Obama’s Taqqiya Unravels

Barack Hussein Obama at the UN: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”  No, Mr. President, the future must not belong to jihadists who want to kill us nor to those who continue to lie to us about ‘the religion of peace’!

 

 

By Nonie Darwish Via The American Thinker

I  have never entertained the idea that Obama was a Muslim and always believed he  was a socialist. But Obama’s behavior over the last four years regarding Islam  has convinced me that Obama has a Socialist/Islamic centered worldview — a  combination that is not uncommon in many parts of the Muslim world.

Having  been a journalist in Egypt for six years in the seventies, I have witnessed  socialism with an Islamic twist to be a popular political ideology, especially  amongst Arab journalists and intellectuals. Socialism, and even communism, have  managed to survive in the ruthless Islamic political system as an alternative to  full-fledged Sharia. The two ideologies have blended together in cases including  the Baath Party in Syria and Iraq and socialist regimes in Egypt and Yemen. One  major difference between the two ideologies is that Islam uses Allah, while  socialism uses atheism, to fight the God of Christianity. Free democracies, such  as the United States, are alien to Islam and socialism both because they regard  government as a servant of the people and hold that human rights are granted by  God and not by government or the code of Sharia.

Both  Sharia and socialism are united in their envy of Western society and need to change it. That is why Obama has become the savior of both Islam and  socialism. He embodies both ideologies. The claim that Obama is a Christian was  a silly joke, but a necessary lie for the greater cause of changing America to  fit the goals of both creeds.

Obama  became the One, the savior of both Islam and socialists. To do that,  Obama had to deny who he really was, which explains why his actions and words  have never added up. At the recent Alfred E. Smith Catholic Charity dinner  speech, Obama did not seem to be just kidding when he said that Romney uses his  middle name Mitt and “I wish I could use my middle name.” Obama was referring,  of course, to his Islamic middle name of Hussein. In Obama’s mind, he was not  ashamed for having deceived America — he blamed America for putting him in the  position of having to deny his true pride in his middle name.

That  brings us to an important discovery by WND in an article by Jerome Corsi titled:  “Obama’s Ring: ‘There is no God But  Allah’.” The article featured close-up photos of a ring  still worn by Obama today in the White House, one that he has worn since his  visit to Pakistan as a young man. The ring, which later also became his wedding  ring, has very tiny and discrete Arabic calligraphy that means nothing to  Americans, but to Arabic-speaking people like myself and Dr. Mark Gabriel, means  quite a lot. Such Islamic calligraphy is commonly found throughout the gold markets of the Muslim world. I am not a  writing expert, but I can clearly see on the ring the word ‘La Ilaha IllaAllah.  (“There is no god but god.”)’ Such a sentence in Arabic has a lot of the letters  A and L which in Arabic are simply a straight line like the number  one.

The  only explanation for Obama’s exciting ring secret is that he is a closet Muslim  and feels that he can serve Islam best if he denies his being a Muslim for the  purpose of a higher aspiration to serve the Muslim world from the White House,  in Islamic terms the “higher jihad.” Obama has no problem whatsoever in lying  for the sake of “Hope and Change” since lying about being a Muslim in a majority  non-Muslim country is allowed under Islam. Lying for the purpose of jihad (known  as “taqqiya”) is not only allowed, but an obligation to be proud of and even  serves as a reason to blame the enemies of Islam for one’s lies. Sharia law  states: “Lying is obligatory if the purpose is obligatory.” Muslim clerics have  no problem in lying not just to the non-Muslim world but even to the Muslim  masses, since Islam also allows Muslims to lie in order to bring Muslims  together in harmony and friendship.

That  brings us to the current debacle in Libya, which can only be understood if we  grasp Obama’s worldviews as regards the “Muslim World.” Like the so-called  ‘moderate’ Muslims, Obama insists Islam in and of itself has nothing to do with  terrorism and blames previous American foreign policy (along with Israel), for  Islamic anger. Obama narrowed down the problem of Islamism to Al Qaeda while  embracing other Islamic groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, as moderate. In  the process, Obama dismissed the Brotherhood’s long history of terror, which in  fact gave birth to Al Qaeda and hundreds of other terror groups. Nothing in  Obama’s world is the fault of Islam, which is why he ordered the Fort Hood  massacre to be classified as “workplace  violence” and not Islamic terrorism.

Obama  believes that he uniquely understands the Muslim world and will bring about a  new era of peace with Islam, at least during his administration. There are  strong rumors in Egypt that when Obama met with the Egyptian foreign minister,  he confided in him that he was a Muslim and that he would assist the Islamic  cause in America after he passes the Health Care Bill.

But  as president of the United States, Obama was caught in a quagmire between  protecting American lives and appearing loyal to Islam. Placing American Marines  at US consulates in dangerous terror-infested Islamic countries created the  possibility of a bloody confrontation between American security and Islamists.  That would discredit Obama’s attempt to separate Islam from terrorism. Also, if Obama confronted  militant Muslim jihadists in Islamic countries, his entire claim to opening a  new page in American/Islamic relations would fall apart. He would then be no  different from his predecessors, Bush or Reagan.

That  explains why the demands for American security by U.S. ambassador Stevens went  unanswered. Obama did not want to deal with the possibility that American  Marines would shoot at Muslim attackers in order to save American  lives.

According to Sharia, it is a capital crime for  a Muslim individual or leader to shoot at fellow Muslims — even Islamists –  for the purpose of protecting Americans. That would make Obama a violator of  Sharia and an apostate. If Obama considers himself a Muslim and wears an Islamic  ring, then he must have had a very hard time deciding on how to protect the  consulate without killing Muslim attackers. His solution? Settling for the  lesser of two evils: getting Muslims, in the form of Libyan security, to guard  the property and in this way, forcing Muslims to shoot other Muslims in order to  defend the consulate. But that plan was useless because even the Muslim guards  had to follow Sharia, and ran away and left the Americans to be killed rather  than violate Sharia themselves by killing other Muslims. Obama gambled with the  lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others and left them as sacrificial  lambs rather than violate the dictates of sharia.

Read the rest here.

Four Stages of Islamic Conquest

Kasey Jachim:

1. Infiltration (Yep, we have that)
2. Consolidation of Power (Yep, that too)
3. Open War with Leadership & Culture (That’s alive and well in Dearbornistan and coming to a city near you soon…..)
4. Totalitarian Islamic Theocracy (That is their ultimate goal and we are complicit in helping them….)
We need to elect a strong, non-Muslim leader and pray we are not too late!

Originally posted on swissdefenceleague:

     . . 4 Stages of Islamic Conquest: . .

     TAKEN FROM : DEXTER AMERICUS

     The Infidel Your Imam Warned You About

4 Stages of Islamic Conquest:

STAGE 1: INFILTRATION

Muslims begin moving to non-Muslim countries in increasing numbers and the beginning of cultural conflicts are visible, though often subtle.

  • First migration wave to non-Muslim “host” country.
  • Appeal for humanitarian tolerance from the host society.
  • Attempts to portray Islam as a peaceful & Muslims as victims of misunderstanding and racism (even though Islam is not a ‘race’).
  • High Muslim birth rate in host country increase Muslim population.
  • Mosques used to spread Islam and dislike of host country & culture.
  • Calls to criminalize “Islamophobia” as a hate crime.
  • Threatened legal action for perceived discrimination.
  • Offers of “interfaith dialogue” to indoctrinate non-Muslims.

How many nations are suffering from Islamic infiltration? One? A handful? Nearly every nation? The Islamic ‘leadership” of the Muslim Brotherhood and…

View original 1,026 more words

The Basics of Shariah Law – Lt. Gen. (Ret.) W.G. Jerry Boykin

An excellent video explaining why Islam is not a religion but a totalitarian way of life – a theocracy - and should not be protected as a religion under our laws!  He also explains how Sharia law is not compatible with our Constitution.

I agree, Americans need to get informed and involved!  Check out the nearest ACT for America chapter near you!

Muslims from French no-go zones armed with bazookas raiding banks in Switzerland

Via Creeping Sharia

via Original translation: Muslims in France (Dijons) attacking Swiss businesses. | Vlad Tepes.

Muslims in France (Dijons) attacking Swiss businesses.

http://www.nzz.ch/aktuell/startseite/kriminaltouristen-werden-gewalttaetiger_1.17055820.html

The swiss border guard is arming against heavily armed gangs from the french banlieues. These gangs stem mostly from the Lyon banlieue; their members are mostly french nationals of north-african origin. Until now, they have committed their raids mostly in western Switzerland [that is the german swiss term for the country's francophone zone] and in the Ticino [Switzerland's italophone zone].

Jürg Noth, chief of the Schweizerisches Grenzwachtkorps (GWK) [Swiss Border Guard Corps], warns against french tourists in crime raiding banks, clock manufacturers and clock museums in Switzerland. ‘The perpetrators procede each time more violently and inconsiderately’, says he in an interview with ‘NZZ am Sonntag’ [sunday edition of this newspaper - NZZ, or Neue Zürcher Zeitung]. ‘They are armed with assault rifles, submachine guns and even bazookas, and they even use them.’

These gangs stem usually from the banlieues of Lyon; their members are mostly french nationals of north-african origin. Until now, they have carried out their raids mostly in western Switzerland and the Ticino. But now they expand their activities towards north-western Switzerland [meaning: the german-language area towards Basel], continues to say Jürg Noth. ‘Severe raids have augmented in recent months.’ [*)]

Because of growing cross-border crime, the border guard corps now takes new measures: Its staff is being trained especially against the violent gangs, plus assigns additional border guards in western Switzerland and the Ticino. Also, new protective vests, new road blocks and additional video cameras will be purchased. Finally, helicopters and drones will be used more extensively against these tourists in crime [**)]. This way, the GWK could arrest three perpetrators early in may, after having prosecuted them by helicopter into France.

Crime tourism to Switzerland has grown in recent years. In 2009, around 11 300 foreigners not having a permit of sojourn or residence for Switzerland were accused of crimes. In 2101, this figure climbed to 11 900, last year to 12 800. Most perpetrators come from France and Romania. From Romania we usually get so-called skimming gangs; skimming is fraud committed with falsified ATM or credit cards. Also these have grown in recent times; the border guard corps catch at least one such skimming gang per week.’

Note from translator:

This appears to be only the first time that the swiss public is informed about it.

So far, they have used this ‘stasi’ manner mostly against unorthodox swiss citizens and similar people from related nations.

For more information click here.

Legislature approves bill to bar use of Islamic law, other foreign codes, in Kansas courts – ALAC victory!

Via The Washington Post

TOPEKA, Kan. — A bill designed to prevent Kansas courts or government agencies from making decisions based on Islamic or other foreign legal codes has cleared the state Legislature after a contentious debate about whether the measure upholds American values or appeals to prejudice against Muslims.

The Senate approved the bill Friday on a 33-3 vote. The House had approved it, 120-0, earlier in the week. The measure goes next to Republican Gov. Sam Brownback, who hasn’t said whether he’ll sign or veto the measure.

The measure doesn’t specifically mention Shariah law, which broadly refers to codes within the Islamic legal system. Instead, it says that courts, administrative agencies or state tribunals can’t base rulings on any foreign law or legal system that would not grant the parties the same rights guaranteed by state and U.S. constitutions.

But several supporters specifically cited the potential use of Shariah law in Kansas as their concern. Though there are no known cases in which a Kansas judge has based a ruling on Islamic law, supporters of the bill cited a pending case in Sedgwick County in which a man seeking to divorce his wife has asked for property to be divided under a marriage contract in line with Shariah law.The bill’s supporters said it simply ensures that legal decisions will protect long-cherished liberties, such as freedom of speech and religion and the right to equal treatment under the law. Sen. Susan Wagle, a Wichita Republican, said a vote for the legislation is a vote to protect women.

“In this great country of ours and in the state of Kansas, women have equal rights,” Wagle said during the Senate’s debate. “They stone women to death in countries that have Shariah law.”

The bill passed both chambers by wide margins because even some legislators who were skeptical of it believed it was broad and bland enough that it didn’t represent a specific political attack on Muslims.

“We don’t have any intolerance in this bill. Nobody’s stripped of their freedom of religion,” said Sen. Ty Masterson, an Andover Republican. “This is talking about the law — American law, American courts.”

But several senators noted that supporters of the bill have singled out Shariah law in talking about it.

“This bill will put Kansas in a light that says we are intolerant of any other faith,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Tim Owens, an Overland Park Republican who voted against the bill. “I would not be able to look at myself in the mirror in the morning if I didn’t stand up and say I don’t want to be that kind of person and I don’t want to be in a community or a state that is that way.”

Both the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the National Conference of State Legislatures say anti-Shariah proposals have been considered in 20 states, including Kansas. Oklahoma voters approved a ballot initiative in 2010 that specifically mentioned Shariah law, but both a federal judge and a federal appeals court blocked it.

“It is an effort to demonize Islam,” said Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Washington-based council. “As Muslims are seen participating in a positive way in society, that really irritates some people.”

In Kansas, 45 House members, led by Rep. Peggy Mast, an Emporia Republican sponsored a bill aimed at Shariah law last year. The House approved it overwhelmingly, but it stalled in the Senate; this year, the House pushed another version, and pressure built on senators.

Mast had a news conference Thursday to highlight the Sedgwick County case, in which Hussein Hamdeh, a Wichita State University physics professor, filed for a divorce in November 2010 from his wife, Hala.

Their Islamic marriage contract, made in Lebanon, promised her a $5,000 payment should they split. He argued that the contract settled property issues, while Islamic law limited spousal maintenance payments to her to three months. Her attorney said in a court document that following Islamic law would leave her “destitute.”

Hussein Hamdeh’s attorney declined to comment because the case is pending. Hala Hamdeh’s attorney did not return a telephone message seeking comment.

Sen. Garrett Love, a Montezuma Republican, said even if no Kansas court has yet based a decision on foreign legal codes, “That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t still protect Kansans from those foreign laws being used in the future — a future that really may not be that far away.”

But several senators questioned whether the legislation is necessary, arguing Kansas judges and officials already must adhere to the U.S. and state constitutions. Hooper derided it as “an anti-unicorn” bill.

“All it does is increase hostility toward Islam and suspicion of Muslims,” Hooper said.

___

The anti-Sharia law measure is House Sub for SB 79.

Online:

Kansas Legislature: http://www.kslegislature.org

Follow John Hanna on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/apjdhanna

For more information click here.

THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD’S “PROJECT” FOR ISRAEL AND AMERICA

via Discover the Net Works

In 1982 the Muslim Brotherhood, which Islam expert Robert Spencer has called “the parent organization of Hamas and al Qaeda,” adopted a strategic plan known as “The Global Project for Palestine” which laid the groundwork for a terrorist “secret apparatus” that eventually would culminate in the creation of Hamas in December 1987 and the unveiling of the Hamas charter in August 1988. A 14-page plan written in Arabic and dated December 1, 1982, the Project outlined a 12-point strategy to “establish an Islamic government on earth.”

 
What makes the Project so different from the standard Islamist rhetoric (i.e., “Death of America! Death to Israel!” and “Establish the global caliphate!”), is that it represents a flexible, multi-phased, long-term approach to the “cultural invasion” of the West. Calling for the utilization of various tactics, ranging from immigration, infiltration, surveillance, propaganda, protest, deception, political legitimacy and terrorism, the Project has served since its drafting as the Muslim Brotherhood “master plan.” The following tactics and techniques are among the many recommendations made in the Project:

  • Networking and coordinating actions between likeminded Islamist organizations;
  • Avoiding openalliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals to maintain the appearance of “moderation”;
  • Infiltrating and taking over existing Muslim organizations to realign them towards the Muslim Brotherhood’s collective goals;
  • Using deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it does not conflict with Shari’alaw;
  • Avoiding social conflicts with Westerners locally, nationally or globally, that might damage the long-term ability to expand the Islamist powerbase in the West or provoke a backlash against Muslims;
  • Establishing financial networks to fund the work of conversion of the West, including the support of full-time administrators and workers;
  • Conducting surveillance, obtaining data, and establishing collection and data storage capabilities;
  • Putting into place a watchdog system for monitoring Western media to warn Muslims of “international plots fomented against them”;
  • Cultivating an Islamist intellectual community, including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups, and publishing “academic” studies, to legitimize Islamist positions and to chronicle the history of Islamist movements;
  • Developing a comprehensive 100-year plan to advance Islamist ideology throughout the world;
  • Balancing international objectives with local flexibility;
  • Building extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;
  • Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
  • Instrumentally using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;
  • Drafting Islamic constitutions, laws and policies for eventual implementation;
  • Avoiding conflict within the Islamist movements on all levels, including the development of processes for conflict resolution;
  • Instituting alliances with Western “progressive” organizations that share similar goals;
  • Creating autonomous “security forces” to protect Muslims in the West;
  • Inflaming violence and keeping Muslims living in the West “in a jihadframe of mind”;
  • Supporting jihadmovements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;
  • Making the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for Muslims;
  • Adopting the total liberation of Palestine from Israel and the creation of an Islamic state as a keystone in the plan for global Islamic domination;
  • Instigating a constant campaign to incite hatred by Muslims against Jews and rejecting any discussions of conciliation or coexistence with them;
  • Actively creating jihadterror cells within Palestine;
  • Linking the terrorist activities in Palestine with the global terror movement; and
  • Collecting sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support jihad around the world.

As an outgrowth of this Project, in May 1991 the Muslim Brotherhood issued to its ideological allies an explanatory memorandum on “the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.” Explaining that the Brotherhood’s mission was to establish “an effective and … stable Islamic Movement” on the continent, this document outlined a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” for achieving that objective. It stated that Muslims “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands … so that … God’s religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions.” For a comprehensive explanation of this “General Strategic Goal” — and to view profiles of each of the 29 likeminded organizations of “friends” identified by the Muslim Brotherhood in that document — click here.

For more information and articles click here.

H/T swissdefenceleague

“The Project” (A Global Strategy for Islamic Policy) – Eerily similar to “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America”

The following was sent to me by a new friend via the Swissdefenceleague.  Switzerland is undergoing a transformation similar to that in the UK.  Muslim and Islamic factions are trying to take over the government and even want to replace the Swiss national flag.  The following document, found written in French, was sent through Google translator.  Note the date of  “The Project” (A Global Strategy for Islamic Policy) - 12/01/1982!  This is eerily similar to “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America” which was written in May 1991 and discovered during the Holy Land Foundation Trial. There will be more to come – thank you Wilhelm!

In November 2001, European police are investing the luxurious villa of an Islamic bank on the banks of a Swiss lake. They discovered a document kept secret for nearly twenty years: the “Project”. This text, known only to a handful of specialists, describes the clandestine strategy which aims to “establish the kingdom of God on Earth”. All means are good in this world conquest: infiltration of society, propaganda, alliance with the fighters of the Holy War … The “Project” shows a section of hidden history of Islam in the West.

Inspired by the radical ideas of the Muslim Brotherhood, his followers have built in Europe and America a network of mosques, religious centers, charitable institutions pursuing the same goal: to create an ideal society based on the Koran, expand the sphere of Islam and to end the hegemony of Western civilization to the world. Conducted over several months in Europe and the United States, this survey raises important issues for the future of our societies: the Islamists who are really “moderates” who claim to represent Muslims in the West? What ideas do they spread, and with what methods? Rich in exclusive revelations, this book provides specific answers, informed, troubling.

By watching the news, we are able to see the “Project” takes place substantially as planned. Except that people are much more aware than they were the dangers of Islamism and they will abort the “Project”.

The “Project”

The name of Allah the merciful merciful,

12/01/1982

Towards a Global Strategy for Islamic Policy

(Starting points, items, procedures and missions)

This report presents an overview of an international strategy for Islamic policy. According to its guidelines, and in accordance therewith, the Islamic political authorities are developed in different regions. This is, first, to define the starting points of this policy and to articulate the components of each starting point and the most important procedures related to each starting point, we finally suggest some missions, as an example only, may Allah protect us. Below, the main starting points of this policy:

1. Know the terrain and adopt a scientific methodology for planning and implementation.

2. Get serious in work.

3. Reconcile international engagement and local flexibility.

4. Reconcile political engagement and the need to avoid isolation on the one hand, continuing education and institutional work of generations on the other.

5. Work to establish the Islamic state, along with progressive efforts to control local power centers through institutional work.

6. Work with loyalty alongside Islamic groups and institutions in various fields by agreeing on common ground in order to “cooperate on areas of agreement and to set aside areas of disagreement.”

7. Accept the principle of temporary cooperation between Islamic movements and national movements in general areas and areas of agreement such as the fight against colonialism, preaching and the Jewish state without having to form alliances. This requires, however, limited contacts between certain leaders, case by case, as these contacts do not violate the law. However, they do not pledge allegiance or trust them, knowing that the Islamic movement must be the cause of the initiatives and orientations taken.

8. Mastering the art of the possible, a provisional perspective, without abusing the basic principles, knowing that the teachings of Allah are all applicable. Must order the blâmable1 and forbidding, while giving a documented opinion. But we should not seek a confrontation with our adversaries, locally or globally, which would be disproportionate and could lead to attacks against the dawa2 or his disciples.

9. Continuously build the strength of the worldwide Islamic dawa and support movements engaged in jihad in the Muslim world, to varying degrees and as much as possible.

10. Helping monitoring systems many and varied, in many places, to gather information and adopt an informed and effective communication, able to serve the global Islamic movement. Indeed, surveillance, policy decisions and effective communication are complementary.

11. Adopt the Palestinian cause on a global Islamic, on a political level and through jihad because it is the keystone of the renaissance of the Arab world today.

12. Learn to use self-criticism and permanent evaluation of worldwide Islamic policy and its objectives, its content and its procedures to improve. It is a duty and a necessity according to the precepts of Sharia.

[1] Concept cited in the Koran, became one of the central aims of the brotherhood: it was also translated as “good order and hunt down the evil.”

[2] Dawa: literally means, call, invocation, exhortation, prayer. The term here refers to the work of the Brothers to propagate Islam.

The first starting point is to know and adopt a scientific methodology for planning and implementation.

Elements:

Know the factors influential in the world, be they Islamic forces, opposing forces or neutral forces.

Use the scientific and technological means for planning, organization, implementation and monitoring.

Procedures:

Establish observatories to gather information, store it for all purposes, be used as appropriate based on modern technology.

Create centers of study and research and produce studies on the political dimension of the Islamic movement.

Suggested tasks:

Draw a map of the doctrines in the world to have a global vision of the world a hundred years to the present and analyze the current situation in light of this configuration taking into account the changes and provided befallen.

Draw a map of the doctrines of the Muslim world.

Draw a map of Islamic movements in the Muslim world.

To study political science and various fields in successive Islamic, which more particularly on current events.

Make a scientific study that draws up the history of contemporary Islamic movements and use.

The second starting point: Be serious about the work

Elements:

Clarity of the main objectives of the dawa in the eyes of all temporary and clarity of purpose to harness the energies and channel them and guide them.

Efforts are sufficient workers in the service of Islam and combine these efforts into a single objective.

Is sufficient time.

Spend the money wisely.

Procedures:

Harnessing the energies of workers in the service of dawa, each at his level (the criterion of effectiveness is that everyone should set about the task he is booked).

Mobilize the maximum amount of followers and leaders.

Raise money efficiently, control expenses and invest in the public interest.

Suggested tasks:

Conduct a survey of the workers of Islam (the right man in the right place).

Establish schedules with the schedules of workers and specialists and use these efforts appropriately and timely (adequate effort at the right time).

Commitment of economic institutions adequate to support the cause financially.

The third point of departure: Reconciling international commitment and local flexibility.

Elements:

Define the general guidelines that everyone must follow.

Leave a margin so that there is sufficient flexibility for local issues that do not oppose the general lines of the Islamic political world.

Procedures:

The Movement, worldwide, defines the areas and issues of general Islamic requiring the commitment of all according to previously defined priorities.

Local management defines the local issues that are within its powers, according to the principle of flexibility and according to priorities defined in advance.

Suggested tasks:

Commitment to an Islamic world total liberation of Palestine and the creation of a Muslim state, mission rests with the world.

Establish a dialogue with local people working for the cause in the political world of the Movement. This is the local management to define the contours of this dialogue.

The fourth point of departure: Reconciling political commitment and need to avoid isolation on the one hand, continuing education and institutional work of generations on the other.

Elements:

Political freedom in each country depending on local conditions, without participating in a process of decision making that is contrary to the texts of the Shariah.

Invite everyone to participate in parliamentary councils, municipal, union and other institutions whose boards are chosen by the people in the interest of Islam and Muslims.

Continue to educate individuals and generations and to ensure the training of specialists in various fields according to a previously studied.

Build social, economic, scientific and in the health field and enter the field of social services to be in contact with the people and to serve him through Islamic institutions.

Procedures:

Study the different political environments and the likelihood of success in each country.

Plan missions of specialized studies that look at the few areas such as communication, history of Islam, etc..

Do feasibility studies covering various institutions and create according to priorities established in each country.

Suggested tasks:

To study on experiences of Islamic political and learn from it.

Islamic political advise on pressing issues.

Support of important local issues in an Islamic issues such as workers, unions, etc..

Create a number of economic institutions, social and in the field of health and education, according to the means available to serve the people within an Islamic framework.

The fifth point of departure: Work to establish the Islamic state, along with progressive efforts to control local power centers through institutional work.

Elements:

Channel thought, education and work to establish an Islamic government on earth.

Influence of local power centers and global service of Islam.

Procedures:

Prepare a scientific study on the feasibility of establishing the rule of Allah throughout the world according to established priorities.

To study the local power centers, and global opportunities of placing them under influence.

Conduct a study on modern concepts of support for Islamic dawa and Islamic law, particularly on the influential men in the state and country.

Suggested tasks:

Write an Islamic Constitution in light of efforts to date.

Write Islamic laws, civil, etc..

Choose a location and put it in the forefront of our priorities in order to establish an Islamic power and concentrating all our efforts.

Work in various influential institutions and use them in the service of Islam.

Use the work of specialized Islamic institutions, economic, social, etc..

The sixth point of departure: Working with loyalty to the service groups and Islamic institutions in various fields by agreeing on common ground in order to “cooperate on areas of agreement and set aside areas of disagreement.”

Elements:

Islamic coordinate work in one direction to allow it to lay the foundations for growth of Muslim society and dedicate the power of Allah on earth.

Each work according to his abilities in the field he chooses, and that mastery is important is loyalty and coordination of efforts.

Procedures:

Studying the reality of Islamic movements, assess the experience to begin a collaboration between them.

Avoid creating new Islamic movements in a country that already has not even a movement, serious and comprehensive.

Suggested tasks:

Coordinate the work of all those working for Islam, in each country, and establish a quality contact with them, whether individuals or groups.

Reduce the differences that exist between workers of Islam and seek to resolve conflicts according to sharia.

The seventh point of departure:

Accept the principle of temporary cooperation between Islamic movements and national movements in general areas and areas of agreement such as the fight against colonialism, preaching and the Jewish state without having to form alliances. This requires, however, limited contacts between certain leaders, case by case, as these contacts do not violate Sharia. However, they do not pledge allegiance or trust them, knowing that the Islamic movement must be the cause of the initiatives and orientations taken.

Elements:

Combine efforts against the forces of evil supreme under the principle that we must “fight evil with a lesser evil.”

Circumscribe the bases together leaders or a limited number of individuals to maximize profit and minimize any inconvenience.

Work in this context to achieve the objectives previously defined by the dawa.

Procedures:

Do a study to assess the areas that have been a mutual aid between Islamic movements and other movements and learn from it.

Study areas that can be coordinated with the other and define the contours.

Studying the thinking and plans of other movements.

Suggested tasks:

Each country should explore opportunities in the future, strengthen internal collaboration.

The eighth point of departure:

Mastering the art of the possible, a provisional perspective, without abusing the basic principles, knowing that the teachings of Allah are all applicable. Must order the proper and forbidding the wrong, while giving a documented opinion. But we should not seek a confrontation with our adversaries, locally or globally, which would be disproportionate and could lead to attacks against the dawa or its disciples.

Elements:

Evaluate the education of individuals and not resort to overly typical modern education does not match the reality, which lacks flexibility and can have serious consequences such as the confrontation between individuals to a single note or a simple failure.

Giving a documented opinion and scientific form of speeches, news releases or books that deal with important events that saw our Ummah. (Tr. Muslim community).

Prevent the movement faces major confrontations that might encourage his opponents to give him a fatal blow.

Procedures:

Conduct a study to evaluate the experiences of Islamic movements in order to avoid fatal errors.

Changing methods of educating people so that they are both copies and they are realistic and true to the principles, while granting sufficient flexibility to enable to face reality.

Suggested tasks:

Changing the orientation programs for enthusiasts and conduct an awareness on the basis of past experience.

Prepare individuals in ways educational modernization.

The ninth point of departure:

Continuously build the strength of the Islamic dawa and support movements engaged in jihad in the Muslim world, to varying degrees and as much as possible.

Elements:

Protect the dawa with the force necessary to ensure safety at the local and global.

Contact while engaged in jihad movement anywhere on the planet, and with Muslim minorities, and building bridges, as necessary, to support and establish collaboration.

Keep jihad alive in the Ummah.

Procedures:

Build an autonomous security force to protect the dawa and its disciples locally and globally.

To study movements engaged in jihad in the Muslim world and among Muslim minorities to know them better.

Suggested tasks:

Building bridges between movements engaged in jihad in the Muslim world and among Muslim minorities, and support them as much as possible, as part of a collaboration.

The tenth point of departure:

Helping monitoring systems many and varied, in many places, to gather information and adopt an informed and effective communication, able to serve the global Islamic movement. Indeed, surveillance, policy decisions and effective communication are complementary.

Elements:

Political decisions to gather important information and accurate.

Disseminating Islamic politics to make it widely and effectively covered by media.

Procedures:

Create a modern monitoring system, through advanced technology (which may complement the observatory suggested).

Create a media center effectively and seriously.

Suggested tasks:

Warning Muslims about the dangers that threaten them and international plots fomented against them.

Give an opinion on current issues and future issues.

The eleventh point of departure:

Adopt the Palestinian cause on a global Islamic, on a political level and through jihad because it is the cornerstone of the rebirth of the Arab world today.

Elements:

Give notice, under an Islamic Perspective, on all subjects, solutions, problems concerning the Palestinian issue based on the precepts of Islam.

Prepare the community of believers for jihad for the liberation of Palestine. We can lead the Ummah in achieving the purposes of the Islamic movement especially if the victory is back, Allah willing.

Create the nucleus of jihad in Palestine, however modest it and feed it to keep this flame that illuminates the only path to liberation of Palestine, and for the Palestinian cause remains alive until the release.

Procedures:

Raise enough funds to continue the jihad.

Do a survey on the situation of Muslims and the enemy in occupied Palestine.

Suggested tasks:

Conduct studies of the Jews, enemies of Muslims, and oppression inflicted by these enemies to our brothers in occupied Palestine, in addition to preaching and publications.

Fight against the sentiment of capitulation among the Ummah, to refuse defeatist solutions, and show that conciliation with the Jews would undermine our movement and its history.

Do comparative studies between the Crusades and Israel, and victory will be on the side of Islam.

Create cells of jihad in Palestine, to support them they cover all of occupied Palestine.

Link between the mujahideen in Palestine and those found in Muslim lands.

Maintaining a sense of resentment against Jews and refuse all coexistence.

The twelfth point of departure:

Learn to use self-criticism and permanent evaluation of worldwide Islamic policy and its objectives, its content, its procedures to improve. It is a duty and a necessity according to the precepts of Islamic Sharia.

Elements:

Make a constructive self-criticism to avoid pitfalls.

Conduct an ongoing assessment on a scientific basis that allows to build policies.

Improve Islamic policies taking advantage of past experiences must be a clear objective and critical.

Procedures:

Assess current practices and take advantage of past experiences.

Ask officials in the various countries and to individuals in each country to give their opinions on the directions, methods and results.

Suggested Missions:

Produce an official document of the Islamic political world.

Sensitize countries, officials and individuals with this policy.

Begin to implement this policy, to annually evaluate and improve it if necessary.

(This should send a chill up your spine – the movement is global and determined at any cost!)

Top ten reasons why sharia is bad for all societies

By James Arlandson via The American Thinker (Original article August 13, 2005)

Traditional Muslims who understand the Quran and the hadith believe that sharia (Islamic law) expresses the highest and best goals for all societies. It is the will of Allah.

But is Islam just in its laws that Muhammad himself practiced and invented?

 

This article says no for ten verifiable reasons.

Here are four points you must read, before reading this article:

First, sometimes these ten points quote the Quran or omit it; sometimes they quote the hadith (reports of Muhammad’s words and actions outside of the Quran) or omit it. This is done only to keep down the length of the article. No one should be fooled into believing that these harsh and excessive laws were invented in the fevered imagination of extremists who came long after Muhammad. These harsh and excessive laws come directly from the founder of Islam in his Quran and in his example in the hadith.

Second, each of these ten reasons has a back—up article (or more) that is long and well documented with quotations and references to the Quran, the hadith, and classical legal opinions. The supporting articles also examine the historical and literary context of each Quranic verse. If the readers, especially critics, wish to challenge one or all of these ten reasons, or if they simply doubt them, they should click on the supporting articles. They will see that Muhammad himself actually laid down these excessive punishments and policies.

Third, it must be pointed out that these harsh laws are not (or should not be) imposed outside of an Islamic court of law. Careful legal hurdles must be passed before the punishments are carried out. However, even in that case, it will become clear to anyone who thinks clearly that these punishments and policies are excessive by their very nature, and excess is never just, as Aristotle taught us in his Nicomachean Ethics.

Fourth, in each of the lengthy supporting article (or articles), a Biblical view on these infractions of moral law (or sometimes civil law or personal injuries) is presented. One of the reasons we all sense that these Islamic punishments are harsh and excessive is that Christianity has also filled the globe. Even if one is not a Christian or is only a nominal Christian, he or she has breathed deeply of Christianity by virtue of laws and customs or even driving by churches. New Testament Christianity, when properly understood and followed, offers humanity dignity.

‘Islam’ in this article stands for Muhammad, the earliest Muslims, and classical legal scholars.

Here are the top ten reasons why sharia or Islamic law is bad for all societies.

10. Islam commands that drinkers and gamblers should be whipped.

In 2001, Iranian officials sentenced three men to flogging not only for illicit sex (see reason no. nine), but also for drinking alcohol.

In 2005, in Nigeria a sharia court ordered that a drinker should be caned eighty strokes.

In 2005, in the Indonesian province of Aceh, fifteen men were caned in front of a mosque for gambling. This was done publicly so all could see and fear. Eleven others are scheduled to undergo the same penalty for gambling.

After going through two previous confusing stages before coming down hard on drinkers and gamblers, the Quran finally prohibits alcohol and gambling in Sura 5:90—91; they do not prescribe the punishment of flogging, but the hadith does. A poor ‘criminal’ was brought to Muhammad who became angry:

The Prophet felt it hard (was angry) and ordered all those who were present in the house, to beat him [the drinker dragged into Muhammad's presence]. (Bukhari, Punishments, nos. 6774—6775)

Thus, we see no offer of help for the alcoholic when he is dragged before Muhammad and his followers. Why does Muhammad not offer rehabilitation? Why does he immediately go to corporal punishment?

The later classical legal rulings follow the Quran and the hadith, so we do not need to examine them here.

It is sometimes argued that Islamic countries are pure, whereas the West is decadent. No one can argue with this latter claim, but are Islamic countries pure? The Supplemental Material, below, demonstrates that Islamic countries still have drinking and gambling in them.

Here is the article  that supports this tenth point and that analyzes the confusing Quranic verses on drinking and gambling. It analyzes the hadith and later legal rulings.

9. Islam allows husbands to hit their wives even if the husbands merely fear highhandedness in their wives.

In 2004, Rania al—Baz, who had been beaten by her husband, made her ordeal public to raise awareness about violence suffered by women in the home in Saudi Arabia.

Saudi television aired a talk show that discussed this issue. Scrolling three—fourths of the way down the link, the readers can see an Islamic scholar holding up sample rods that husbands may use to hit their wives.

The Quran says:

4:34 . . . If you fear highhandedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great. (MAS Abdel Haleem, the Qur’an, Oxford UP, 2004)

The hadith says that Muslim women in the time of Muhammad were suffering from domestic violence in the context of confusing marriage laws:

Rifa’a divorced his wife whereupon ‘AbdurRahman bin Az—Zubair Al—Qurazi married her. ‘Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah’s Apostle came, ‘Aisha said, “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!” (Bukhari)

This hadith shows Muhammad hitting his girl—bride, Aisha, daughter of Abu Bakr: Muslim no. 2127:

‘He [Muhammad] struck me [Aisha] on the chest which caused me pain.’

It is claimed that Islamic societies have fewer incidents of fornication and adultery because of strict laws or customs, for example, women wearing veils over their faces or keeping separate from men in social settings. But these results of fewer incidents of sexual ‘crimes’ may have unanticipated negative effects in other areas, such as the oppression of women. Generally, sharia restricts women’s social mobility and rights, the more closely sharia is followed. For example, in conservative Saudi Arabia women are not allowed to drive cars.  In Iran, the law oppresses women. For example, women’s testimony counts half that of men, and far more women than men are stoned to death for adultery.

Here is the supporting article for the ninth point. It has a long list of different translations of Sura 4:34, in order to resolve confusion over this verse, circulating around the web. This longer article has many links that demonstrate the oppression of women under Islamic law (scroll down to ‘Further discussion’).

8. Islam allows an injured plaintiff to exact legal revenge—physical eye for physical eye.

In 2003, in Saudi Arabia a man had two teeth extracted under the law of retaliation.

In 2003, a court in Pakistan sentenced a man to be blinded by acid after he carried out a similar attack on his fianc�e.

In 2005, an Iranian court orders a man’s eye to be removed for throwing acid on another man and blinding him in both eyes.

The Quran says:

5:45 And We ordained therein for them: Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth and wounds equal for equal. But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it shall be for him an expiation. And whosoever does not judge by that which Allah has revealed, such are the Zalimun (polytheists and  wrongdoers . . .). (Hilali and Khan, The Noble Qur’an, Riyadh: Darussalam, 1996)

This passage allows for an indemnity or compensation instead of imposing the literal punishment of eye for an eye. No one should have a quarrel with this option. According to the hadith, the plaintiff also has the option to forgive, and this is legitimate, provided a judge oversees the process. The problem is the literal law of retaliation.

The hadith and later legal rulings demonstrate that this excessive option was actually carried out, as do the three modern examples linked above.

Please go here for the supporting article that cites the hadith and later legal rulings.

Islamic law calls all of humanity to march backwards 1,400 years BC and to re—impose the old law of retaliation—literally, and the evidence suggest that the Torah never intended the law to be carried out literally, as the supporting article demonstrates.

7. Islam commands that a male and female thief must have a hand cut off.

Warning! This short article has photos of severed hands. The reader should never lose sight of the fact that this punishment is prescribed in the Quran, the eternal word of Allah. It does not exist only in the fevered imagination of a violent and sick radical regime like the Taliban, which once ruled in Afghanistan.

A Saudi cleric justifies chopping off hands here.

The Quran says:

5:38 Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done—a deterrent from God: God is almighty and wise. 39 But if anyone repents after his wrongdoing and makes amends, God will accept his repentance: God is most forgiving and merciful. (Haleem)

At first glance, verse 39 seems to accept repentance before the thief’s hand is cut off. But the hadith states emphatically that repentance is acceptable only after mutilation. Muhammad himself says that even if his own daughter, Fatima, were to steal and then intercede that her hand should not be cut off, he would still have to cut it off (Bukhari, Punishments, no. 6788)

If the reader would like to see more hadith passages, modern defenses of this indefensible punishment (and a refutation of them), and the Biblical solution to theft, they should click on this long supporting article or this shorter one.

6. Islam commands that highway robbers should be crucified or mutilated.

In September 2003, Scotsman Sandy Mitchell faced crucifixion in Saudi Arabia. He was beaten and tortured until he confessed to a crime he did not commit: a bomb plot masterminded by the British embassy. The article says of this punishment that it is the worst kind of execution and that two have been carried out in the last twenty years.

In 2002 Amnesty International reports that even though Saudi Arabia ratified the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention against Torture) in October 1997, amputation is prescribed under both Hudud (punishments) and Qisas (law of retaliation). AI has recorded thirty—three amputations and nine cross—amputations where the alternate hand or foot is mutilated.

The Quran says:

5:33 Those who wage war against God and His Messenger and strive to spread corruption in the land should be punished by death, crucifixion, the amputation of an alternate hand and foot or banishment from the land: a disgrace for them in this world, and then a terrible punishment in the Hereafter, 34 unless they repent before you overpower them: in that case bear in mind that God is forgiving and merciful. (Haleem)

It may be difficult to accept, but the hadith says that Muhammad tortured these next people before he executed them. This scenario provides the historical context of Sura 5:33—34. The explanations in parentheses have been added by the translator:

Narrated Anas: Some people . . . came to the Prophet and embraced Islam . . . [T]hey turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away . . . The Prophet ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they died. (Bukhari, Punishments, no. 6802)

The next hadith reports that the renegades died from bleeding to death because Muhammad refused to cauterize their amputated limbs. Then the hadith after that one reports that the renegades were not given water, so they died of thirst. They probably died of both causes: thirst and loss of blood.

See this short article for details on another example of Muhammad’s use of torture.

Islamic law says that these punishments are imposed for highway robbery, and in some cases crucifixion does not need a murder before it is imposed.

For more information on Muhammad’s brutality and the barbaric laws that flow out of it, go to the back—up article.

5. Islam commands that homosexuals must be executed.

In February 1998, the Taliban, who once ruled in Afghanistan, ordered a stone wall to be pushed over three men convicted of sodomy. Their lives were to be spared if they survived for 30 minutes and were still alive when the stones were removed.

In its 1991 Constitution, in Articles 108—113, Iran adopted the punishment of execution for sodomy.

In April 2005, a Kuwaiti cleric says homosexuals should be thrown off a mountain or stoned to death.

On April 7, 2005, it was reported that Saudi Arabia sentenced more than 100 men to prison or flogging for ‘gay conduct.’

These homosexuals were lucky. Early Islam would have executed them, as these hadith demonstrate.

Ibn Abbas, Muhammad’s cousin and highly reliable transmitter of hadith, reports the following about early Islam and Muhammad’s punishment of homosexuals: . . .

‘If you find anyone doing as Lot’s people did, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done’ (Abu Dawud no. 4447).

This hadith passage says that homosexuals should be burned alive or have wall pushed on them:

Ibn Abbas and Abu Huraira reported God’s messenger as saying, ‘Accursed is he who does what Lot’s people did.’ In a version . . . on the authority of Ibn Abbas it says that Ali [Muhammad's cousin and son—in—law] had two people burned and that Abu Bakr [Muhammad's chief companion] had a wall thrown down on them. (Mishkat, vol. 1, p. 765, Prescribed Punishments)

Though this punishment of a wall being toppled on them is extreme, the Taliban were merely following the origins of their religion.

If the reader would like to see the confusion in the Quran on the matter of homosexuality, the severity in the hadith, and excessive rulings of classical fiqh, they should see the supporting article. This longer one has links to many discussions on Islamic punishments of homosexuals (scroll down to ‘Supplemental material’).

4. Islam orders unmarried fornicators to be whipped and adulterers to be stoned to death.

Fornication:

In 2001, Iranian officials sentenced three men to flogging for illicit sex.

The Quran says:

24:2 The fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not pity withhold you in their case, in a punishment prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of the believers witness their punishment. [This punishment is for unmarried persons guilty of the above crime (illegal sex), but if married persons commit it (illegal sex), the punishment is to stone them to death, according to Allah's law]. (Hilali and Khan).

The additions in the brackets, though not original to the Arabic, have the support of the hadith. These command flogging only of unmarried fornicators: Bukhari, Punishments, nos. 6831 and 6833.

The classical legal rulings follow the Quran and the hadith closely, so we do not need to analyze them here.

According to this report, in Iran a teenage boy broke his Ramadan fast, so a judge sentenced him to be lashed with eighty—five stripes. He died from the punishment. Though his sad case does not deal with fornication, it is cited here because it shows that lashing can be fatal.

Adultery:

In December 2004, Amnesty International reports:

An Iranian woman charged with adultery faces death by stoning in the next five days after her death sentence was upheld by the Supreme Court last month. Her unnamed co—defendant is at risk of imminent execution by hanging. Amnesty International members are now writing urgent appeals to the Iranian authorities, calling for the execution to be stopped. She is to be buried up to her chest and stoned to death.

This gruesome hadith passage reports that a woman was buried up to her chest and stoned to death:

And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al—Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on his face he cursed her . . . (Muslim no. 4206)

The Prophet prayed over her dead body and then buried her. Truthfully, though, how effective was the prayer when Muhammad and his community murdered her in cold blood? The rest of the hadith says that Muhammad told Khalid not to be too harsh, but the Prophet’s words drip with irony. Perhaps Muhammad meant that Khalid should not have cursed her. However, if they really did not want to be harsh, they should have forgiven her and let her go to raise her child.

Later Islamic legal rulings follow the Quran and the hadith closely, so we do not need to analyze them here.

Here is the back—up article that supports this fourth reason.

3. Islam orders death for Muslim and possible death for non—Muslim critics of Muhammad and the Quran and even sharia itself.

In 1989, Iran’s Supreme Leader issued a fatwa (legal decree) to assassinate Salman Rushdie, a novelist, who wrote Satanic Verses, which includes questions about the angel Gabriel’s role in inspiring the Quran. Now the extremists in the highest levels in Iran have recently renewed  the fatwa.

In 2005, The Muslim Council of Victoria, Australia, brought a lawsuit against two pastors for holding a conference and posting articles critiquing Islam. Three Muslims attended the conference and felt offended. The two pastors have been convicted based on Australia’s vilification law. While on trial, one of them wanted to read from the Quran on domestic violence (see 9, above), but the lawyer representing the Council would not allow it. The pastors are appealing their conviction.

In 2005, British Muslims have been campaigning to pass a religious hate speech law in England’s parliament. They have succeeded. Their ability to propagandize has not been curtailed. Opponents of the law say that it stifles free speech that may criticize Muhammad, the Quran, and Islam.

Here are the classical legal rulings.

First, the Muslim deserves death for doing any of the following (Reliance of the Traveler pp. 597—98, o8.7):

(1) Reviling Allah or his Messenger; (2) being sarcastic about ‘Allah’s name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat’; (3) denying any verse of the Quran or ‘anything which by scholarly consensus belongs to it, or to add a verse that does not belong to it’; (4) holding that ‘any of Allah’s messengers or prophets are liars, or to deny their being sent’; (5) reviling the religion of Islam; (6) being sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law; (7) denying that Allah intended ‘the Prophet’s message . . . to be the religion followed by the entire world.’

It is no wonder that critical investigation of the truth claims of Islam can never prevail in Islamic lands when the sword of Muhammad hangs over the scholars’ head.

The non—Muslims living under Islamic rule are not allowed to do the following (p. 609, o11.10(1)—(5)):

(1) Commit adultery with a Muslim woman or marry her; (2) conceal spies of hostile forces; (3) lead a Muslim away from Islam; (4) mention something impermissible  about Allah, the Prophet . . . or Islam.

According to the discretion of the caliph or his representative, the punishments for violating these rules are as follows: (1) death, (2) enslavement, (3) release without paying anything, and (4) ransoming in exchange for money. These punishments also execute free speech—even repulsive speech—and freedom of religion or conscience.

Ultimately, censorship testifies to a lack of confidence in one’s position and message. If the message of Islam were truly superior, one could trust in the power of truth. As it stands, sharia with its prescribed punishments for questioning Muhammad, the Quran, and sharia itself testifies to their weakness since sharia threatens those who dare to differ.

How confident was Muhammad (and today’s Muslims) in his message that he had to rely on violence and force to protect his message, besides reason and persuasive argumentation?

For the supporting article that analyzes the Quran and the hadith, both of which orders death to critics, click here.

2. Islam orders apostates to be killed.

In Iran an academic was condemned to death for criticizing clerical rule in Iran. The rulers assert that he was insulting Muhammad and Shi’ite laws. He was charged with apostasy.

This analysis  tracks the application of apostasy laws around the world, citing many examples.

Apostates are those who leave Islam, like Salman Rushdie (see the linked article in no. three, above), whether they become atheists or convert to another religion. They are supposed to be killed according to the Quran, the hadith, and later legal rulings.

See the previous point no. three for acts that entail leaving Islam according to Islamic law.

Here are the articles that support reason no. two.

This is a short, but full article on apostasy, citing Quranic verses and hadith passages.

Sayyid Maududi, a respected Islamic scholar, in this booklet argues that Sura 9:11—12 refers to apostates and that they should be put to death (scroll down to ‘The Proof in the Quran for the Commandment to Execute Apostates’).

This Muslim website has an overview of Islam on apostates. They should be given time to repent, but if they refuse, they must be killed.

And the number one reason why sharia is bad for all societies . . .

1. Islam commands offensive and aggressive and unjust jihad.

Muhammad is foundational to Islam, and he set the genetic code for Islam, waging war. In the ten years that he lived in Medina from his Hijrah (Emigration) from Mecca in AD 622 to his death of a fever in AD 632, he either sent out or went out on seventy—four raids, expeditions, or full—scale wars. They range from small assassination hit squads to kill anyone who insulted him, to the Tabuk Crusades in late AD 630 against the Byzantine Christians. He had heard a rumor that an army was mobilizing to invade Arabia, but the rumor was false, so his 30,000 jihadists returned home, but not before imposing a jizya tax on northern Christians and Jews.

Money flowed into the Islamic treasury. So why would Muhammad get a revelation to dry up this money flow?

What are some of the legalized rules of jihad found in the Quran, hadith, and classical legal opinions?

(1) Women and children are enslaved. They can either be sold, or the Muslims may ‘marry’ the women, since their marriages are automatically annulled upon their capture. (2) Jihadists may have sex with slave women. Ali, Muhammad’s cousin and son—in—law, did this. (3) Women and children must not be killed during war, unless this happens in a nighttime raid when visibility was low. (4) Old men and monks could be killed. (5) A captured enemy of war could be killed, enslaved, ransomed for money or an exchange, freely released, or beaten. One time Muhammad even tortured a citizen of the city of Khaybar in order to extract information about where the wealth of the city was hidden. (6) Enemy men who converted could keep their property and small children. This law is so excessive that it amounts to forced conversion. Only the strongest of the strong could resist this coercion and remain a non—Muslim. (7) Civilian property may be confiscated. (8) Civilian homes may be destroyed. (9) Civilian fruit trees may be destroyed. (10) Pagan Arabs had to convert or die. This does not allow for the freedom of religion or conscience. (11) People of the Book (Jews and Christians) had three options (Sura 9:29): fight and die; convert and pay a forced ‘charity’ or zakat tax; or keep their Biblical faith and pay a jizya or poll tax. The last two options mean that money flows into the Islamic treasury, so why would Muhammad receive a revelation to dry up this money flow?

Thus, jihad is aggressive, coercive, and excessive, and Allah never revealed to Muhammad to stop these practices.

For an analysis of the Christian Crusades and the Islamic Crusades, click here.

For the supporting article of reason no. one, please go here.  It also has a segment on the differences between jihad in Islam and the wars in the Old Testament. Another article on that topic can be read here.   There are vast differences between Islam and Judaism on this topic.

Therefore, Islam is violent—unjustly and aggressively.

Conclusion

The nightmare must end. Sharia oppresses the citizens of Islamic countries. Islam must reform, but the legal hierarchy in Islamic nations will not do this because the judges and legal scholars understand the cost: many passages in the Quran and the hadith must be rejected, and this they cannot do. After all, the Quran came down directly from Allah through Gabriel, so says traditional theology. So how can Islam reform? But reform it must. It can start by rewriting classical fiqh (interpretations of law). Again, though, that would mean leaving behind the Quran and Muhammad’s example. How can the legal hierarchy in Islamic nations do this?

In contrast, the West has undergone the Enlightenment or the Age of Reason (c. 1600—1800+), so western law has been injected with a heavy dose of reason. Also, the New Testament tempers excessive punishments. At least when Christianity reformed (c. 1400—1600), the reformers went back to the New Testament, which preaches peace and love. So religion and reason in the West permit justice to be found more readily—the Medieval Church is not foundational to Christianity; only Jesus and the New Testament are.

Can Islamic countries benefit from an Enlightenment that may deny the Quran and the hadith? This seems impossible. Islamic law threatens Muslims with death if they criticize Muhammad and the Quran, not to mention denying them.

Since Islamic law cannot be reformed without doing serious damage to original and authentic Islam—the one taught by Muhammad—then a second plan must be played out. Sharia must never spread around the world. At least that much is clear and achievable. The hard evidence in this article demonstrates beyond doubt that sharia does not benefit any society, for it contains too many harsh rules and punishments.

One of the most tragic and under—reported occurrences in the West in recent years is the existence of a sharia court in Canada.  Muslims are pushing for a sharia divorce courting Australia  as well. Having a court of arbitration if it is based on western law and legal theory is legitimate, but sharia does not hold to this standard. Whether sharia is imposed gradually or rapidly, Canada should promptly shut down any sharia court, and Australia should never allow one. Such a court should never be permitted in the US, the rest of the West, or anywhere else in the world that is battling Islam.

It is true that the Enlightenment teaches tolerance, but it also teaches critical thinking and reasoning. Sharia cannot stand up under scrutiny. It is intolerant and excessive, and Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics teaches the West that excess is never just.

Thankfully, the province of Quebec, Canada, has forbidden sharia. This is the right initiative.

Sharia ultimately degrades society and diminishes freedom.

For additional references and information click here.

Pennsylvania: Muslim Admits Attacking Atheist; Muslim Judge Dismisses Case!

Submitted by American Atheists on Feb 22, 2012Via Creeping Sharia

By Al Stefanelli

Sharia law is in affect in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania – among other places in the United States.


The Pennsylvania State Director of American Atheists, Inc., Mr. Ernest Perce V., was assaulted by a Muslim while participating in a Halloween parade. Along with a Zombie Pope, Ernest was costumed as Zombie Muhammad. The assault was caught on video, the Muslim man admitted to his crime and charges were filed in what should have been an open-and-shut case. That’s not what happened, though.

The defendant is an immigrant and claims he did not know his actions were illegal, or that it was legal in this country to represent Muhammad in any form. To add insult to injury, he also testified that his 9 year old son was present, and the man said he felt he needed to show his young son that he was willing to fight for his Prophet.

The case went to trial, and as circumstances would dictate, Judge Mark Martin is also a Muslim. What transpired next was surreal. The Judge not only ruled in favor of the defendant, but called Mr. Perce a name and told him that if he were in a Muslim country, he’d be put to death. Judge Martin’s comments included,

“Having had the benefit of having spent over 2 and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. In fact I have a copy of the Koran here and I challenge you sir to show me where it says in the Koran that Mohammad arose and walked among the dead. I think you misinterpreted things. Before you start mocking someone else’s religion you may want to find out a little bit more about it it makes you look like a dufus and Mr. (Defendant) is correct. In many Arabic speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society.

Judge Martin then offered a lesson in Islam, stating,

“Islam is not just a religion, it’s their culture, their culture. It’s their very essence their very being. They pray five times a day towards Mecca to be a good Muslim, before you die you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca unless you are otherwise told you can not because you are too ill too elderly, whatever but you must make the attempt. Their greetings wa-laikum as-Salâm (is answered by voice) may god be with you. Whenever, it’s very common when speaking to each other it’s very common for them to say uh this will happen it’s it they are so immersed in it.

Judge Martin further complicates the issue by not only abrogating the First Amendment, but completely misunderstanding it when he said,

“Then what you have done is you have completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very very very offensive. I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive. But you have that right, but you’re way outside your boundaries or first amendment rights. This is what, and I said I spent about 7 and a half years living in other countries. when we go to other countries it’s not uncommon for people to refer to us as ugly Americans this is why we are referred to as ugly Americans, because we are so concerned about our own rights we don’t care about other people’s rights as long as we get our say but we don’t care about the other people’s say”

But wait, it gets worse. The Judge refused to allow the video into evidence, and then said,

All that aside I’ve got here basically.. I don’t want to say he said she said but I’ve got two sides of the story that are in conflict with each other.”

And,

“The preponderance of, excuse me, the burden of proof… “

And,

“…he has not proven to me beyond a reasonable doubt that this defendant is guilty of harassment, therefore I am going to dismiss the charge”

The Judge neglected to address the fact that the ignorance of the law does not justify an assault and that it was the responsibility of the defendant to familiarize himself with our laws.  This is to say nothing of the judge counseling the defendant that it is also not acceptable for him to teach his children that it is acceptable to use violence in the defense of religious beliefs.  Instead, the judge gives Mr. Perce a lesson in Sharia law and drones on about the Muslim faith, inform everyone in the court room how strongly he embraces Islam, that the first amendment does not allow anyone ” to piss off other people and other cultures” and he was also insulted by Mr. Perce’s portrayal of Mohammed and the sign he carried.

This is a travesty. Not only did Judge Martin completely ignore video evidence, but a Police Officer who was at the scene also testified on Mr. Perce’s behalf, to which the Judge also dismissed by saying the officer didn’t give an accurate account or doesn’t give it any weight.

Here is a link to the video that includes the audio of the Judge during the trial:

Here’s coverage of the incident from the local ABC affiliate

Needless to say, this is totally, completely and unequivocally unacceptable. That a Muslim immigrant can assault a United States citizen in defense of his religious beliefs and walk away a free man, while the victim is chastised and insulted by a Muslim judge who then blamed the victim for the crime committed against him is a horrible abrogation.

This reeks of those cases we used to read about where a woman is blamed for her own rape because she “was asking for it” by virtue of the clothing she chose to wear, and then having the Judge set the rapist free.

I can promise you this, you have not heard the last of this issue. Not by a long shot.


Cross examination below. Contact Your Elected Officials

Did “Hope and Change” Really Mean “Allah Akbar”?

By  David DeGerolamo via Tea Party Nation

“Genuine democracy will carry the day.”  Barack Obama, February 2011

Watch video here

One year later, we can look back at this turning point in history. The support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt by our leadership in Washington has now resulted in their control of the Egyptian parliament. Last week (February 9, 2012), the Muslim Brotherhood has called for a new Egyptian government to be led by a Brotherhood prime minister. Welcome to Sharia Law in Egypt and another dressed stone in the foundation of the new Islamic Caliphate.

As the United States (or more accurately, the Obama administration) supports this new “democracy” in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and now Syria, we are seeing that “hope and change” really meant “Allah Akbar“.

The judicial branch is also supporting this movement as shown by Justice Ginsburg:

From Egypt, Ginsburg continued her work with the State Department by heading to Tunisia, where the Arab Spring protest movement had its start. Tunisians recently marked the one-year anniversary of the revolution that ended the dictatorship of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and sparked uprisings around the Arab world.

One justice out of nine does not represent a majority of the judicial branch. We have to ask ourselves which branch of the government is responsible for maintaining our laws which are based on the tenets outlined in the Bible? Where is the outcry from the rest of the Supreme Court when one of their members denounces the U.S. Constitution that they have all sworn to protect? Where is our national outcry from the people as this administration is about to enter into another “kinetic action” in Syria where once again, the United States will be supporting the Muslim Brotherhood under the guise of the “right to protect”?

Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Pastor Bonhoeffer gave his life for his belief that we must act to confront and destroy evil. Where is the outcry in Congress and our church to confront the evil in our government which has abandoned Israel? Will supporting Israel in a conflagration against Iran be more than a diversion in this plan to support a new order?

At some point we need to start looking forward and realize that our inaction to confront the evil in our own country now will have consequences that could  and should have been avoided. We must stop looking backward: Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.

As our government is staging the next war in the Middle East, let us hope that we act in accordance with our beliefs and heritage instead of aiding the next Caliphate.