the defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, could lead to social disharmony and violations of human rights, and alarmed at the inaction of some States to combat this burgeoning trend and the resulting discriminatory practices against adherents of certain religions,

"Inaction of some states" is a vague term; what does it mean? Is it a reference to Denmark allowing publication of the cartoons and Holland allowing the publication of Fitna? What discrimination against Muslims resulted from those publications?

...sessions, in which the Special Rapporteur highlighted the serious nature of the defamation of all religions and the need to complement legal strategies...

"Legal strategies" is a reference to national and international legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam.

5. Notes with deep concern the intensification of the overall campaign of the defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, including the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001;

"Overall campaign of the defamation of religions" ; is one single source defaming more than one religion and inciting religious hatred? Where is religious hatred incited other than in Mosques Madrassas and the state run media of Islamic nations where Jihad against Jews & Christians is preached? Was it Muslims or Mormons who perpetrated that attack and those in London & Madrid? Because Muslims perpetrated those attacks and others in the name of Allah, we are unable to trust Muslims. Failure to profile would be suicidal.

6. Recognizes that, in the context of the fight against terrorism, defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general become aggravating factors that contribute to the denial of fundamental rights and freedoms of members of target groups, as well as their economic and social exclusion;

Does anyone else recognize the non sequitur in that item?

8. Reiterates the commitment of all States to the implementation, in an integrated manner, of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, which was adopted without a vote by the General Assembly on 8 September 200614 and reaffirmed by the Assembly in its resolution 62/272 of 5 September 2008, and which clearly confirms, inter alia, that terrorism cannot and should not be associated with any religion, nationality, civilization or ethnic group, stressing the need to reinforce the international community’s commitment to promote a culture of peace, justice and human development, ethnic, national and religious tolerance, and respect for all religions, religious values, beliefs or cultures and prevent the defamation of religions; [Emphasis added.]

Take a good long look at the emphasized clause in item 8. Terrorism is associated with Islam because it is an intrinsic sacrament of Islam, sanctified & exemplified in the Qur'an and confirmed in Moe's sunnah.

3:151 We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they joined others in worship with Allâh, for which He had sent no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrongdoers).
8:12 (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes."
33:26 And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.

And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches, and a land which you had not trodden (before). And Allâh is Able to do all things.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:
Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).

But we must not say or write that: to do so constitutes "defamation", "negative stereotyping", and " incitement to religious hatred & violence", according to the OIC and their factotums at the UN. Debate must be closed and silence imposed by law, even of truthful expressions which expose Islam's intrinsic evils.

Does anyone recognize the subsequent non sequitur? Promoting tolerance for the intolerable does not promote peace or justice. Islam is infamous because of its own canonical texts and its continuing history of rapine. Peace & justice would be promoted by recognizing and eliminating aggressive evil.

15. Urges all States to provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from the defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general;

Item 15 asserts that accurate description of the doctrines and practices of Islam incites hatred, intimidation & coercion. It demands the passage & enforcement of national laws to prevent & punish truthful criticism of Islam, including Fitna and this blog post.

17. Welcomes the recent steps taken by Member States to protect freedom of religion through the enactment or strengthening of domestic frameworks and legislations to prevent the defamation of religions and the negative stereotyping of religious groups;

19. Underscores the need to combat defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, by strategizing and harmonizing actions at the local, national, regional and international levels through education and awareness-raising, and urges all States to ensure equal access to education for all, in law and in practice, including access to free primary education for all children, both girls and boys, and access for adults to lifelong learning and education based on respect for human rights, diversity and tolerance, without discrimination of any kind, and to refrain from any legal or other measures leading to racial segregation in access to schooling;

To make item 19 honest, indoctrination should be substituted for "education".

25. Requests the Secretary-General to submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world, to the General Assembly at its sixty-fifth session.

Negative stereotyping occurs twelve times.

2. Expresses deep concern at the negative stereotyping of religions and manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religion or belief still evident in the world;

They are concerned about Fitna & similar videos, the Danish Cartoons and blog posts which expose Islamic doctrines which sanctify and mandate genocidal warfare & terrorism.

17. Welcomes the recent steps taken by Member States to protect freedom of religion through the enactment or strengthening of domestic frameworks and legislations to prevent the defamation of religions and the negative stereotyping of religious groups;

Truthful exposure of Islamic doctrines & practices does not diminish freedom of religion. Where Allah's writ runs, as in Egypt, Pakistan & Saudi Arabia, Islam diminishes freedom of religion.

23. Welcomes the initiative by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the expert seminar on freedom of expression and advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, on 2 and 3 October 2008, and requests the High Commissioner to continue to build on this initiative, with a view to concretely contributing to the prevention and elimination of all such forms of incitement and the consequences of negative stereotyping of religions or beliefs, and their adherents, on the human rights of those individuals and their communities;

According to the OIC and their UN factotums, Fitna and the Danish Cartoons are advocacy of religious hatred constituting incitement of violence. The Cartoons depicted Moe as a terrorist, which, by his own admission, he was. Fitna exposed the relationship between Allah's Jihad imperatives, the hatred preached by Muslim clerics and the violence done by their congregants. In reality, that is not defamation neither is it negative stereotyping nor is it incitement.

The draft resolution is a demand for national and international enforcement of Islam's blasphemy law, which punishes any negative statement about Allah, his messenger or his book with death.

Reliance of the Traveller’s Book O [Justice]. O8.7 lists 20 things that entail apostasy. Here are a few relevant items in that list.

-4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);

-5- to deny the existence of Allah, His beginingless eternality, His endless eternality, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him (dis: v1);

-6- to be sarcastic about Allah’s name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat;

-7- to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;

-15- to hold that any of Allah’s messengers or prophets are liars, or to deny their being sent;

(n: `Ala’ al-din’ Abidin adds the following:

-16- to revile the religion of Islam;

-19- to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law;

-20- or to deny that Allah intended the Prophet’s message (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be the religion followed by the entire world (dis: w4.3-4) (al-Hadiyya al-`Ala’iyya (y4), 423-24). )

Another provision prescribes the penalty.

O8.1

When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.

O8.2

In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.

One of the rules applied to dhimmis is equally instructive. What is impermissible to say about Allah or Moe? According to previously quoted statements, it is impermissible to link Islamic violence with Islamic scripture & tradition.

O11.10

The agreement is also violated (A: with respect to the offender alone) if the state has stipulated that any of the following things break it, and one of the subjects does so anyway, though if the state has not stipulated that these break the agreement, then they do not; namely, if one of the subject people:

-3- leads a Muslim away from Islam;

-5- or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam.

The passage of these Defamation of Religion resolutions gives an unwarranted aura of legitimacy to the blasphemy laws enforced in Pakistan and other Islamic countries. Those laws are frequently used to persecute innocent victims, including indigenous Christians, converts to Christianity and missionaries.

Canadian, British, Australian and European critics of Islam have been persecuted, jailed and fined for truthful expressions about Islam. The policy of the Obama administration places our First Amendment right of free expression at risk. The Secretary of State condemns the defamation clauses but supports those alleging negative stereotyping. Both clauses have the same effect: criminalizing accurate description of Islamic doctrines and practices.

We must therefore resist and counter attack. Please sign, support and publicize the following on line petitions.

For a long list of links to previous resolutions, related documents and blog posts, refer to Defamation of Religions: Background Info.

External References in the resolution: superscripts refer to footnotes in the draft resolution.

¹ICERD
²ICCPR

For detailed documentation of how Islamic doctrines violate these international covenants, refer to Islam vs Human Rights 64kb chm file compiled from 7 blog posts.

³Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief
⁴Declaration on the Human Rights of Individuals Who are not Nationals of the Country in which They Live
⁵Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities,
Recalling the relevant resolutions of the Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Council in this regard,

None specified; assuming the reference is to previous defamation resolutions.

⁶United Nations Millenium Declaration
⁷Durban Declaration A/CONF.189/12

Durban Declaration - A/CONF.189/12 Chapter I - UN Documents

⁸Outcome Document of the Durban Review Conference, held in Geneva in April 2009 A/CONF.211/8
⁹Taking note of the reports of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance

¹⁰Global Agenda for Dialogue among Civilizations, A/RES/56/6
¹¹Declaration and Programme of Action adopted by the Ministerial Meeting on Human Rights and Cultural Diversity of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, held in Tehran on 3 and 4 September 2007 A/62/464, annex.

¹²A/62/18
CERD/C/63/CO/11, para. 20 (10 December2003)
CERD/C/63/CO/6, para. 14 (10 December 2003)
CERD/C/NGA/CO/18, para. 20 (1 November 2005)
CERD/C/TZA/CO/16, para. 20 (1 November 2005)
CERD/C/IRL/CO/2,para. 18 (14 April 2005)
CERD/C/RUS/CO/19, paras. 16 and 17 (20 August 2008)

resolution 63/171 of 18 December 2008
¹³report of the Secretary-General A/64/209
¹⁴United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, A/RES/60/288 General Assembly
¹⁵general recommendation XV (42) of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (A/48/18), chap. VIII, sect. B.
¹⁶World Programme for Human Rights Education proclaimed by the General Assembly on 10 December 2004 resolutions 59/113 A and B.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend