Ground Zero Mosque: the Fix

A fiery post by Barenaked Islam brought a detailed and well illustrated post by Atlas Shrugs to my attention. According to Pam Geller, the Landmark Commission met on a 1.5 week notice to consider its recommendation on granting protected landmark status to the Burlington Coat Factory which the Muslims seek to replace with a Mosque as a symbol of Islamic supremacism.

One journalist noted that the "CB1 Landmarks committee, which is a stickler for details when someone wants to install new windows or awnings, voted to recommend to the NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission that landmark status not be given to the two antique buildings on Park Place that the owner wants to tear down to build the mega-mosque at Ground Zero."

The historical significance of the property is clear: it was designed by the famous architect Daniel D. Badger. A number of his buildings have already been given landmark status. The New York Times obituary (19 Nov. 1884, p. 2) for Daniel D. Badger (1806-1884), read in part, "Daniel D. Badger, the pioneer of this country in the use of iron for building purposes" ....... Further, the building was the headquarters of Merck & Company from 1911 to 1925.

More importantly, his building has special historical significance because of 911. It was part of the attack. The landing gear of one of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center towers flew out to the Burlington Coat Factory building, and fell through the roof to the basement. The fact that the committee ignores that fact is outrageous, and disrespects the victims of 911.

It is obvious that the Landmarks Commission is going to deny landmark status at its meeting next Tuesday. Again, why the mad rush? So that the mosque can open on the tenth anniversary of September 11th, as promised?

Geller states that the building has historical, architectural & cultural significance. And, of course, part of one of the aircraft rests in its basement. She includes historical details and photographs of the facade.

The full board is scheduled to meet later this month, but they want to ram the vote through in a hurry, Tuesday. Why the rush when?

The LPC has had the Property “calendared” for landmark consideration since 1989, tabled for 22 years. Only within the last two weeks has it provided the public notice that it would be making a decision. It is doing this without full public input, and in the dead of summer, when many people aren't around to provide input.

There probably is no way to get the local state or federal governments to stop the Cordoba House project. Its opponents must act to make the project too costly in terms of public relations.

Rick Barber's campaign spot and Pat Condell's curmudgeonly video excoriating the project led the way, pointing out the fact that the Abomination was done in Allah's name, with shouts of "Alla-hu Akbar!" while slitting the flight crew's throats. Pam Geller followed up by referring to the project as a symbol of Islamic supremacy in several televised interviews.

We need more of those advertisements & interviews and more street protests, and we need more people involved in those demonstrations. Cordoba House must be made too costly in terms of associating Islam with terrorism, triumphalism & supremacism. The proposed erection of a mega Mosque two blocks from the scene of a horrific sneak attack upon civilians affords an opportunity to expose the damnable doctrines of Islam to public view.

Why are there two Mosques, but no Jewish Temple on the Temple Mount? Why do Muslims strive to destroy any archaeological evidence of the Temples and sever the historical connection of Jews to Jerusalem? Why did they tear down pagan temples and build Mosques on the ruins when they conquered India? Why did they replace churches with Mosques in Constantinople?

Why do they shout "Allah is greater!" in Arabic while slitting throats? Those are the same takbir they use while sacrificing cattle for eid. Why won't the mainstream media point that out?

Why did Allah say "fight them" & "fight those who"? Why did Allah say "... nor they take any step to raise the anger of disbelievers nor inflict any injury upon an enemy but is written to their credit as a deed of righteousness."

Why did Allah say that he would cast terror and that he did cast terror, resulting in killing some, captivating others and seizure of their property? Why did Moe say that he was helped by awe and made victorious with terror?

Why can't Christians in Egypt repair and maintain churches? Why can't Christians in Saudi Arabia build churches or meet in the privacy of their apartments?

Muslims and their apologists among our elected officials strive diligently to suppress those fatal facts and questions. Connecting those fatal facts to the Cordoba House project is our best weapon against it. Only by expressly making that connection can we change the cost/benefit analysis of the project into the red.

Sphere: Related Content

John Brennan Spews Again!

On Wednesday, May 26, '10, The President's terrorism adviser once again served up ample evidence of Obamination's treason. His latest spew of feces occurred before the Center For Strategic & International Studies.

The CSPAN video indicates a run time of 57 minutes.



VPR News has a description of the speech and a transcript link. Unfortunately, that is not a transcript of the speech, it does include a few quotes. The video I found is high definition, and loads too slow on my connection. I can't pause and rewind it, so I can't create an accurate transcript.

Ahh, the fine print. I finally found the well concealed transcript link. The transcript is in the form of a 20 page pdf file.

Brennan tells how he previously outlined the new administration's policy, identifying two principle challenges.

1. First, the immediate near-term challenge of destroying al-Qaida and its extremist affiliates.
2. And second, the longer-term challenge of confronting violent extremism generally, including the political, economic and social forces that can sometimes put individuals on the path toward militancy.

Fallacy #1: al-Qaida is not the enemy; it is a subset of the the Muslim Brotherhood, which is a subset of the enemy: Islam. Fallacy #2: Violence is intrinsic to Islam, it is neither extreme nor innovative. Fallacy #4: Islamic violence is doctrine driven, not grievance driven.

The doctrines which sanctify and mandate aggressive world conquest are found in the Qur'an: Al-Baqarah 216 makes it mandatory, not optional. Al-Anfal 39 commands Muslims to fight pagans until all resistance ceases and Allah has a monopoly. Muslims and their apologists will swear that those verses don't mean that, are taken out of context, misapplied, mistranslated and misinterpreted. Ibn Kathir, who spent his adult life studying and teaching the Qur'an & hadith, has a different take on those verses and Moe confirmed their obvious meaning. The final clincher: Islamic law codifies them.

• Jihad is required in all Conditions
• The Order to fight to eradicate Shirk and Kufr
• The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah
• Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-8.html The caliph makes war on Jews... codification of 9:29.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-9.html The caliph fights all other people... codification of 8:39.

When Muslims do their wet work, they shout the takbir, as if they were sacrificing a goat for eid. They think they are doing Allah's will, the best of good deeds. Why is that? The answer is in the Qur'an, Surah At-Taubah 120. "...they suffer neither thirst nor fatigue, nor hunger in the Cause of Allah, nor they take any step to raise the anger of disbelievers nor inflict any injury upon an enemy but is written to their credit as a deed of righteousness. ". [Emphasis and link added.] When a Muslim does anything to anger or injure a disbeliever, he gets brownie points. This should be a clue for you.

Brennan goes on to tell us how President Obama is clear about the threat we face, following up with a weak excuse for his misidentification of the enemy.

The president’s strategy is absolutely clear about the threat we face. Our enemy is not terrorism because terrorism is but a tactic. Our enemy is not terror because terror is a state of mind and, as Americans, we refuse to live in fear. Nor do we describe our enemy as jihadists or Islamists because jihad is holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam meaning to purify oneself of one’s community.

Terrorism is a tactic, a fact so obvious as to require no restatement. "jihadist" & "islamists" are smokescreens commonly used to divert our attention from the real enemy: Muslims; Islam's true believers. The last clause in the quote is a form of kitman: dissimulation by obfuscation. Brennan intentionally conflates jihad an-Nafs with jihad asghar, to the exclusion of the effective definition. To make the extent of Brennan's deception clear to you, I will quote two relevant definitions of jihad. The first is from the translator's notes to Surah Al-Baqarah 190. That ayeh is related to defensive jihad, when Dar ul-Islam is invaded, but the definition is not, it relates to offensive jihad on Islamic initiative. I can't explain their placement of the footnote, I just report it.

(V.2:190) Al-Jihâd (holy fighting) in Allâh’s Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islâm and is one of its pillar (on which it stands). By Jihâd Islâm is established, Allâh’s Word is made superior, (His Word being Lâ ilaha illallâh which means none has the right to be worshipped but Allâh), and His Religion (Islâm) is propagated. By abandoning Jihâd (may Allâh protect us from that) Islâm is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihâd is an obligatory duty in Islâm on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfil this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.
Narrated ‘Abdullâh bin Mas‘ûd رضي الله عنه: I asked Allâh’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم "O Allâh’s Messenger! What is the best deed?" He replied, "To offer the Salât (prayers) at their early fixed stated times." I asked, "What is next in goodness?" He replied, "To be good and dutiful to your parents." I further asked, "What is next in goodness?" He replied, "To participate in Jihâd in Allâh’s Cause." I did not ask Allâh’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم anymore and if I had asked him more, he would have told me more. (Sahih Al-Bukhâri, Vol.4, Hadîth No.41).

Let that sink in for a moment, then re-read it until it becomes clear to you. The second definition is from Islamic law: Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9.0. It does not have named anchors for linking, but it is documented here: http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-0.html .

Chapter O9.0: Jihad

(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the lesser jihad. As for the greater jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self (nafs), which is why the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said as he was returning from jihad.

``We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad.''

The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus (def: b7) is such Koranic verses as:

-1- ``Fighting is prescribed for you'' (Koran 2:216);

-2- ``Slay them wherever you find them'' (Koran 4:89);

-3- ``Fight the idolators utterly'' (Koran 9:36);

and such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

``I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah'';

and the hadith reported by Muslim,

``To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.''Details concerning jihad are found in the accounts of the military expeditions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), including his own martial forays and those on which he dispatched others. The former consist of the ones he personally attended, some twenty-seven (others say twenty-nine) of them. He fought in eight of them, and killed only one person with his noble hand, Ubayy ibn Khalaf, at the battle of Uhud. On the latter expeditions he sent others to fight, himself remaining at Medina, and these were forty-seven in number.) [Emphasis and links added.]

Will you kill anyone else or be killed in your struggle against your ego? How?? I have added emphasis to Surah At-Taubah 111 to make things clear for you.

Verily, Allâh has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allâh's Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. It is a promise in truth which is binding on Him in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur'ân. And who is truer to his covenant than Allâh? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is the supreme success .

Like Obama, Brennan knows no shame, there is no limit to his deception.

And there is nothing holy or legitimate or Islamic about murdering innocent men, women and children. Indeed, characterizing our adversaries this way would actually be counterproductive. It would play into the false perception that they are religious leaders defending a holy cause when in fact, they are nothing more than murderers, including the murder of thousands upon thousands of Muslims.

I added emphasis to one word in that quote to make it stand out because it illustrates one of the methods by which Muslims and their apologists practice deception. Who is innocent? By definition, only Muslims can be innocent. Surah Al-Ma'idah' 33 lists the punishments prescribed for those who wage war against Allah. Ibn Kathir's Tafsir defines that term. "`Wage war' mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. " [Emphasis added.] If you do not believe in Allah, you are rebelling against him, not innocent.

If you did not follow the link to Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387, when I presented it earlier, do it now. What makers our blood sacred to Muslims, so that they can't kill us with impunity? Why does Islam forbid killing women and children in combat? Only because they are "property for Muslims". If you still harbor doubts, read this: http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-13.html.


The lies keep flowing.

Moreover, describing our enemy in religious terms would lend credence to the lie propagated by al-Qaida and its affiliates to justify terrorism, that the United States is somehow at war against Islam. The reality, of course, is that we have never been and will never be at war with Islam. After all, Islam, like so many faiths, is part of America.

True, we have not declared war on Islam, but we need to because Islam declared and is waging war against us. Evidently Brennan is not aware of the Barbary Wars. The Barbary Pirates were Muslims, who attacked our shipping for economic reasons, using the Qur'an as a rationalization. Wikipedia has the details for you.

It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once. ^{[2] [3]}

Right and duty to plunder and enslave--where did they get such an idea? I will quote a fragment from Sahih Bukhari 4.53.386: "Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."".

Brennan, like President Obama, believes that we are stupid, ignorant, gullible fools incapable of reasoning.

Instead, the president’s strategy is clear and precise. Our enemy is al-Qaida and its terrorist affiliates. For it was al-Qaida who attacked us so viciously on 9/11 and whose desire to attack the United States, our allies and our partners remains undiminished. And it is its affiliates who have take up al-Qaida’s call to arms against the United States and other parts of the world.
The president’s strategy is unequivocal with regard to our posture. The United States of America is at war. We are at war against al-Qaida and its terrorist affiliates. That is why the president is responsibly ending the war in Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11 and why he has refocused our efforts on Afghanistan, where al-Qaida continues to plot from the tribal regions along the border with Pakistan and inside of Pakistan.

We have a clear mission. We will not simply degrade al-Qaida.'s capabilities or simply prevent terrorist attacks against our country or citizens. We will not merely respond after the fact, after an attack that has been attempted. Instead, the United States will disrupt, dismantle and ensure a lasting defeat of al-Qaida and violent extremist affiliates.

.
Once they tell a lie, they repeat it, believing as the Nazis did, that repetition will bring about wide spread belief. Al-Qaida is not a separate organization, it is an alias for Islam. It is one of the branches of the Muslim Brotherhood. Another branch of al-Iqhwan has in their charter, words which expose the awful reality which Brennan & Obama wish we would never learn about.

Allah is its target, the Prophet is its model, the Koran its constitution: Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes.

Arrogant narcissists can't stop lying.

We will build positive partnerships with Muslim communities around the world. And most importantly, we will protect our homeland.

We can't build partnerships with Muslims because Allah explicitly forbids it. I will quote one of several ayat which make this fact clear to those willing to read and learn.

60:1. O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies (i.e. disbelievers and polytheists, etc.) as friends, showing affection towards them, while they have disbelieved in what has come to you of the truth (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism, this Qur'ân, and Muhammad ), and have driven out the Messenger (Muhammad ) and yourselves (from your homeland) because you believe in Allâh your Lord! If you have come forth to strive in My Cause and to seek My Good Pleasure, (then take not these disbelievers and polytheists, etc., as your friends). You show friendship to them in secret, while I am All-Aware of what you conceal and what you reveal. And whosoever of you (Muslims) does that, then indeed he has gone (far) astray, (away) from the Straight Path .

Arrogant narcissists repeatedly return to their favorite lies.

The president’s national security strategy also outlines how we will strengthen other tools of American power which will help us meet many challenges. This includes addressing the political, economic and social forces that can make some people fall victim to the cancer of violent extremism.

Through a renewed commitment to diplomacy and in contrast to terrorists who offer the false hope of change through violence, we seek to show that legitimate grievances can be resolved peacefully through democratic institutions and dialogue, whether in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or between Israelis and Palestinians, where the continuing conflict undermines moderates and strengthens extremists across the region.

'Violent extremism" is a lie. Moe set the standard for Islam in all places, at all times with his recitation & Sunnah. You need to read the Qur'an & hadith to learn what that standard is. In the last 9 years of his life, Moe started 86 battles. Does that give you a clue?

Jihad is about obedience to Allah & emulation of Moe, not "legitimate grievances". The Falestinians do not have legitimate grievances, Israel has them: repeated conquests, including that of Caliph Umar in 638 deprived the Jews of their homeland. Their legitimate grievance had a hope of redress when the Balfour Declaration was published. Hope turned to frustration when Britain reneged, giving most of their patrimony to the Hasemites.

Since 1948 Muslims have been attempting genocide and politicide against Israel. That gives Israel the right to defend herself, which does not give rise to legitimate Falestinian grievances.


The same old lie rears its ugly head again.

Through new partnerships to promote development in places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, we are working to foster good governance, reduce corruption and improve education, health and basic services, all of which helps undermine the forces that can put the disillusioned and disposed on the path to militancy.

Muslims are explicitly forbidden to take kuffar as partners. Muslims must be dominant, not submissive in any relationship. We can not foster good governance, because Islam is feudalism. Only Allah and his messenger have the right to rule, and their rule must be extended over the entire globe. If you could make them prosperous, you would only enable them to build and equip larger armies with which to attack us.

Repetition does not convert a lie into truth.

We have also seen individuals, including American citizens, apparently inspired by al-Qaida’s ideology, take matters into their own hands.

The ideology belongs to Islam, not to any sub-set. "Only Allah has the right to be worshiped.". That is the idea at the base of the system, the bedrock foundation. Allah's word must be "made superior", that is, dominant. Supremacy is gained through armed conquest. Muslims are obligated to conquer and subjugate the entire world. That is fard al-kifaya, binding upon all able bodied adult male Muslims until a sufficient number have reported to the front. Jihad must be undertaken in every year, failing only when there is insufficient manpower or material.


Common sense dictates that predators must be eradicated. Because Islam is a predator, it must be eradicated. Because President Obama is a Muslim, he can not acknowledge that reality. Because President Bush was in the purse of the Saudi's, he could not acknowledge that reality. The fatal fact is that we can never obtain peace or security while there is Islam on this earth. Obama and Brennan can not acknowledge that fatal fact.

Instead of giving into fear and paralysis, which is the goal of terrorists, we must resolve, as a nation, as a people, that we will go forward with confidence, that we will resist succumbing to overreaction, especially to failed attacks and not magnify these perpetrators beyond the despicable miscreants that they are, that as a proud and strong nation, we will not cower in the face of a small band of cowards who hide in the shadows and send others to their slaughter and to slaughter the innocents.

Please explain to me how a "small band of cowards" conquered an empire that extended from the border of China to the border of France. How the Hell did a tiny minority raise an army willing and able to conquer India? Explain to me how they slaughtered up to 90 million Hindus. Explain how, in less than 1400 years, they slaughtered 270*10⁶ people.

It is not al-Qaida. It is not "terrorists". It is not "extremists". It is not "radicals". It is believers: Muslims who bought the evil of Islam hook, line and sinker [8:2, 9:111, 24:62, 49:15 ]. If we don't get them out of this country and off of this planet, we will never have peace and security and we will eventually be conquered and enslaved. This is a reality that our cowardly politicians can not acknowledge because that acknowledgment would subject them to charges of advocacy of genocide. Either Muslims cease believing or cease living or we will cease being alive and free.

We must ship them home and prevent more from entering. We must either break Allah's yoke of slavery and cause them to become apostates or usher them into Hell. Otherwise they will torment us until they prevail, then they will enslave us.

This is not a legal issue. This is not a moral issue. This is an existential issue: will the flag yet wave, will this continue to be the land of the free and home of the brave or the prison of the craven slave?

Terrorists may try to bring death to our cities, but it is our choice to either uphold the rule of law or chip away at it. They may strike our communities, but it is our choice to either respond wisely and effectively or lash out in ways that inflame entire regions and stoke the fires of the violent extremism. That is our choice. And with the strategy we are releasing tomorrow, President Obama and the administration offers our answer.

When Nazis landed by submarine, FDR knew what to do with them. Muslims are arriving by commercial aviation, and Obama can't figure out what to do with them. The fires of violent Islam are stoked by the Qur'an, hadith and kutbah delivered at Juma Salat in every Mosque. When stung by hornets, you destroy the nest and its occupants with chemical warfare. The same logic applies in this case. When defense is considered provocative, it must be preemptive. There is no rational alternative. Overwhelming, disproportionate force is required.

Those arrogant traitors who mislead and misrule this nation talk of "inflaming" and "recruiting". If they were honest, they would tell us about the obligation of Jihad. When Muslims attack kuffar, the obligation is fard al-kifaya: binding on all eligible male Muslims until a sufficient number answer the call. When we retaliate, the obligation becomes fard ayn, binding on the entire Muslim community for immediate response.

American Thinker has an excellent article about Brennan's speech, here is their conclusion.

Seeing the enemy as potential welfare customers will not win any battles and will probably get a lot of innocent people killed.

Sphere: Related Content

Dance of the Liars

Bare Naked Islam posted a video of Attorney General Holder's testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. In this video, Eric Holder is being questioned by Rep. Lamar Smith R, Tx., who is trying to coax the A.G. into giving a straight answer to a crooked question. This dialog demands close attention, there is some cross talk involved. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOQt_mP6Pgg&feature=player_embedded



I have attempted to format Rep. Smith's questions in Century Gothic and A.G. Holder's answers in Ariel.

In the case of all three attempts in the last year, the terrorist attempts, one of which was successful, those individuals have had ties to radical Islam. Do you feel that these individuals might have been incited to take the actions that they did because of radical Islam?

Because of? --Radical Islam.--There are a variety of reasons why I think people have taken these actions. Its hard--I think you have to look at each individual case. I mean we are in the process now of talking to Mr. Shahzad to try to understand what it is that drove him to take the action he took.

But radical Islam could have been one of the reasons ?

There are a variety of reasons--But was radical Islam one of them? -- There are a variety of reasons why people do these things. Some of them are potentially religious convictions--But all I'm asking is if you think among those variety of reasons, radical Islam might have been one of the reasons that the individuals took the steps that they did?-- We say radical Islam...I think those people who espouse a version of Islam that is not--Are you uncomfortable with attributing any of their actions to radical Islam it sounds like it?--No, I don't want to say anything negative about a religion that is not appropriate--I'm talking about radical Islam, I'm not talking about the general religion--Right and I'm saying that a person like Anwar Awlaki,-- for instance, who has a version of Islam that is not consistent with the teachings of of it and espouses a radical version--Could Radical Islam have motivated have motivated these individuals to take the steps that they did? --I certainly think that it is possible that people who espouse a radical version of Islam have had an ability to have an impact on people like Mr. Shahzad.--And could it have been the case in one of these three instances ?--Could that have been the case?--Yes--again, could one of these three individuals have been incited by radical Islam? Apparently you feel that they could have been.-- I think potentially incited by a view of Islam that is inconsistent with--It is hard to get an answer yes or no but let me go on to my next question, ...

Rush Limbaugh & Sean Hannity had fun with this video clip, playing the sound track for their audiences. They drew attention to the fact that Holder carefully avoided attributing terror attacks to "radical Islam". Since I am an amateur, not dependent on advertisers for revenue, I can analyze the dialog more deeply than the professionals who are beholden to political correctness.

There are two critical statements in the dialog.

• "No, I don't want to say anything negative about a religion that is not appropriate"
• "I'm talking about radical Islam, I'm not talking about the general religion"

These politicians are trying to convey a false concept of Islam: that it is a religion with 'radical' and 'moderate' forms. Islam is a way of life, not a religion. Its religious component is a social control mechanism which shields the aggressive way of life from recognition while it motivates Muslims to participate in genocidal conquest. Their tactic has two objectives: first, to avoid being labeled "racist" & "bigot", second to avoid offending potential voters.

Some insightful person whose identity I have forgotten, said "Its Islam, Stupid.". Qualifiers such as 'radical' and catch phrases such as 'Islamofascism' distract us from objective factual reality which few are willing to acknowledge.

This hadith reveals too much about Islam, pay close attention to the parts I have emphasized.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 23, Number 3455:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar:

I heard the Apostle of Allah, (peace_be_upon_him) say: When you enter into the inah transaction, hold the tails of oxen, are pleased with agriculture, and give up conducting jihad (struggle in the way of Allah). Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion.

Jihad and agriculture are presented as alternative ways of life, agriculture is rejected in favor of jihad. Jihad is their "original religion". That should give you a clue.

Don't hand me the standard line of crap about jihad being a struggle against your ego. Moe waged war against anyone he could plunder, he did not struggle against temptation. After all, he married a six year old girl. He also married the wife of his adopted son and seven other women besides captives and slaves he sexually exploited. Jihad is defined in Islamic law as "to war against non-Muslims".
One Qur'an verse conveys vital knowledge, affording you another clue.

9:111. Verily, Allâh has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allâh's Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. It is a promise in truth which is binding on Him in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur'ân. And who is truer to his covenant than Allâh? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is the supreme success .

Fight in Allah's cause, kill & be killed; its what Muslims do. Got a clue yet? The Qur'an mandates jihad, declaring that it is ordained for Muslims. It also commands Muslims to wage war against disbelievers. Surah Al-Anfal 39 commands Muslims to fight pagans until resistance ceases and only Allah is worshiped. Surah At-Taubah 29 commands them to fight "people of the book" until we are subjugated and submit to annual extortion demands. Moe confirmed those imperatives, as recorded in Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387.

Think back to the playing of the cockpit voice recorder after 9/11. What did they say while they slit the throats of the crew? What did Nidal Malik Hasan say when he opened fire at Fort Hood? Why shout "Allāhu Akbar"? Mohammad Atta has the answer for you: "When the confrontation begins, strike like champions who do not want to go back to this world. Shout, 'Allahu Akbar,' because this strikes fear in the hearts of the non-believers." Allah is greatest just happens to be what they say when they slaughter a goat for eid and when slitting the throat of a captive.

What is the objective of striking fear? It is done for the purpose of rendering us confused, agitated and unable to mount an effective defense; to make us easy prey. It is commanded in Surah Al-Anfal 12 & 60. It is exemplified in Surat Al-Ahzab 26 & Al-Hashr 2. It is celebrated in Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220. Terrorism is not exceptional. Terrorism is not radical. Terrorism is not extreme; it is an intrinsic part of orthodox Islam.

Full documentation of the fatal facts outlined in this blog post is freely available.

• Islamic Terror.chm [30.4KB] A 6 part series from Freedom Ain't Free.
• Jihad.chm [45KB] A 6 part series from Freedom Ain't Free.
• What's Wrong With Islam/Muslims.chm [23KB].
• Islamic Supremacism [49KB] A 3 part series from Freedom Ain't Free.
• Islam's Mercenary Mission 08/30/09 Full exposure of the dirty details of Islam's foundational purpose: accrual of spoils & sex slaves. It is a war cult, not a 'religion of peace'. This post is intended to serve as a reference link for bloggers & forum participants who expose Islam to the ignorant. Post a link to it instead of re-inventing the wheel.
• FOMIJihad.chm [163.4KB] The Offensive Jihad thread from the old FOMI anti Islam forum. This thread contains several significant quotes from Fiqh, both ancient and modern.
• What's Wrong With Islam/Muslims? 10/10/09 If nothing else, read this post and share it with all your family, friends & associates. This post contains the most vital information about Islam, fully documented and including common sense refutations of the most popular objections raised by bigoted multicultural idiots. Copy this post, paste it into an email, and send it to everyone you can hope to influence. Exhort the recipients to forward it.

Now is the time for the electorate to disrespectfully demand honesty from our deceptive and cowardly politicians. Tell them that if they continue to lie to us, we will remember Nov. 2 ' 10.

Sphere: Related Content

Interviewer Tries to Trap Geert Wilders

I found this video at Bleed the Soul, through a Google Alert.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lMkwH9ODCU&feature=player_embedded



I have attempted to transcribe the interview. Unfortunately, there is a lot of fast talking, and parts of the audio track are unintelligible. I can't speak a word of Dutch, so I should not knock Geert's fluency in English, but his syntax could be improved.

The point I really want to make is that the Islamic ideology is facing a real threat to our freedom--to our western society so the values of our society are based on Judaism and Christianity; on humanism. And I'm also here in the United States to learn, I mean, the United states is the country when it comes to freedom of speech and I'm here to learn in order to propose a European kind of First Amendment because unfortunately, free speech is on trial In Europe today.

It ain't the ideology that poses a threat, it is the believers' attempt to actualize it that threatens us. The European legal system is so different from ours that I' doubt that our concept of free speech can be adapted to fit the European system. The change would be so revolutionary that I doubt that it can be done in the short term.

You know, I watched the film on line and I would call it fearmongering at best, at worst, it really reminded me of a kind of propaganda thats been used to trigger violence and discrimination from Nazi Germany to Rwanda.

If vampirism was real instead of mythological, and vampires were sucking blood, killing people and turning them into vampires, would exposing them be 'fearmongering'? I would call it sounding a warning. Fitna demonstrates the connection between the words of the Qur'an and the action of Muslim mobs stirred up by Muslim clerics. Arabia, North Africa, nearly half of Asia and a considerable part of Southern and Eastern Europe were conquered by Islam in the past. Millions of people were slaughtered in the process. Europe is in danger of demographic conquest as well as terrorist attacks. The interviewer seems to feel that we should keep silent in the face of those imminent dangers.

Well, unfortunately, this is not true, I mean, I didn't use any actors in the movie, the movie was made by radical Muslims themselves. I used certain Surahs and verses from those Surahs and I used real images from 9/11 and the radical Imam who said that he would conquer the whole world and the death of one of my fellow countrymen in Amsterdam. And so, unfortunately I could not have made such a movie about Christianity; I have to say fortunately I could not make such a movie about Christianity or Judaism. Of course it would be ridiculous to say that all Muslims are terrorists, this is nonsense, but unfortunately, most of the terrorists in the world today are Muslims. And the ideology of Islam is really, and I truly believe that, is a threat to our free society.

Islam is terrorism; therefore Muslims are terrorists. In 3:151, Allah said: "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). In 8:12 Allah again declared that he would cast terror. In 33:26 & 59:2, Allah provides examples of his casting terror and describes the results.
Islam's founder bragged about being made victorious by terror, as recorded in Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220. Terrorism is a tactic of Jihad. In 8:60, Allah commands Muslims to build the largest possible arsenal, for the purpose of terrifying their perceived enemies. That is related to 8:39 & 9:29 in which Allah comands Muslims to wage war against pagans, Jews & Christians until only Allah is worshiped and the Jews & Christians are subjugated and extorted.

Islam divides the world into two houses: the house of Islam and the house of war. Dar al-harb is wherever Allah's writ don't run. Dar al-harb must be conquered and subsumed into Dar al-Islam. . Islam is perpetual war; terrorism. Without Muslims it would be totally impotent, just books on a shelf.

But you use the extremes of that and in the film...the extremes of people that have, you know, who have lost all reason and I have to ask you: Is it freedom of speech you are talking about or freedom of hate speech?

There are no extremes; there is only Islam as revealed and exemplified by Moe. Those people depicted in the Islamic promotional videos included in Fitna never had any reason to lose, they were brainwashed with Islam from birth. Jihad, terrorism & genocide are not exceptional, they are standard issue Islam.

The Qur'an is a combination of hate speech and incitement to violence.

No. I am not somebody who is in favor of hate speech at all. I want to open the eyes of the political elite in Europe, and maybe even the United States that Islam is not just another religion it can not be compared with Christianity or Judaism. I believe that Islam is more like a totalitarian ideology that rules all aspects of life; it wants to rule all aspects of society, it doesn't want to integrate in society but it wants to submit. So I think it is more to be compared with other totalitarian ideologies like Communism or Fascism. And, of course, I make a distinction between the people and the ideology. I have nothing against Muslims, I hate nobody and the majority of Muslims in our society are law abiding people like you and me. But I have a lot of fear of the influx of the Islamic totalitarian ideology that at the end of the day, I'm sure, unfortunately, will cost us our freedom if we don't stand up and fight to preserve our own identity.

Maududi described Islam as a revolution. Moe called it a deen: way of life. What is it really? Perpetual war. Islam is perpetual war, propagated for the ostensible purpose of making the entire world submit to Islam; for the real purpose of accruing spoils, tribute, power and sex slaves for Moe and his successors. You who doubt this fatal fact need to read the Qur'an & hadith to comprehend objective factual reality. The parts you need to read have been concentrated in "Islam's mercenary Mission"; read it and follow the links to the source documents.

Muslims are here to dominate; to take over and subjugate us, not to assimilate. They intend to force us to submit. Rational and informed lovers of liberty have something against Muslims: Islam. Islam imposes on Muslims a demonic mandate to conquer the entire world and confers upon them a license to kill, rape, enslave and pillage, open season with no bag limit. Participation in Jihad is the only guarantee a Muslim has of not being condemned to eternal damnation. Being killed in Jihad is the only guarantee a Muslim has of obtaining one of the best seats in Paradise.

You know, moderate Muslims in the United States and beyond -- they don't like the extremists either; they don't like the calls to kill non-believers as they are called in the terminology that you quoted. Have you ever thought about joining hands with them to fight the extremism rather than attacking their faith?

Extremists are a figment of your imagination. There are believers and there are hypocrites, whose Islam goes no deeper than their throats. Allah tests them by Jihad to determine which is which. What you call extremism is the doctrine of their faith; its fundamental core tenets. No Muslim can abjure the ayat which command perpetual warfare, terrorism & genocide. To do so is tantamount to apostasy, the penalty for which is immediate death. If you don't believe this or can't comprehend it, then you need to sample Islamic law. Don't worry, the vital parts have been extracted from the 1200 page book and documented for your reading displeasure.

• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-0.html Jihad defined as making war on kuffar.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-1.html The communal obligation to attack kuffar at least once each year.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-8.html The caliph makes war on Jews... codification of 9:29.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-9.html The caliph fights all other people... codification of 8:39.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO25-9.html The eighth duty of subordinate rulers: to undertake Jihad.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO11-5.html Restrictions on dhimmis.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO11-10.html Acts which violate Dhimma, subjecting the violator to the death penalty.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-13.html Women & children enslaved by reason of capture.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO8-7.html List of acts entailing apostasy.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO8-2.html Penalty for Apostasy.

So, like I said before, sir, I am not against--I don't have a problem with Muslims as persons and of course I acknowledge the fact that there are persons who call themselves .....

That is pandering to political correctness; it ain't a good sign.

But wouldn't you admit that the film Fitna is an assault; an attack on the Qur'an and on and the verses in it?

The question implies that there is something wrong about challenging and exposing evil.

Of course, but the Qur'an, according to me, is a fascist book, so my aim is to attack and to expose the real nature of the Quran.

Have you read some of the passages in the Old Testament?

That is the standard diversionary attack: argumentum tu-quoque: "You're one, too!". It belongs in the elementary schoolyard, not in a serious interview about a live and death issue of existential conflict.

Of course I did, and, as you know, the Old testament and I know--everybody knows that passages of the book [unintelligible] and you know, that after the more harsh parts of the Old testament there was a New Testament and the New Testament was more moderate and Christianity went to a place of enlightenment and separation of church and state. And, unfortunately, there is no new Qur'an. I would be very much in favor if the Muslims would get rid all the violent passages from the Qur'an--get rid of it, tear it out of the Qur'an and build it a new, more moderate Islam ...

Muslims can't get rid of the violent passages, because they are Allah's perfected, immutable word, any attempt to alter his word earns the editor a place in Hell fire.

Should all of the violence in the Old Testament and all the calls to kill people and slaughter them--should that also be eliminated; should Christians today and Jews go back and purge their books?

The diversionary attack is repeated, in different terms. The Hebrew genocide mandate expired with the conquest of Canaan. It has no modern validity. Christ did not issue any genocide edicts. There is no New Testament equivalent of Al-Anfal 67.

No, like I said...

No? Just the Muslims...

The interviewer persists in postulating a false equivalence between Christianity and Islam.

Like I said, The Old Testament was followed by a more moderate New Testament whereas we have not seen because Muslims believe its the word of Allah and it can not be criticized there has not been and there probably will not be a new Qur'an and at the same time we have in the world no problem with Christians or Jews with few exceptions, of course out there we have a problem, and all over the world, with the ideology of hatred which is called Islam.

Islam is an ideology of supremacism, genocidal conquest and domination.

The movie Fitna is still available on line. The Qur'an quotes used in Fitna and Wilders' address to the Dutch Parliament are documented in this blog post.

Sphere: Related Content

Media Won't 'Get Islam Right'~We Will

A new post at Logan's Warning alerted me to a post on Islam Online titled "Media should get Islam right" under the byline of Hind Al-Subai Al-Idrisi .
The post pulls many of the standard strings of al-taqeyya. If the media would "get Islam right", they would be subjected to fatwas, threats, boycotts and litigation. Those of us who do not make our living by the word have a greater license to be accurate and honest. I have therefore extracted the most egregious lies from Hind's stream of malignant malarkey and will expose them below.

Rabat - Given the amount of violence and instability in countries with Muslim majorities, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, some people mistakenly assume the violence stems from Islamic teachings, when in fact Islam does not condone such actions. The media does not help the matter, often focusing on the activities of terrorists who claim to be Muslims, instead of identifying these individuals as criminals and shedding light on the true essence of Islam.

The internecine violence between Sunni & Shi'ia is, technically, un-Islamic conduct, forbidden by Allah & Moe. Surah An-Nisa' 92 & 93 make this fact abundantly clear.

• 4:92. It is not for a believer to kill a believer ...
• 4:93. And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell to abide therein, and the Wrath and the Curse of Allâh are upon him, and a great punishment is prepared for him.

The paragraph cited above serves as a distraction, to divert our attention away from the real issue: Jihad, which is defined in Islamic law as "to war against non-Muslims" A similar, and more complete definition and explanation are provided in the translator's footnote to 2:190. The purpose of Jihad is to establish Islam and make it dominant.

Jihad is made mandatory for Muslims in Surah Al-Baqarah 2:216. Warfare against pagans & atheists is commanded in Surah Al-Anfal 8:39. Warfare against Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians is commanded in Surah At-Taubah 9:29. Those imperatives are codified in Shari'ah.

• The caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians....
• The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim...

Those are not anachronisms; Allah's Jihad imperatives have no expiration date. Sunan Abu Dawud 14.2526 makes this fact clear.

• ...jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist)....

The media shows Muslim terrorists with guns performing prayers but rarely associates terms like terrorist, fanatic and fundamentalist with any other religious group.

Is terrorism a sacrament of any other religion? Which scripture contains functional equivalents of these gems of holiness?

• 3:151. We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, ...
• 8:12. ...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." ...
• 8:60. Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of God and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom God doth know.... [Abdullah Yusuf Ali]
• 33:26. ...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. ...

Did Jesus Christ or the founder of any other religion brag about victory through terrorism?

• ...Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. ...
• ...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. ...
  

The vast majority of Muslims are peace loving and coexist harmoniously with those around them; they would say that the core of Islam is tolerance, co-existence and respect for all religions. In fact, Prophet Muhammad was known for his superior manners, merciful demeanor and tolerance toward all people, regardless of their race or religion.

Three cheers for the "vast majority of Muslims"; they are not the root of the problem. Believers are another matter, as Surah Al-Hujuratt 49:15 and Al-Anfal 2-8 reveal.

• 8:2. The believers are only those who, when Allâh is mentioned, feel a fear in their hearts and when His Verses (this Qur'ân) are recited unto them, they (i.e. the Verses) increase their Faith; and they put their trust in their Lord (Alone);
  8:3. Who perform As-Salât (Iqâmat­as­Salât) and spend out of that We have provided them.
  8:4. It is they who are the believers in truth. For them are grades of dignity with their Lord, and Forgiveness and a generous provision (Paradise).
  8:5. As your Lord caused you (O Muhammad ) to go out from your home with the truth, and verily, a party among the believers disliked it;
  8:6. Disputing with you concerning the truth after it was made manifest, as if they were being driven to death, while they were looking (at it).
  8:7. And (remember) when Allâh promised you (Muslims) one of the two parties (of the enemy i.e. either the army or the caravan) that it should be yours, you wished that the one not armed (the caravan) should be yours, but Allâh willed to justify the truth by His Words and to cut off the roots of the disbelievers (i.e. in the battle of Badr).
  8:8. That He might cause the truth to triumph and bring falsehood to nothing, even though the Mujrimûn (disbelievers, polytheists, sinners, criminals, etc.) hate it.
• 49:15. Only those are the believers who have believed in Allâh and His Messenger, and afterward doubt not but strive with their wealth and their lives for the Cause of Allâh. Those! They are the truthful.

Spend, strive and go out are euphemisms for Jihad. If you doubt this fact, visit http://www.quranbrowser.com/ search for those terms and examine the context in which they are used. 8:1 & 8:7 are sufficient to establish the connection between the second ayeh and Jihad. Those who do not enthusiastically participate in Jihad are not believers, they are hypocrites

The quote above contains three egregious lies: tolerance, respect and co-existence. Anyone who asserts that those values are the core of Islam is either an ignorant fool or an accursed liar of the lowest order.

I took care of the co-existence deception when I cited the ayat which command Muslims to wage war against non-Muslims. Co-existence and perpetual warfare are not compatible, they are mutually exclusive.

The tolerance deception falls to the same evidence. War is not toleration. But there is more, found in Surah Al-Imran 3:85.

• 3:85. And whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.
  

The respect deception falls to similar evidence found in Surah Al-Baiyyinah 98:6, Surah Al-Taubah 9:30 and Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387.

• 98:6. Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islâm, the Qur'ân and Prophet Muhammad ) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikûn will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.

• 9:30. And the Jews say: 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allâh. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allâh's Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!
• Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
  Narrated Anas bin Malik:
  Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."
  

Our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims and we have no rights until we become Muslims. Declaring open season on us is hardly a token of respect, tolerance & co-existence.

There are many verses in the Qur’an that support this message of peaceful coexistence and harmony. Among the basic features of Islam is freedom of religion and non-compulsion: “Let there be no compulsion in religion” (2:256) and “If it had been the Lord’s will, they would all have believed – all who are on earth. Wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will to believe?” (10:99).

"No compulsion in religion" does not mesh with "And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]". The two are polar opposites. The conflict can only be resolved by the science of Naskh.

• 2:106. Whatever a Verse (revelation) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allâh is able to do all things?
  

Newer revelations abrogate earlier revelations. Which came first, 2:256 or 8:39? Surah Al-Baqarah was #87 in sequence of revelation and Surah Al-Taubah was #88. [http://www.masjidtucson.org/quran/chapters_chronological_sequence.html] 2:256 has been abrogated, it is null and void. But I have further proof. Surah Al-Imran was # 89 in sequence of revelation. Examine 3:110 and Sahih Bukhari 6.60.80, which explains its meaning.

• 3:110. You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh - and rebellious against Allâh's Command).
• The Verse:--"You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind." means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.
  

If dragging us with chains on our necks is not compulsion, what is?

When the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) established the first Muslim community in Mecca, he guaranteed freedom of religion, the sanctity of the human soul, and the right to security for non-Muslims, including Christians and Jews – the “People of the Book”, as they’re referred to in the Qur’an. They were privy to the same rights and subject to the same duties as Muslims, and were granted protection from outside threats.

What Moe tried to do was recruit the Jews & Christians into Islam, and when they rejected him, he attacked and plundered them. His military career began with raids on camel caravans returning to Mecca. As his army grew larger, fed by the spoils from those raids, he turned against the local Jewish population. His extortion letter to and attack on the Jews at the Khaibar Oasis [and 4.52.143]are exemplary.

The egregious assertions of sanctity and equality have already been dealt with above, completely disproved by reference to Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387. You have already discovered, if you followed the links immediately above, that Islam sold protection from itself. Note the reference to jizya in 9:29.

The malignant malarkey about "freedom of religion" is best disproved by reference to Shari'ah. Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 11.5 lists several restrictions imposed on Jews & Christians under Islamic domination.

• Forbidden to:
• ring church bells
• display crosses
• recite the Torah or Evangel aloud
• make public display of funerals or feasts
• build new churches.

The teachings of Islam encourage acquaintance and communication among all people, as well as the blending among societies: “O mankind! Lo! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another” (49:13).

Allah strictly forbids friendly relations between Muslims and kuffar in the following ayat, from which I will quote one exemplar: 3:118, 4:144, 5:51, 5:57, 60:1 & 60:13.

• 3:118. O you who believe! Take not as (your) Bitânah (advisors, consultants, protectors, helpers, friends, etc.) those outside your religion (pagans, Jews, Christians, and hypocrites) since they will not fail to do their best to corrupt you. They desire to harm you severely. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse. Indeed We have made plain to you the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses) if you understand.
  
  

A similar ayeh serves as one of the foundation stones of al-taqeyya. I have added emphasis to make the critical clause stand out.

• 3:28. Let not the believers take the disbelievers as Auliyâ (supporters, helpers, etc.) instead of the believers, and whoever does that will never be helped by Allâh in any way, except if you indeed fear a danger from them. And Allâh warns you against Himself (His Punishment), and to Allâh is the final return.
  

Surah An-Nahl 16:106 is another foundation stone of Islamic dissimulation.

• 16:106. Whoever disbelieved in Allâh after his belief, except him who is forced thereto and whose heart is at rest with Faith but such as open their breasts to disbelief, on them is wrath from Allâh, and theirs will be a great torment.
  
  

Ibn Kathir's Tafsir quotes a hadith allegedly from Bukhari, which is not found in the collection at USC-MSA.

• ...For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' Al-Bukhari said that Al-Hasan said, "The Tuqyah is allowed until the Day of Resurrection....

Because of the Islamic practices of dissimulation and obfuscation, it is necessary to check their references and search out the conflicting ayat & hadith which disprove them. Only ignorant fools will accept statements by politicians and Muslims at face value. Yet Another Qur'an Browser, to which I link ayat, displays a table of ten parallel translations. USC-MSA displays parallel translations by Pickthall, Shakir & Yusuf Ali. The same site has four of the six canonical hadith collections. You can use the navigation links on its pages to access them. The King Fahd Complex displays the Hilali & Khan translation with their footnotes. You can search and read Reliance of the Traveller, the all purpose handbook of Shari'ah at Scribid. Ibn Kathir's Tafsir displays the Arabic text of the Qur'an, an English translation and the parallel ayat & ahadith which explain its meaning A search engine for the tafsir is available at http://www.qtafsir.com/

Links to on line texts, search engines, texts you can download and links to many of my blog posts are available at http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/ .

Sphere: Related Content