Waking Up To Islam

By Bill Muehlenberg

When it comes to understanding the true nature of Islam, just like the true nature of communism decades earlier, there are basically two groups of people out there: those who know what a genuine menace and threat it is, and those who are utterly clueless, and think we can somehow just accommodate and appease our sworn enemies.

The communists never covered up their aims of wishing to destroy America and the West, and Islam too has not been coy about publically stating its ultimate aims: taking over the West, stamping out freedom and democracy, and instituting a universal Caliphate with sharia law becoming the law of the planet.

There have been plenty of gullible and ignorant Westerners who actually applauded the spread of communism, as there are many people today foolishly endorsing and promoting the spread of the political ideology known as Islam. Lenin called such folks “useful idiots” and we still have plenty of them around today it seems.

Throughout so much of the Western world creeping sharia and stealth jihad have been occurring at a rapid rate, but most Westerners have been sleeping right through it. In one country after another ignorance, appeasement and apathy have allowed the Islamists to cement their positions in the West.

The UK is an obvious case in point. While Christianity seems to be all but dead there, Islam is on the move big time. Simply look at how houses of worship reveal these truths. In 1960 there was one mosque in all of London. Today there are many hundreds of them and incredibly many of these are former churches! Yet most folks there have snoozed through all this.

Of course there have been plenty of voices sending out warnings – often falling on deaf ears however. For example Melanie Phillips wrote an important book back in 2006 called Londonistan: How Britain is Creating a Terror State Within. I wrote a review of this incisive volume back then.

But she has basically been a voice crying out in the wilderness. Most English leaders have been woefully ignorant and appallingly clueless about the real nature of Islam. That is why I was quite startled to learn that not one but two major English leaders recently have come out slightly aware of Islamic matters for a change.

It may well be too late, but these two leaders may finally be waking up at least to some extent, and can see that not everything is sweetness and light in their nation, and elsewhere. Both men had in the past been almost sycophantic over Islam, seemingly believing it could do no wrong.

Consider a minor awakening from Prime Minister Cameron. Audrey Russo offers this commentary: “It appears that the UK’s great advocate for Islam has had a change of heart. The constant display of barbaric acts and Islamic cries of hate for the West, was never enough to open the eyes of the UK PM David Cameron. The question must be asked: What magical smelling salts was the PM given … because these suckers appear to have grown a spine!

“Cameron’s rabid defense for Islam in the past, almost required shots. He condemned the EDL (a grassroots movement of citizens desiring to retain the freedoms and culture of their homeland) with egregious barbs … but fell all over himself to protect this vile lot of Mohammedans. Now we are to believe he agrees with those who oppose Islamists?

“So, let me get this straight … Mr. Cameron has awoken out of his deep Islamic slumber. Well, then I’d like to know what it finally took for this man to awaken. The tragic event of his soldier Lee Rigby’s beheading, didn’t move him. The kidnapping and rape of British teenage girls by grooming gangs wasn’t enough. And the rallying cry of the British people in the streets, desperately trying to bring attention to the daily Islamic hate crimes committed against fellow citizens, moved him not. But now, suddenly he’s startled into reality?”

She says it may be too early to tell if this is a real change, or just more political grandstanding. But hopefully he is beginning to become aware of a few inconvenient truths here. Another English leader who finally seems to have seen a bit of light is Prince Charles.

As one news report said, “Christianity is beginning ‘to disappear’ in its own birthplace after 2,000 years because of a wave of ‘organised persecution’ across the Middle East, the Prince of Wales has warned. In an impassioned intervention, he said that the world is in danger of losing something ‘irreplaceably precious’ with communities tracing their history back to the time of Jesus now under threat from fundamentalist Islamist militants.

“Speaking openly of his own Christian faith, he said he had become ‘deeply troubled’ by the plight of those he described as his ‘brothers and sisters in Christ’. And the Prince, a long-standing advocate of dialogue between religions, voiced personal dismay at seeing his work over the last 20 years to ‘build bridges and dispel ignorance’ being deliberately destroyed by those attempting to exploit the Arab Spring for their own ends. He devoted a Christmas reception for religious leaders at Clarence House to draw attention to the threat Christians have come under in recent months across Egypt, Syria, Iraq and other parts of the region.”

Nice of him to finally wake up to some reality here, although anyone without Islamist eyeglasses on knew full well the horrific condition of Christians in the Middle East and Muslim-majority countries. They have been suffering terribly for so very long, yet most Western leaders have chosen to ignore all this.

Indeed, Islamic persecution of Christians has been a hallmark of Islam’s 14-century history, but it has been especially ferocious in more recent times. So I am glad the Prince of Wales has finally caught on here. Whether his ongoing attempts at interfaith dialogue will now be hampered remains to be seen, but at least he is finally a bit aware.

Hopefully many other Western leaders will wake up to the real nature of Islam, their tremendous persecution of Christians, and their openly-stated goal of taking over the West. Until we wake up to these basic home truths, the future of the West remains very dim indeed.

---

Criminal Terror Charges Filed Against Obama

By Jerome R. Corsi

Several prominent media sources in Egypt are now reporting that Egyptian lawyers have filed criminal terrorism charges in the International Criminal Court against President Obama in addition to the criminal terrorism charges previously filed in Egyptian courts against the president’s half-brother Malik Obama.

Malik Obama is quickly becoming a person of interest in Egypt for his alleged management of funds for a terrorist organization based in neighboring Sudan. A group of Egyptian lawyers, meanwhile have charged President Obama with crimes against humanity for his support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

The charges come as the criminal trial against former Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi is scheduled to begin in Egypt in January 2014. Morsi facing charges that he supported the Muslim Brotherhood in acts of violence directed against the Egyptian people.

President Obama is likely to be a subject in Morsi’s criminal trial because of evidence the Obama administration used the U.S. Embassy in Cairo to provide direct financial support to key Muslim Brotherhood political operatives, with the full knowledge and complicity of the Morsi government, as WND was first to report in August.

Criminal complaints filed at ICC

The Egyptian newspaper El Watan has reported a group of Egyptian lawyers has submitted a complaint to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, charging Obama with backing the group that incited widespread violence in Egypt both before and after what is known in Egypt as the “June 30 Revolution.” The Egyptian army coup d’état removed Morsi from the presidency July 3.

As first reported by CBN News, the complaint names several top-ranking Muslim Brotherhood leaders, beginning with the head of the organization, Muhammad Badie, as well as Mohamed al-Beltagy, Essam al-Erian and Safwat Hegazi.

The complaint charges that Obama coordinated, incited and assisted the armed elements of the Muslim Brotherhood in the commission of crimes against humanity in the period from March 7 through Aug. 18 in Egypt.

The complaint specifies the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt persecuted the country’s Christian minority, including the torching, destruction and plundering of some 85 Christian churches. The regime also scapegoated the Christian Copts in Egypt for their support of the June 30 Revolution and the removal of Morsi from the presidency, the complaint asserts.

The complaint alleges Muslim Brotherhood incitement against the Copts resulted in the murder of a 10-year-old girl who was shot and killed as she walked back from Bible class, the murder of a young Coptic priest who was shot in front of his church in the Egyptian Sinai with his body found mutilated and beheaded, and the murder of two girls, aged 8 and 12, who were riddled with bullets as they attended a Christian church wedding.

The complaint further alleges that since the Muslim Brotherhood denounced the Copts, entire towns and villages have been emptied of Christians. More than 100 Christian families, for example, have been driven from the North Sinai city of El Arish.

Muslim Brotherhood supporters are accused of extorting Copts by making them pay tribute money to Islamic overlords, while those unwilling to pay were attacked, with their wives and children being beaten or kidnapped.

In a YouTube video, CBN News contributor Raymond Ibrahim reported from Egypt details of alleged atrocities committed by Muslim Brotherhood members against Christians in Egypt.

Criminal complaints against Malik Obama

Former PLO member and native Arabic-speaker Walid Shoebat reported on his website that Youm7 television in Egypt has now confirmed Ahmed Nabil Ganzory – in his capacity as a lawyer and agent for Sadik Rauf Ebeid, a physician residing in the United States and an officer in the Egyptian Air Force – filed a criminal complaint against Malik Obama with Egyptian Attorney General Hisham Barakat.

WND reported in September that the complaint called for Malik Obama to be placed on Egypt’s terror watch list because of his involvement as an owner and investment adviser for the Sudan-based Islamic Dawa Organization, or IDO, and the organization’s umbrella group, the Muslim Brotherhood.

The following is a direct translation from Youm7:

Dr. Ahmed Nabil Ganzory, in his capacity as lawyer and agent for Dr. Sadik Rauf Ebeid, and resident in the United States of America, filed a complaint with Egypt’s Attorney General Hisham Barakat, against Malik Obama, accusing him of supporting terrorism in Egypt and for his involvement in managing the Islamic Da’wa Organization (IDO). The complaint also asks to include Chancellor Tahani Al-Gebali to substantiate claims against Obama. …
Complaint No. 1761 for the year 2013 reported to the Attorney General asked the Egyptian High Court to consider the suspicious activity of a group called the Islamic Da’wa Organization (IDO), which is owned and managed by Malik Obama. This group is now being investigated by international bodies and the attached evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that a close link exists between Malik Obama and some of the most notorious characters already wanted for their involvement in terrorism, as is consistent with the pictures and reports attached. …
The complaint also asks the court to bring in Malik Obama – a resident of the United States – to be questioned in regards to the terrorist groups in Egypt, whether by inciting or participating with or in any form of support punishable by law. It seeks permission to declare Obama a defendant in his right outside Egypt diplomatically, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In the case of non-appearance and compliance for the investigation, the complainant requests monitoring [Mr. Obama] by including his name on all Egyptian airports and ports, and take the necessary legal steps. [emphasis placed by Walid Shoebat]

In August, WND reported Tahani Al-Gebali, chancellor of the Constitutional Court of Egypt, substantiated the claims made against Malik Obama. On a television news programs in Egypt, al-Gebali asked the court to bring Malik Obama to Egypt for questioning as “one of the architects” of investments made by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Ganzory, the attorney who filed the criminal complaint against Malik Obama, was identified in a recent interview on El-Balad TV in Egypt as an Egyptian constitutional law expert.

In the interview, Ganzory claimed he has “what it takes to convict Obama’s brother in financing terrorism.”

“Malik Obama will be brought to face justice in Egypt if and when these charges are proven,” he said.

In an email to WND, Dr. Sadek Raouf Ebeid, the U.S. resident who brought the criminal complaint in Egypt against Malik Obama, explained an attempt to serve the complaint to Malik in Kenya failed because he was not in the country at the time.

Ebeid further explained his attorney, Ganzory, is currently preparing to serve the complaint to Malik in the U.S.

Arguing that President Obama is complicit in advancing the activities of his half-brother, Ebeid said evidence WND has published suggests Malik Obama received unprecedented assistance from the White House through retroactive approval of tax-exempt status for the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a 501(c)3 organization created by Malik Obama in the U.S.

Islam = Cancer

Taken from Politically Incorrect

Islam is a cancer. So believes Michael Stürzenberger who must give an account for this statement before the Munich district court for alleged insulting of a religious confession. He’s right, says his defense attorney who filed four motions of evidence with around 150 pages in order to give that factual foundation. It’s not about that, district attorney Henkel says: “Cancer” is an “insult”; the facts weren’t of interest in this context. The defense took this as an opportunity to impart a few lessons to Madame district attorney Henkel, and that in oncology and sociology.

“In the trial against Michael Stürzenberger (for the accusation of the disparagement of confessions), case number 844 Cs 111 JS 126317/13, the defense is thankful for the opportunity to take a position that is granted him with the writing of the court on 22 October 2013 installment 1.

In the position of the district attorney of 15 October 2013 installment 2, with which the suggestion that the four evidence proposals given be rejected due to irrelevance for the trial, is unfortunately produced by a misunderstanding of the linguistic connection between the symbol and the label.

If the label, that is Islam, is such as presented under evidence, then the lable is also, i.e., a cancer, an precise social scientific analogy to a correctly used medical term.

It remains the secret of the district attorney as to how the use of the term “cancer” should be an “insult”; she doesn’t find herself in the position of having to support this, and doubtlessly raises herself above the context of the isolated accused expression that this is to be seen as an exact sociological analogy to a correctly employed oncological term and not as an insult.

Meanwhile, the resistance of facts by the district attorney can be helped out by another motion of evidence:

Expert witness Prof. Dr. Armin Geus, professor emeritus for medical history, and as author of the much acclaimed standard work “The Disease of the Prophet,” is an internationally leading medical historian and a designated scholar of the mental illness of the prophet Mohammed that manifests itself in the Koran, the Hadith, the Sira, Islam and unfortunately many Muslims as well.

He can be summoned by way of Marburg University, Post for History of Medicine, Bahnhofstrasse 7, 35037 Marburg, and will confirm the following analogies according to the work by Thews et al. on Pathophysiology as being unequivocally applicable and therefore not “insulting” but rather “scientific.”

The expert witness will show: “Everything that one can say about cancer applies to Islam:

1. Autonomy

“Malignant tumors bear as characteristic an overreaching growth of bodily cells that live autonomously, that is independent of the superordinate regulation systems of the organism.”

In exactly the same way, Muslims increasingly do not live according to the law of their corresponding countries but according to the Sharia whereby they circumvent the control of the corresponding legal system until this is destroyed. Germany, Turkey, Syria and Afghanistan under the Taliban demonstrate only differing degrees of growth of the cancer of Islam.

2. Lethality

“Malevolent (malignant) tumors are characterized by the fact that they “as a rule lead to the death of the one affected when untreated.”

Likewise uninhibited islamization leads to the complete destruction of a society to the point of sinking down to the level of Stone Age under the failure of all functioning structures, such as could be observed in Afghanistan under the Taliban and is to be experienced as well advanced in Somalia, far advanced in real time in Syria.

3. Quick Growth

“Malignant tumors are characterized mostly by quick growth with a high cell division rate.”

Likewise, Islam is characterized by a very quick growth through warlike expansion, infiltration by means of targeted deception and birth jihad, which in Nigeria, for example, has led in the past 30 years to the Christian majority becoming the persecuted minority and the Muslim minority becoming the aggressive persecuting majority.

4. RNA Surplus

“The cytoplasm exhibits a high content of ribonucleic acids. The nucleus-plasma relationship is displaced in favor of the nucleus.”

Likewise, each society requires a heritage from myths, religion, philosophy, etc. However, when a society defines itself only according to its ideological heritage and transforms all branches from that, for example, law, economy, finances, marriage, family, child rearing, education, science, etc., then all social subsystems will be completely interfused by the ideology and destroyed: They can no longer function autonomously and then eventually not at all.

5. Dedifferentiation

“Malignant adenomas are further dedifferentiated: The degree of dedifferentiation reveals something about the malignity (virulence): The more a tumor tissue is dedifferentiated, the more malignant it is normally.”

In no other totalitarian system is the social differentiation so greatly removed than under Islam. The German Reich under National Socialism and the German Democratic Republic under SED Stalinism still allowed space for some people and institutions; Islam doesn’t recognize such things. The most influential sociologist of the 20th century, Niklas Luhmann, presented in detail in his life work that touches on the theory of “social systems,” the system theory, the fact that functioning societies are kept sustainable by means of their degree of differentiation.

In the law, the social usefulness or harmfulness would count and not the compliance with an archaic ideology, in the economy, the effective and efficient distribution of goods and services and not the compliance with an archaic ideology, in finance, the stable provision of capital for the economy and budgets and not the compliance with an archaic ideology, in marriage and family, the mutual affection and provision and not the compliance with an archaic ideology, in child rearing and education the provision of the triad knowledge proficiency responsibility and not the compliance with an archaic ideology, and in science, the free research for new knowledge and its uncoerced communication with the outside and not the compliance with an archaic ideology.

This detailing of the social systems and their release from the primacy of the theopolitical dictatorship was painstakingly achieved by Europe through renaissance, humanism, reformation, enlightenment, technical and industrial revolution, liberalism, social democracy and the creation of a balance of powers between economic liberal and social democratic powers. The already filed motions of evidence are suited to prove that Islam destroys this social differentiation just as much as cancer does cellular differentiation, and that the unavoidable consequences in both cases is the death of the organism.

6. Destruction

“In contrast with benign tumors, malignant adenomas grow invasively and destructively. That means that the malignant tumor doesn’t stay at the limits of the tissue but rather breaks into organs and vessels, and with this growth destroys the original tissue.”

The same exact phenomenon can be regularly observed in Islam or the islamizaiton of a society: The legal system is overrun by the claim of validity by the Sharia, for example, through demands for stalls, circumcision, muezzin call, prayer under heavy impediment of street traffic, pressure on all public facilities for the installment of prayer rooms and provision of halal meals, etc. The economic and financial system is changed through establishments like halal banking. Marriage, family and child rearing fall under the islamic system of coercion with forced marriages, forced veiling, male urge to dominate and massive oppression of women, honor killings, etc. Education and science are no longer free as the fact among other things shows that witness Prof. Dr. Armin Geus is being prosecuted for a charge by a Saudi Arabian educational facility of the StA Marburg, and the trial was halted only after the defense attorney named 30 renowned psychiatrists who were all ready to confirm that “The Disease of the Prophet” dealt with a correct, scientific treatment at the highest methodical and contextual level.

This is how Islam destructively invades in all branches of society and transforms it according to the ideas of Arabia of the 7th century and the mentally ill founder Mohammed. And district attorneys and courts happily join in with the mistaken belief that it is about a religion.

7. Metastasis

“The tumor often forms child tumors in other locations of the organism that are called metastases.”

Thus, unfortunately, Islam doesn’t limit itself to the Arabian peninsula, rather it has metastasized into almost all national areas and is attempting to transform these according to its ideas, i.e. according to the ideas of the Koran, the Hadiths, the Sira and the sick prophet Mohammed.

8. Stepwise Carcinogenesis

“The transformation of a normal cell into a tumor cell is completed in several steps.”

This concerns an occurrence that starts with a “malignant transformation” of a cell and then advances itself. The “transformation of a normal into a malignantly deformed cell” occurs. In the development of terror cells of brave German boys that have become terror sympathizers and terrorists, the origin, process and speed of this development can reproduced at anytime and is in this respect common knowledge.

Also, whole societies can be classified with respect to their degree of degeneration, thus, the stoning societies such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Somalia are societies with 100% islamization; Christian-persecuting societies such as Libya, Syria, Iraq, Sudan and Nigeria are societies with 75% islamization; toppling societies such as Turkey with occasional persecution of Christians and a convergence of secular and islamic population, societies with 50% islamization; societies such as Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark, where critique of Islam is already being suppressed nationally are headed toward 25% islamization, even though the portion of Muslims is less.

What generally applies: The more the tumor tissue the closer the death of the person. The more Islam, the closer the total collapse of society and the return to the Stone Age.

9. DNA Failure

“Explosive growth of tumors can be caused by failure of tumor suppression genes (=antioncogenes). In this case, the defense no longer functions on the genetic level. If the DNA repair of the cell stays missing, the cell is lost: In erroneous or missing repair, the primary lesion becomes irreversible and out of the transformed cell, a clinically tangible tumor can come into existence after a month to years.”

The Western societies are being destroyed exactly the same way, when their “DNA”, i.e. their Judeo-Christian religious identity in connection with the historically unique heritage of renaissance, humanism, reformation, enlightenment, technical and industrial revolution, liberalism, social democracy and creation of a balance of power between economic liberal and social democratic powers that encloses the claim of totality by religion regardless of the kind, cannot prevail against totalitarian and ideological Islam.

10. Proliferation of Tumor Cells

“After the malignant transformation begins the autonomic, uninhibited growth of the tumor. The tumor binds itself with the pathways of the body: Of importance for the development of clinically manifest tumors is a growth of vessels in the often vessel-free tumors during early stages of growth.

Consequence: When a provision of vessels for the growing tumor mass is achieved in this way, the supply situation improves and the tumor begins to grow again exponentially.”

This phase began only in the 20th century. Until then, Islam was limited to the region of Northern Africa, and the Near, Middle and Far East, which it was able to conquer militarily. With trillions of petrodollars, Islam infiltrated into all pathways of Western societies in the 20th century: legal systems were transformed according to the Sharia, economy and finances ended up in increasing dependence on the dictates of islamic national funds, marriage – family – customs – mosque communities forming increasing subcultures and parallel societies that live according to the Sharia and disregard the law and customs of the guest countries; the so far free system of child rearing – education – science fell under pressure to be able to do only positive and agreeable research and explanation about Islam, and the media are even more strongly prepared to push back press freedom in a pro-islamic way.

Thus it is common knowledge that no longer is it allowed for the country of origin or religious affiliation regarding the assailants of violent crime in Western countries to be reported, partly due to national censorship, partly to a self-censorship by the press. The list can be carried on without end: All pathways of society have been infected with Islam like a cancer

11. Immune Failure

“The failure of the immune system follows the failure of DNA. Tumor antigenes: The malignant transformation is often bound with the appearance of new antigenes on the surface of the tumor cells. Such tumor antigenes release above all cellular but also endocrine defense mechanisms. In this respect, it is a matter of the function of macrophages and lymphocytes, suspicion of T-cells that try to get rid of the tumor. If the tumor has reached a critical size of around 10 to the 6th power cells, it has escaped immunological control.”

There are a small number of social T-cells like the accused who try under the perception of defense laws such as self-defense, state of emergency and constitutional right of resistance to arrest the islamization of Germany and Europe. Since the justice department, the real immune system, however, is not working effectively against the islamization (rather, in contrast, against its critics), the West, figuratively speaking has AIDS, a fatal immune deficiency, so that the cancer of Islam can further spread itself unhindered.

12. Consequences of The Tumor Growth

“The consequences of the tumor growth are disastrous and include ‘displacement of hollow organs,’ ‘arrosion,’ ‘infection of necrotic tumor material,’ ‘perforation of body wall structures’ of the organs, ‘tumoric anemia,’ ‘kachexy (loss of balance and weakness as a result of the deprivation of vital substances by the tumor tissue)’”

The tumor acts as a parasite at the expense of the organism, and Islam at the expense of society; this has been observed in detail in the welfare state mentality of total care of strictly devout Muslim large families who despise the West but nonetheless in large scale allow themselves to be sustained by it. The financial and social expenditures are not sustainable. The society is dying.

In light of the aforementioned, the quixotic idea of the district attorney that calling Islam “cancer” is a (punishable) “insult” and not an (in the framework of free speech and press) exact and scientifically based analogy of medical and sociological conceptualization should be discarded. It is a matter of an idea that truly rests on ignorance but also on lack of understanding because the choice of terminology conforms in each ordered communication according to the issue so that the issue cannot remain out of sight when it has to do with the appropriateness of a choice of terms.

By the way, the district attorney’s office should read the filed motions of evidence in context. From this arises the fact that Islam is no religion at all, but a totalitarian theopolitical system to which a religion also belongs, but also much more as well.

Killing Muhammad

By Jake Neuman

700 years after the birth of Jesus, there was born in Mecca, Saudi Arabia a psychotic killer who was to grew up and become known as the prophet Muhammad. This killer created his own god – Allah (the Anti God AKA Muhammad), his own religion -Islam – his own book – the Quran. 1443 years later, in the year 2013 – 1,600,000,000 people have sacrificed the very essence of their humanity, their immoral souls to this manic – A Monster of History With No Human Face.

In my view, Muhammad is the most important human being who was ever born. He embodies the totality of the evilness of the species Homo Sapiens. This evil will sooner rather then later lead to the extinction of Sapiens.

Without Muhammad there would have been no Islam – no Allah – no Quran. On the day Muhammad was born the death warrants of 270,000,000 human beings were signed: 120,000,000 blacks, 80,000,000 Hindus, 60,000,000 million Christians, 10,000,000 Buddhists perished in the Islamic holocaust. Not only did these human beings perish but all their possible descendents by the billions perished – never to be born – never to know life. The killing of just one human being by another human being is the murdering of all mankind.

This book – killing Muhammad – will not only concern itself with the assassination of Muhammad by a very brave Jewish woman after the Massacre of Khaybar but much more importantly will be the killing of the mythology of Muhammad – the Mythology that Muhammad was a prophet of peace who met the Angel Gabriel and received from Gabriel the verses of the Quran that God had transmitted to Gabriel for re transmission to Muhammad. We will destroy this mythology proving beyond by percentages to absolute certainty that Muhammad never net Gabriel – that Muhammad never received not even one word from God via Gabriel – that every word of the Quran was fabricated by Muhammad. That Islam is fraudulent – the Quran is fraudulent – that Muhammad was a total fraud – not a prophet of God.

Our mission – killing Muhammad – will be to destroy the Sunna of Muhammad – that this killer was exactly what he is as depicted in the Hadith and Sira and the Quran – a killer, mass murderer, child molester, rapist, terrorist, torturer – a prophet of monsterness.

Islam: Against All Mankind

By Cherson & Molschky

When Islam’s prophet Muhammad, the very first Muslim immigrant, arrived at Yathrib, or Medina, he and his followers began military preparations and partook in a series of attacks, over 100 in one year. But against whom were all those preparations?

The answer was given by Muhammad himself: against all non-Muslims. And since then nothing changed; Islamic immigration is aimed against all non-Muslims in the host countries, with the final goal of converting them into countries ruled by Islam.

Muhammad planned his immigration like a military campaign, carefully eliminating any chance of error. And he had good reasons; his situation in Mecca became perilous. Of course, the wealth he inherited after his wife Khadija’s death was with him, and this wealth was enormous; the monthly business turnover of Khadija’s business was equivalent to a whole year’s balance for the entire tribe of Quraish. But after Khadija and his uncle Abu Talib died in 620, Muhammad lost the political protection and became very vulnerable for the attacks of his enemies. Those enemies were practically all the Quraish tribe whom he deeply insulted by the continuous and fierce attacks of their gods. The situation was aggravated by the fact that all the tribal leaders of the near-by towns Muhammad tried to approach seeking refuge and protection from Quraish turned him down.

Finally, he decided to run to an oasis town, Ta’if, situated some 40 miles from Mecca. Together with his adopted son he arrived to Ta’if, but evidently, “the local muscle” he boughtwas not strong enough, and the citizens of the town chased him out in a very “undemocratic” manner; Muhammad was hounded and beaten. Besides, they informed Quraish about Muhammad’s attempt. By the time he reached Mecca, the news had preceded him, and he did not dare enter Mecca for fear of his life. Instead, he contacted one of the members of the board of elders of Mecca, Mutaeam bin Adi, asking him for help. And he got it!

Why a pagan Mutaeam bin Adi all of a sudden decided to give his protection to the Muslim Muhammad who was hated by all the Quraish could be a theme for a separate investigation, but the sources carefully mention that there were benefits on both sides. Putting it simple, Muhammad  bought protection of the local Quraish leader- and that let him stay in Mecca for some more time. But Muhammad understood that this time was quickly running out and that the second failure could be the last one.

In 620 CE, six men of the Yathrib Arab pagan tribe Aws arrived to Mecca to seek an alliance against another Arab tribe of Yathrib: Khazraj. Muhammad did a wonderful job of convincing them against this alliance and making them his allies instead (for more details, see “Muhammad, The First Muslim Immigrant, Part 2: Buying Off The Local Muscle.”) The enemy was very clearly defined: those who had to be attacked and destroyed were Jews, Christians and the people of his own tribe Quraish. The idea was received with enthusiasm. Yathrib was founded by Jews, and at that time was a Jewish city. There were three very rich and powerful Jewish tribes there. Another part of the citizens of Yathrib was formed by pagan Arabs of two bitterly rivalling tribes, Aws and Khazraj. Arabs dreamed about snatching the rule from the Jews, but they did not have either money or enough military strength to throw an open challenge to them. Besides, Aws and Khazraj were constantly fighting each other, and Jews skilfully supported this or that side depending on the current situation.

Muhammad offered to both Aws and Khazraj something they could only dream about.

In 621, already 12 local Arab leaders from Yathrib: six from Aws and six from Khazraj, arrived to Mecca and made the first pledge of loyalty to Muhammad. This is known as the “First Pledge of Aqaba.”

In 622, Mecca saw already 75 tribal leaders of both Aws and Khazraj coming to have a talk with Muhammad. They made a “Second Pledge of Aqaba”, and it was decided that Muhammad and his followers would be welcomed to Medina. From the beginning it was clear to all that the pledge was an Alliance of War. When Muhammad’s uncle Abbas bin Abdel Muttalib asked Aws and Khazraj leaders if they knew and understood what they were supporting and what they pledged their alliance for, they all answered affirmatively, confirming they knew they pledged the alliance to fight against all mankind. I am not exaggerating, the answer was exactly this: AGAINST ALL MANKIND.

Ishaq:204/TabariVI:134  Abbas the uncle of the Prophet said: ’Men of the Khazraj, do you know what you are pledging yourselves to in swearing allegiance to this man?’

‘Yes,’ they answered. ‘In swearing allegiance to him we are pledging ourselves to wage war against all mankind.’  

The first target of course were the “red” and “black”, nicknames used for Jews and unbelievers of Mecca, i.e. Quraish and all other pagan Arab tribes. But one of the Aws leaders, Abu Haitham, wishing to make the situation absolutely clear, asked Muhammad a question:

Oh Apostle of Allah, between us and Jews are ropes (meaning links, ties) and we are about to cut those and if we do that, then we might have disobeyed being in breach of our own agreement with them and so Allah may show you to come back to your people? 

Arab leaders of Yathrib understood  that they were going to cut the links with Jews, and they also understood that if something went wrong, Muhammad could find attractive the idea of returning back to Mecca, leaving to them the broken relationships both with Jews and with Quraish for having given Muhammad a refuge in their city.

Muhammad calmed Yathrib leaders with a very short and clear answer:

“Blood, blood and destruction, destruction!”

After that, the Yathrib Arab leaders lost any doubts about the true fate Muhammad prepared for Jews and Quraish: they were going to be annihilated.

The very point on which the alliance was made was the war against all enemies of Allah (and of Muhammad of course), until their total extermination or submission. 

Tabari VI:133 “We pledge our allegiance to you and we shall defend you as we would our womenfolk. Administer the oath of allegiance to us, Messenger of Allah, for we are men of war possessing weapons and coats of armour.” 

Ishaq:208  “When Allah gave permission to his Apostle to fight, the second Aqabah contained conditions involving war which were not in the first act of submission. Now we bound ourselves to war against all mankind for Allah and His Apostle. He promised us a reward in Paradise for faithful service. We pledged ourselves to war in complete obedience to Muhammad no matter how evil the circumstances.”  

Tabari VI:138 “Those present at the oath of Aqabah had sworn an allegiance to Muhammad. It was a pledge of war against all men. Allah had ordered fighting.”

Muslim migration was ultimately a conquest. Its goal was to establish an Islamic State ruled by Shari’a laws, and all non-Muslims had to be either subdued or annihilated.

Muslim immigrants individually can be – and many of them are- very good people, polite, hospitable and nice. But Muslim immigration is a death threat to the native population of any country that was stupid (if you wish, you can use the term “politically correct”) enough to accept it.

---

Islamic Doctrines Justify Sex Jihad

By Raymond Ibrahim

As news of the sex jihad continues to proliferate in Mideast media, and as the West continues to bury its head in the sand -- here for example is Der Spiegel's attempt to portray as "false" the "tales of rebels engaging in 'sex jihad' and massacring Christians" --it is instructive to note that even the practice of sex jihad has specific doctrinal validation in Islam (which should not be surprising, considering that so too do things like "adult breastfeeding").

First there is the general justification for sex jihad -- namely that because Muslim men waging jihad have become sexually frustrated in their camps, losing morale and quitting the theatre of war, it is permissible, indeed laudable, for Muslim women to volunteer to give up their bodies to these men so that they can continue the jihad to empower Islam, in accordance with the Koran: "Allah has purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain" (Yusuf Ali trans. 9:111).

While this verse has traditionally been understood as Muslim men selling "their persons" -- that is, their bodies -- in the jihad in exchange for paradise, in the context of sex jihad, Muslim women are also selling "their persons" (their bodies to be used for sex) to help empower the jihad, in exchange for paradise.

Aside from this logic, which involves intention (niyya) and the idea that the ends justify the means -- this is the same rationale, for example, used to justify Islamic suicide attacks ("martyrdom operations") -- in the hadith and teachings of early Islam, precedents exist that Islam's ulema use to justify the sex jihad.

Recorded in Sahih Bukhari -- for most Sunni Muslims, the second textual authority after the Koran itself -- is an anecdote of one Muslim giving another Muslim one of his wives for sexual purposes. The story is as follows: When some of Muhammad's followers from Mecca migrated to Medina, a complaint was raised that the people of Medina had better profited from following Muhammad than his original Meccan followers, who had suffered more deprivations. In this context, Muhammad paired up the Meccan Abdul Rahman bin Awf with Sa'ad bin Rabi'a of Medina, for the latter to share some of his possessions with the former. So Rabi'a offered to Rahman half of all his possessions, adding, "Look at my two wives, and whichever of them you desire, I will divorce her so you can have her" (Sahih Bukhari: 118, 1943).

Based on this, divorcing one's wife for the use of another Muslim became acceptable -- indeed, laudable and generous behavior. Indeed, Sahih Bukhari has an entire chapter (bab) on the jurisprudence of this practice. Nor should it be forgotten that, recorded in the Koran itself, one man divorced his wife and gave her to Muhammad simply because the prophet desired her.

In several of the videos that interview people involved with the Syrian sex jihad, this very same logic plays out. In this video, for instance, one Muslim man explains how he was told that, since he had three wives, he should divorce one of them so she can wage sex jihad with the "freedom fighters" in Syria. This, both he and his wives were told, was laudable, and so they complied.

Then there is the whole idea of mut'a marriage. Often translated as "temporary" marriage, the word mut'a simply means "pleasure" -- i.e., a marriage for the sole purpose of "pleasure." These "marriage" contracts are made between a Muslim man and woman for a temporary duration and often for the sole purpose of legitimizing otherwise banned sexual relations -- basically a legalized form of prostitution.

Koran 4:24 exonerates pleasure marriage, as many Muslim doctrinaires hold:

And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess [sex slaves]. [This is] the decree of Allah upon you. And lawful to you are [all others] beyond these, [provided] that you seek them [in marriage] with [gifts from] your property, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse. So whatever you enjoy of them, give them their due compensation as an obligation. And there is no blame upon you for what you mutually agree to beyond the obligation. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

Although the practice of mut'a marriage is often pinned on the Shias, it -- as with taqiyya, which is also often treated as a Shia phenomenon -- often manifests itself among Sunnis, especially in the context of sexually deprived men waging jihad. Moreover, it is well known that Muhammad and his followers used to have sex with the women of conquered tribes, hence the recent rape fatwa in Syria.

In light of all this, it is amazing that some in the West are still trying to exonerate the jihadis in Syria from the practice of sex jihad, since, apparently, those "noble freedom fighters" would never stoop to such a level (the rampant beheadings, church bombings, and Christian persecution is all a "myth," too, according to Der Spiegel).

Finally, below is a 15-minute video of several people -- men and women from various nations -- discussing their experiences with the sex jihad in Syria, translated from Arabic to English by some of my colleagues (you may need to click on "CC" [closed caption"] for the English subtitles to appear).

---

The Treatment of Women in Islam

By Rachel Molschky

“Our women are precious to us.” That is the typical Muslim response when asked about the treatment of women in Islam. Women are covered from head-to-toe because they are so “precious,” and in the West, domestic abuse is higher in the Muslim enclaves than in the neighborhoods of the natives because women in Islam are “valued so highly.” Female genital mutilation is apparently another way to demonstrate how women are treated like queens by their Muslim families, and getting flogged or even beheaded for getting raped also proves how special women are in the “religion of peace.”

Honor killings are another wonderful example of the treatment of women in Islam. Recently in Pakistan, a man and his two accomplices killed his sister for allegedly having “illicit relations” with a neighbor. In another Pakistani case, a woman, her aunt and cousin were all killed in an honor killing because the woman left her husband to marry another man. The other two women helped her, and the jirga, assembly of tribal elders, decided that they must be killed. No, it wasn’t madness or a crime of passion but an official decision made by what is essentially the governing group there because women are “precious” in Islam.

In August, a woman, her daughter and son-in-law were also victims of an honor killing by the woman’s brother after the woman had married without her family’s consent. Her brother killed her for it. These honor killings are all too common in Pakistan with new cases reported every few days. Earlier this year, two teenage girls and their mother were killed because the girls had been filmed dancing in the rain, and the video made the rounds via mobile phones. According to the Express Tribune, “the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan says 943 women and girls were murdered in 2011 after being accused of tarnishing their families’ honor.” Pakistanis make up the largest Muslim immigrant group in the UK, though honor killings take place across the Muslim world.

In 2010, around 3000 honor attacks occurred in the UK’s Muslim community, though the actual number is believed to be far greater as many crimes go unreported or are not classified as honor attacks, which include abduction, mutilations, beatings, acid attacks and murder.

Underage marriage is all too common in the Muslim world, and a new report shows that instead of progressing, Malaysia is getting worse with more underage marriages in 2012 than in 2011. While non-Muslims in the nation must wait until the age of 18 to marry, the legal age for Muslims is 16. But with the common belief that girls must be married once they reach puberty, underage children can marry if they get consent from the Shariah court. And that is what they do to get around the supposed legal age the country has “officially” adopted in order to comply with world expectations.

In Nigeria, Senator Ahmad Yarima supports child marriage. The Senator himself married a 13 year-old in 2010 and has voted to uphold a law which states that all married girls are “of age.” One out of every five Nigerian children is not in school, partly because of this Muslim belief that puberty means marriage when it comes to girls. Over half the girls in the northern part of the country are married off by the time they are 16. And these girls are expected to have a child their first year of marriage. As a result, Nigeria which makes up two percent of the world’s population has ten percent of the world’s VVF cases. VVF is vesicovaginal fistula, a condition which occurs when urine involuntarily enters the vaginal vault. Why does this happen so much in Nigeria? Because the children giving birth are too small. Their pelvises are still too narrow. It’s a good thing these girls are considered “precious.” That helps a lot.

Forced marriage in the British Muslim community is also out-of-control, with at least 8000 per year in England alone. In many of these cases, young girls, barely teenagers, are forced to marry men at least twice their age, which is a dream compared to those who must marry men three or four times older. Refusal to marry these men can result in an honor attack.

A heroin-dealing Muslim in the UK became so infuriated with his wife for wanting an education, he subjected her to a year of “hell,” telling her that married women don’t do this, apparently equating it to some sort of lewd behavior. He forced her to wear a niqab, a face veil, but this was not enough. After she didn’t smile while with the family for Eid, he beat her. His subsequent beatings included ripping her tongue, kicking and punching her, giving her black eyes, keeping tabs on her via her cell phone, accusing her of cheating, etc. The abuse continued even after she got pregnant, and their baby was delivered prematurely. Eventually he stabbed her with scissors and hit her with a dumbbell. The assailant was a “devout Muslim.”

This is not an isolated case. Stories like this one are all too common in the Muslim world and are not contained only in Muslim countries. This case took place in the UK, but it could have been in France, Sweden, Australia, the United States or in any Muslim community around the world.

The precious women of Iran are allowed to get an education, but as a senior cleric has recently stated, if they are not dressed “properly,” their grades should reflect that. He calls for stricter regulations of women’s Islamic attire, saying, “If her veiling is bad, don’t let her into the university and let her feel it in her grade. This is not troublesome. Start here! If you put someone at the university gate and tell students that if they don’t observe proper veiling it would affect their grades, they would certainly pay heed.”

Saudi Sheikh Salah al-Luhaydan has another suggestion for the “precious jewels” that are Muslim women: do not drive. Women in Saudi Arabia are not allowed to drive, but this sheikh explains the reasoning behind it. Believe it or not, driving “damages a woman’s ovaries and pelvis.” It is actually a “health risk.” That’s right, a health risk. Why getting in the passenger seat is less of a “health risk” must be some kind of a miracle. Driving is so unhealthy for women, according to the skeikh, it could even affect her unborn babies. In fact, if Saudi Arabia were to allow it, more women and men would turn to homosexuality and pornography. These comments were based on a “scientific” study done by Saudi Arabia’s highest religious council alongside a former professor at King Fahd University. The study also “found” that allowing women to drive could result in prostitution and divorce.

Prostitution however, is already a part of the Muslim world and has nothing to do with driving. A new report from an NGO states that there are over 100,000 sex slaves in Turkey, and half of them are children. And while Muslims from around the world have been travelling to Syria to join the fight of the Al-Qaeda linked rebels, underage Tunisian girls have also done their part to “help the cause.” They’ve been sent to sexually satisfy these jihadis and have returned pregnant. Nothing more than a prostitution ring, this is another prime example of how Islam treats its precious jewels.

Ibn Warraq explains the basis for demeaning women in Islam. Beginning with the concept of Eve, the first woman, as a temptress who set the stage. Warraq writes, “Modern Muslim commentators interpret certain verses to show that guile, deceit, and treachery are intrinsic to a woman’s nature. Not only is she unwilling to change, she is by nature incapable of changing – she has no choice…”

Quranic verses expose the truth about women in Islam:

4.11. Allah chargeth you concerning (the provision for) your children: to the male the equivalent of the portion of two females.4.34. Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart; and scourge (beat) them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted, Great.

Warraq explains that in Islam, a man is allowed to beat his wife if she refuses to make herself beautiful for him; refuses to meet his sexual demands; leaves the house without permission or without any legitimate reason recognized by law; or neglects her religious duties.

Having to walk around like a blob, covered head-to-toe; getting their clitoris carved out and getting sewn almost completely shut; being denied an education or the right to work in a “gender mixing” job; verbal, physical and sexual abuse; running the risk of getting killed for any number of horrific “crimes” such as looking at a boy, talking to men on the street if they aren’t relatives, wearing Western clothing, not wearing a hijab, having a boyfriend, refusing to marry a stranger, getting raped… If this is what “precious” means, I’m glad I’m not so precious.

Muslim DHS Advisor Is Clear And Present Danger To America

By Godfather Politics

Mohamed Elibiary is a radical Muslim who last month was promoted to a senior fellow position on the Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council.  He is a vocal supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood who if you recall named the US as an enemy to be destroyed.

Under most presidential administrations Elibiary would have been warned to keep his mouth shut and probably would have been removed from his influential position in the DHS.  However, the Obama administration has repeatedly demonstrated that they will cater to the radical Muslim Brotherhood ahead of most American conservative and Christian groups so Elibiary has been allowed to spout out his Islamic ideology and is now warning Americans about their attitudes towards Muslims.

Keep in mind as you continue to read below just what this man’s job is.  According to official Homeland Security website, the Homeland Security Advisory Council’s mission is:

“The Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary on matters related to homeland security. The Council comprises leaders from state and local government, first responder communities, the private sector, and academia.”

In other words, Elibiary has a key role in determining the security and safety of America and when you read what this man is saying, that should cause you to be very alarmed.

Elibiary is a strong supporter of the Islamic martyr Sayyid Qutb, who was executed in 1966 for trying to over throw the Egyptian government.  Before his death, Qutb called all Muslims to unite and form a global Islamic state.  He stated:

“There is only one place on earth which can be called the home of Islam (Dar-ul-Islam), and it is that place where the Islamic state is established and the Shariah is the authority and God’s limits are observed.”

Qutb, who defined the non-Muslim world as the ‘house of war’ (Dar-ul-Harb) wrote:

“A Muslim can have only two possible relations with Dar-ul-Harb: peace with a contractual agreement, or war.”

“A country with which there is a treaty will not be considered the home of Islam.”

Referring to the writings of Qutb, Elibiary wrote:

“The potential for a strong spiritual rebirth that’s truly ecumenical allowing all faiths practiced in America to enrich us and motivate us to serve God better by serving our fellow man more.”

The rebirth he refers to is the rebirth of Islam and the God he refers to is Allah, not our God.

Elibiary’s photo on Twitter has a yellow box in the corner with a black hand holding up four fingers.  The Muslim Brotherhood adopted this logo to symbolize the supposed martyrdom of the pro-Morsi demonstrators killed in Cairo on August 14.  What makes this significant is that not only does it publically show his support for Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood; it goes against the standards of conduct that most federal employees are held to.  People holding public office are supposed to conduct themselves in a manner respectful of their position, but no one in the federal government is doing or saying anything about Elibiary’s outward support for an extremist organization.

According to PJ Media, about a year after Elibiary’s appointment to the DHS Security Advisory Council, he downloaded files from the Texas Department of Public Safety and tried to sell them to a variety of liberal media outlets in an effort to defame Gov. Rick Perry and make him into an islamophobe.  Fortunately, even the left wing media shied away from Elibiary’s anti-Perry crusade.

Five congressmen including Louie Gohmert (R-TX) and Michele Bachmann (R-MN) questioned the logic or ethics of Elibiary’s appointment to his DHS position.  Their concerns were based upon his open support of the Muslim Brotherhood, which some members of Congress and others consider to be an extremist organization with terrorist ties.  Their concerns were swept to the side and labeled as being McCarthyistic in nature.

Just last month Elibiary went on Twitter to defend Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood while at the same time claiming that all of the problems and violence was caused by the Christian minority.  He failed to mention that Morsi had given all non-Muslims in Egypt three options: convert to Islam, pay a huge tax or leave the country.  Morsi’s military and police were systematically attacking Egypt’s Christians, beating them, raping the women, looting their possessions and burning their homes and churches, and yet Elibiary blames them for the violence.

In his latest social media racist tirade, Elibiary went on Twitter with the following message:

“If #TeaParty wants US revived then we must swing Blue seats Red & that is only achievable thru Libertarianism, not Christianist Xenophobia.”

Also on Twitter, he calls some people ‘white identity/privilege types’ who have a problem with a ‘black president’ and ‘brown Mexicans.’  WND contacted Elibiary via email and asked him to clarify his comments and he responded saying:

“’Christianist’ is a term coined about a decade ago and like ‘Islamist’ (for Muslims) and ‘Zionist’ (for Jews) refers to Christians who mix theology and nationalism.”

“Christianists” view “today’s politics through a theologically influenced (Calvinist) view of America’s founding.”

“Xenophobia is easier for you to understand on your own, but it generally manifests itself in anti-immigrant policies of which Islamophobia today inside the U.S. is just one sub-component for some White Identity/Privilege types that have a problem with a black president, brown Mexicans and so on and so forth.”

“WND certainly would often times fall in this camp as well as perhaps a subset of Christianists that political scientists refer to as ‘Christian Zionists’ because of its foreign policy worldview through a dispensationalist end-time theology.”

Not only do I find Elibiary’s comments to be alarming and anti-American, but so does Michael Meunier, President of the Al-Haya Party in Egypt.  He responded to Elibiary’s tweets by saying:

“I think the Obama administration should be ashamed to have had someone like this in their administration.  This underscores the thinking inside the Obama administration.”

While I agree with him that Elibiary should not be part of the government administration, I have to disagree with his reasoning.  I truly believe that Elibiary shares the exact same views on the Muslim Brotherhood that Barack Obama does.  Through all of the Egyptian violence and turmoil, Obama has remained steadfastly supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood while at the same time has said and done nothing concerning the genocide of Egypt’s Christians at the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Now realize that this Muslim who follows radical Islamists who proclaim the need to create a worldwide Islamic state is advising the federal government on the safety and security of American soil and citizens.  How can anyone trust such a person?  His own words tell us that he hates America’s Christian foundation and the conservative Christians trying so desperately to preserve our nation.  He has no place in our government.  In all honesty, based upon his affiliations and his own words, he needs to be placed on the terrorist watch list instead of a Washington office building.

Mohamed Elibiary poses a clear and present danger to the American people and our nation.

---