Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Muslim Brotherhood): Juan Williams is "un-American"

Ellison gets more Islamic every day, now he sports that cool looking beard...I don't usually agree with Juan Williams, but he is far more a gentleman the Ellison...Free speech is really only for liberals, and Mahoundians and Mahoundian Congressman, to say any nasty disparaging thing about whom ever they choose...the rest of us, can shut up...Or at least that's what they would lead us to believe...

I generally look for the subtleties. Ellison is making the case that the 9/11 jihadists did not dress in Muslim garb ("whatever that is" - Ellison); rather they made sure they looked as "mainstream" as possible, etc. (41 seconds). Then approximately one minute into the interview, Mr. Ellison says the following, as best as I could transcribe it:

"People (Muslims) who are just practicing their faith or their culture MORE LIKELY these people aren't any danger to our country; these folks are minding their own business BY AND LARGE...."

by and large adv.
For the most part; generally: By and large, the play was a success.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/by+and+large

I don't know that Mr. Williams (or most American for that matter) would - at this juncture in our history - disagree with the statement that Muslims here in America
are "more likely" minding their own business, "by and large."

Since JW often treats the wider world to the intricacies of American Politics (and I did read comparative politics) then maybe you would be interested in an insider's view of the Tower Hamlets debacle. The insider is a Labour (ie Democrat) supporter and gives a potted version of what happened and how the Muslim minority managed to seize control because of incompetence by the Labour Party (yes here, in the cradle of the English Language we spell Labor as Labour).

http://lukeakehurst.blogspot.com/2010/10/tower-hamlets.html

If you can pick up Andrew Gilligan's reports (daily telegraph)then you will get even more on the evil machinations of the Muslim community - well SOME of them.

This is a dirty game and sadly we must play dirtier to win.

Excuse me ....a Muslim congressman who has accepted favors from the Muslim Brotherhood, he accuses another American - who expresses concern, nay fear of a re-enactment of the Flying Imams or the Syrian Musicians not to mention far worse when he sees an ostentatious Muslim entering a passenger plane - of not being patriotic? Has being a perfectly sane and reflecting and honest human being become contrary to the Islamic Human Rights?
Perhaps it has ...that would explain a lot.

I sincerely hope that more people like this congressman get on the air and deride those who dare to speak up so more people will wake up and see their enemy for what it is.

Keith Ellison, and American?

Sad.

Ellison, as would be expected, is missing the point which is not the wisdom of William's personal reaction but that Williams had the right to simply describe his reaction.

What is of unacceptable is a state of affairs in which any unflattering public remark concerning Muslims or Islam - even innocently made - can bring a call from CAIR to your employer demanding punitive action. We cannot allow CAIR or any Muslim organization to militate against free expression like this.

Worried is if you hear your pilot is Mahoundian. They shouldn't even be on planes anyway, they should travel by camel and drink its piss as in-ride refreshment. They hate us and think they're better - fine then; no phones, electricity, cars, medicines (besides the camel piss), etc. How truly pathetic that they can think they're better and God is on their side when they are so backward.

Silly Mussies, when will you join the ranks of humanity?

OT. Robert, you wrote, "Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't."

Will you speak out publicly against (repudiate) this? We've been watching the rapprochement between the Church and the global jihad for some time now. It is neither peaceful nor just. Nor is it Biblical. Jesus himself would condemn it. It is the antithesis of peace and justice:

'Vatican calls for end to occupation of Arab territories'
By JPOST.COM STAFF
10/23/2010 14:43

Conference of Catholic bishops for Mideast reportedly call for UN, int'l community to create Palestinian state through legal means; statement says "Holy City of J'lem will be able to acquire its proper status."

http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=192474

"In a separate part of the document -- a section on cooperation with Jews -- the synod fathers also took issue with Jews who use the Bible to justify settlements in the West Bank, which Israel captured in 1967.

"Recourse to theological and biblical positions which use the Word of God to wrongly justify injustices is not acceptable," the document said.

"Many Jewish 'settlers' and right-wing (sic) Israelis claim a biblical birthright to the West Bank, which they call Judea and Samaria and regard as a part of historical, ancient Israel given to the Jews by God.

"Asked about the passage at a news conference, Greek-Melchite Archbishop Cyrille Salim Bustros, said:

"We Christians cannot speak about the promised land for the Jewish people. There is no longer a chosen people. All men and women of all countries have become the chosen people.

"The concept of the promised land cannot be used as a base for the justification of the return of Jews to Israel and the displacement of Palestinians," he added. "The justification of Israel's occupation of the land of Palestine cannot be based on sacred scriptures."

"The synod's concluding message repeated a Vatican call for Jerusalem to have a special status "which respects its particular character" as a city sacred to the three great monotheistic religions -- Judaism, Christianity and Islam.....

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3973590,00.html

Keith Ellison isn't a moslem and he knows it. He is a lapsed Catholic. He is a political opportunist who saw the rising, though unfortunate, moslem population in Michigan and decided to join the fray. Keith, you can always come home. God bless.

Juan Williams just spoke the truth.

He feels uncomfortable with seeing sharia here in America.

He knows that the only ones in the world who promote jihad are Muslims.

For that he gets fired?

There is a simple way to deal with NPR.

Cut it off from its affiliates.

Without the local affiliate radio stations, such as WAMU-FM, in Washington, DC, NPR is dead.

Let your affiliates know why you refuse to support them anymore, why you are voting with your pocket books.

They are not forced to carry NPR.

Yet, they choose to use your contributions to support it.

Let them know that you will not contribute until they remove NPR coverage from their airwaves.

Also, when the FCC renews their licenses, complain that they are abusing their public-service status.

Put their feet to the fire.

http://www.jewishdailyreport.wordpress.com

The only reason left wing loons like Ed Schlitz want the "Fairness Doctrine" is because no intelligent American watches shows like his.

MSNBC'S ratings are in the tank compared to FOX who would never call for the fairness doctrine because they have a huge audience. Is it any wonder that MSNBC.com that operates independently has distanced themselves from MSNBC Cable in the last couple of months because of the leftwingers like Keith Overbite,Rachal Madcow,Ed Schlitz, and Chris Tingles Matthews.

Why did we see the radio talk programs like Air America collapse over and over again after being propped up numerous times? because no one listens to their narrow minded anti American crap--simple as that.

""The synod's concluding message repeated a Vatican call for Jerusalem to have a special status "which respects its particular character" as a city sacred to the three great monotheistic religions -- Judaism, Christianity and Islam....."

yo!! herr pope (and minions)

jerusalem judea and samaria are israel's. point!
get used to it!!!

for 19 years (prior to 1967) no jew was allowed in eastern, nonliberated jerusalem...where were the outcries then?...
huh!
antisemitism is unfortunately alive and well in most places and takes different forms of expression. unfortunately, all these hypocritical 'humanists' are still trying to perfect their eulogy speech for israel and the jewish people....
the answer is take that piece of paper where you wrote your sick notes and SHOVE IT !!!

Juan Williams is un-Ameerican. But this Koran-sworn-in Congressman is as American as apple pie.

I feel like taking that stuff off the shelf and putting it into the garbage

was Keith Ellison talking about the Koran there?

I guess not because I have not heard Obama's outrage about that threat.

my last post was a reply (with quote) to wildjew

Congressman Keith Ellison's prophet, Muhammad, says your lives and property are not safe from him unless you become a Muslim

In Sahih Bukhari, the most canonical hadith collection:

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24:

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform all that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."

-----------------------------------

In Sahih Bukhari, the most canonical hadith collection, Congressman Keith Ellison's prophet, Muhammad, said,

"Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him."

Various other canonical hadiths attest that Muhammad called for death to those who leave Islam. That's why even today all the schools of Islamic law prescribe death for apostasy from Islam.

-----------------------------------

Congressman Keith Ellison's prophet, Muhammad, in core Islamic texts, rejects religious pluralism

For example, in Sahih Muslim, a canonical hadith collection.

Book 19, No. 4366
It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah [Muhammad] (may peace be upon him) say:"I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim."

-------------------------------------

On page 222 (326 in the Arabic) of the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad, Congressman Keith Ellison's prophet, Muhammad, affirms that those who do not follow him will be slaughtered.

Abu jahl said to them: "Muhammad alleges that if you follow him you will be kings of the Arabs and the Persians. Then after death you will be raised to gardens like those of the Jordan. But if you do not follow him you will be slaughtered, and when you are raised from the dead you will be burned in the fire of hell." The apostle [Muhammad] came out to them with a handful of dust saying: "I do say that."

---------------------------------------------------------------

On page 464 (690 in the Arabic) of the earliest Muslim biography of Congressman Keith Ellison's prophet, Muhammad, presides over the beheading of 600 to 900 Jews:

Then [the Banu Qurayza tribe] surrendered, and the apostle [Muhammad] confined them in Medina in the quarter of d. al-Harith, a woman of B. al-Najjar. Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. Among them was the enemy of Allah Huyayy b. Akhtab and Ka`b b. Asad their chief. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900. As they were being taken out in batches to the apostle they asked Ka`b what he thought would be done with them. He replied, 'Will you never understand? Don't you see that the summoner never stops and those who are taken away do not return? By Allah it is death!' This went on until the apostle made an end of them.

----------------------------------------

So who does Congressman Keith Ellison think he is, to call Juan Williams un-American? I think the boot is on the other leg.

How secure is Ellison's congressional seat? Is there any chance of his being ousted in the coming election? Are there any Twin Cities' JW readers who can provide input on these questions?

There is a very simple way to fight back.

Do it right now.

Find out your local NPR-affiliate station.

Contact the Federal Communications Commission, which renews their license as a public broadcaster. Complain that they are abusing their status by carrying biased, anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, anti-black broadcasting from NPR. Cite the Juan Williams firing.

Fill out their complaint form.

Contact the administration of the local station and let them know what you have done and that you will not support them financially as long as they carry NPR.

Let your friends know what to do and how to do it. Let it go viral.

Congress will soon consider a bill to defund NPR which is partly supported by your tax dollars. Let them know how you feel on this.

Here is all the info.

http://jewishdailyreport.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/juan-williams-boomerang-npr-terrified-with-backlash/

The same funding that got Keith Ellison to Mecca, got him elected, and it is the same funding that got this president into the white house, and the same funding that flooded NPR after they sacked Williams and is the same funding that is building 10 mega mosques across the US today...and it will be the same funding getting more Keith Ellison's elected..and the more the price of Oil goes north the more disposable Saudi Zakat money will be available to convert this nation to their path....

Muslim Brotherhood's (Sunni) Islam is Rep Ellison's ticket (from obscurity) to Glory. They gave him a ticket to ride on.

Ellison ... "he's got a chicken to ride and he don't care."
Yes his ticket seems to have been punched by the blessing of the great Islam, but he doesn't know what american is. Maybe his faith has erased his understanding of American rights and freedoms, I don't know, but he is riding on his Muslim ticket rather well. To some, what Williams said wasn't nice, but it wasn't un-american. Americans speak their minds, whether what they have to say is is pretty or not.

A uneasy, gut level feeling, born out of a violence, is what Juan Williams was conveying in his remarks. Ethic profiling, and a blanket distrust of all things Islamic, is the fruit of Jihad.

In my youth I was threatened with a handgun in my face, shots going off past my ear, because I was a hippie and he a biker. Some bikers at a rock festival got their butts kicked when they tried to throw their weight around. I just happened to run into a group of wounded, shamed bikers at the wrong time. I always feel leary when bikers are around. They may be harmless dentists or accountants doing their weekend warrior role play on American Iron, or hardcore drug death dealing 1 per centers.

It's the hardcore 1 per centers of Islam we all have to watch out for. Don't waste your breath telling me my approach to self preservation is unpatriotic, or unfair.

"The covenant (the giving of the land) is eternal and it is stated over and again the book of Genesis. Is God's word now meaningless in the eyes of the Church?"

Oh, stop with the bible and the torah, already!

We can both argue about it, till we're both blue in the face!

What is valid in ancient days to YOU, is NOT valid to me! To to who or what the "god" in the bible is!

Or who has rights to land since the ancient days.

Let's just stick to the present day, eh?

A Goddess/Nature worshipper

That was my signature

I think everybody stole everybody's land since the ancient days. You can see in history that there really are no "indigenous" peoples - anywhere. Even here in the Americas- if you go back to ancient days. Each groupo has uprooted a previous group.

Let's all set ancient "sacred" texts aside, and today, stick together like glue, for what is JUST.

Let's just set differences aside, religion and culture. This is the ONLY way we will not only survive, but flourish and Evolve Humanity.

muslims are BIG on apologies, aren't they? Ellison needs to shut his ugly pie hole. Juan does NOT need to apologize for his statement. And for your 911, Keith, the majority of Americans agree with Juan, so there. I mean of course other passengers would feel uncomfortable flying with a muslim. Anyone being honest would say the same thing; and Juan is not UNAMERICAN, so you can shut up about that as well.

Ellison is one slick ole boy, isn't he? ...he would have us think that the muslims responsible for 9/11 were just some poor, misguided "misunderstanders" of islam. What a liar Ellison is! And he is the one who's unamerican. I'm not saying that all muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are MUSLIM. Hello!

The interviewer should have his head examined, too. "Always a pleasure". What, is he kidding? Surprised he didn't kiss his b-hind.

Ellison is in no position to determine who is and is not "un-American". What a floater in the bowl, this asino.

Juan Williams should "apologize profusely to the people of this country?"

For what? Telling the truth?

The majority in this country are backing Williams.

Ellison said he felt like taking books off his shelves and throwing them in the garbage. Maybe he should just take the plunge into the garbage himself instead?

DO NOT Re-elect Keith Ellison!

Please vote this man OUT of office this November!

What a scum!

So, Williams is "un-American?" Where was he born? In Africa?Heheheh. (in Africa, the people would id him as ABSOLUTELY American!)

It's just that the people in this coutnry, the minute one says something that particular Americdan doesn't like, the first thing out of their mouths is "OOO, you're anti-American" or "you're a racist."

For example, imagine, my shock when I read on a Forum at the time of Katrina, "ooo, the people of New Orleans deserve what they got, because they wre told to leave before."

Whaaat!

I always had the impression that Americans should STICK TOGETHER no matter the issue. Wasn;t it always, "My Country right or wrong?" Or, "I'm an American!"

I doubt whether any American in different parts of the country agree on anything. From the West Coast to the Southwest, to Florida to teh deep South, to the Midwest.

Well, there's no telling what is safe to say in today's atmosphere.

" Because this nation (the US) is in the forefront of this effort to establish a Muslim-enemy state in Israel."

No it's not. The U.S. is rather on the FOREFRONT in defense of israel. Not to mention the billions of US$ and high tech weaponry the U.S. gives to that country.

"It's every moslem we have to watch out for"

Reminded me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXQozTxQSiE

Ok, Wildjew, I'm not going to argue with you. I wish you the best. Peace.

"Free speech is really only for liberals, and Mahoundians and Mahoundian Congressman, to say any nasty disparaging thing about whom ever they choose...the rest of us, can shut up...Or at least that's what they would lead us to believe..."

Naw, free speech isn't something they give us. It's something we take. We took it from the English and made them hear us roar. Time to do the same with the uninvited Mohammadans.

Since the subject of what is American, or un-American, has been raised, here is a classic from the jihadwatch archives, first posted in August 2008.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/08/fitzgerald-muslims-and-america.html

'Fitzgerald: Muslims and America'

I recommend it to all those who have joined this forum since that date, and may not have had time to explore the archives.

Click on the link and read. You won't regret it.

You will also find, in the comments thread to that article, among other things, two most interesting documents: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. Read the second - the Cairo Declaration - with your BS detector turned up to 'High' and your Islamspeak Enigma machine switched on.

Here, for persons not of United States nationality who may not yet be familiar with them, are two of the most important documents written in the 18th century:

The United States Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution of the United States (scroll down to read Articles I through X [to XIV], also known as the Amendments, sometimes referred to as the Bill of Rights).

The Declaration.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/declare.asp

Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

The Constitution.

http://constitutionus.com/

(Scroll down to see the Amendments).

Now, once you have clicked on those links and read those documents, read what I will post below: two translations of the legendary Pact of Omar, archetype of or template for all kinds of discriminatory and oppressive rules imposed upon dhimmis (non-Muslims within the Islamic state) in all parts of dar al Islam throughout the history of Islam; and the text of the form that some of these rules take in the 'Reliance of the Traveller', which many Muslims read, study, and take entirely seriously as an account of how society ought to be ordered.

Rules for Dhimmis.

Although few Islamised countries have these provisions formally on their law-books today, they are practiced informally in many, many places.

For instance: in every Islamised country it is very difficult, if not impossible for Christians [or Jews, or Hindus, or anyone non-Muslim] to gain permission to build a house of worship or to enlarge or repair an existing one.

From Ibn Kathir, the Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Riyadh, 2000; vol 4, pages 404-407; interpretation of Quran 9: 29. Reproduced in "Legacy of Jihad", pages 128-130}.

'Paying Jizyah is a Sign of Kufr and Disgrace' 

Allah said,

﴿حَتَّى يُعْطُواْ الْجِزْيَةَ﴾

(until they pay the Jizyah), if they do not choose to embrace Islam,

﴿عَن يَدٍ﴾

(with willing submission), in defeat and subservience,

﴿وَهُمْ صَـغِرُونَ﴾

(and feel themselves subdued.), disgraced, humiliated and belittled.

' Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimmah or elevate them above Muslims, for they are miserable, disgraced and humiliated.

'Muslim [i.e. the Sahih Muslim Hadith compiler - dda] recorded from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet said,

«لَا تَبْدَءُوا الْيَهُودَ وَالنَّصَارَى بِالسَّلَامِ، وَإِذَا لَقِيتُمْ أَحَدَهُمْ فِي طَرِيقٍ فَاضْطَرُّوهُ إِلَى أَضْيَقِه»


(Do not initiate the Salam to the Jews and Christians, and if you meet any of them in a road, force them to its narrowest alley.)

'This is why the Leader of the faithful `Umar bin Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him,

'demanded his well-known conditions be met by the Christians,

'these conditions that ensured their continued humiliation, degradation and disgrace.

'The scholars of Hadith narrated from `Abdur-Rahman bin Ghanm Al-Ash`ari that he said, "I recorded for `Umar bin Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, the terms of the treaty of peace he conducted with the Christians of Ash-Sham [THAT IS: the Byzantine Christians of formerly Byzantine ‘Palestine’, the Land of Israel - dda]:

`In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. This is a document to the servant of Allah `Umar, the Leader of the faithful, from the Christians of such and such city.

'When you (Muslims) came to us we requested safety for ourselves, children, property and followers of our religion.

'We made a condition on ourselves that

'we will neither erect in our areas a monastery, church, or a sanctuary for a monk, nor restore any place of worship that needs restoration nor use any of them for the purpose of enmity against Muslims.

'We will not prevent any Muslim from resting in our churches whether they come by day or night, and we will open the doors (of our houses of worship) for the wayfarer and passerby.

'Those Muslims who come as guests, will enjoy boarding and food for three days.

'We will not allow a spy against Muslims into our churches and homes or hide deceit (or betrayal) against Muslims.

'We will not teach our children the Qur'an,

'publicize practices of Shirk,

'invite anyone to Shirk

'or prevent any of our fellows from embracing Islam, if they choose to do so.

'We will respect Muslims, move from the places we sit in if they choose to sit in them.

'We will not imitate their clothing, caps, turbans, sandals, hairstyles, speech, nicknames and title names,

'or ride on saddles, hang swords on the shoulders, collect weapons of any kind or carry these weapons.

'We will not encrypt our stamps in Arabic, or sell liquor.

'We will have the front of our hair cut, wear our customary clothes [i.e. humiliating garments so that Muslims may know whom to attack - dda] wherever we are,

'wear belts around our waist,

'refrain from erecting crosses on the outside of our churches

'and demonstrating them and our books in public in Muslim fairways and markets.

'We will not sound the bells in our churches, except discretely,

'or raise our voices while reciting our holy books inside our churches in the presence of Muslims,

'nor raise our voices (with prayer) at our funerals,

'or light torches in funeral processions in the fairways of Muslims, or their markets.

'We will not bury our dead next to Muslim dead, or buy servants who were captured by Muslims.

'We will be guides for Muslims and refrain from breaching their privacy in their homes.”

[note : above it was stipulated that Muslims can invite themselves into a dhimmi’s house or church, but dhimmis are forbidden to enter a Muslim’s house: this is a revolting breach of the principle of reciprocity - dda].

'When I gave this document to `Umar, he added to it, “We will not beat any Muslim”.

{Note: this added clause, forbidding the dhimmis to strike a Muslim, is without qualification, and therefore removes from the dhimmis any right of self-defence if attacked by a Muslim - dda}.

'These are the conditions that we set against ourselves and followers of our religion in return for safety and protection.

'If we break any of these promises that we set for your benefit against ourselves, then our Dhimmah (promise of protection) is broken and you are allowed to do with us what you are allowed of people of defiance and rebellion.'''

{i.e – the Jihad resumes - mass murder, pillage, rape and enslavement against the entire community. And note that this clause which provides that ANY perceived, or supposed, or pretended, or even merely rumoured ‘breach’ of these punishingly oppressive Rules for Dhimmis, by even one member of the dhimmi community, justifies Total War to properly punish the ‘offending’ community – has over and over and over been provided the pretext for Muslims to attack dhimmi communities in the most vicious and horrible fashion - dda}


This material was originally flagged by one KAOSKTRL here at jihadwatch on September 9, 2007 at 3:38 PM.

The poster added the following information - That's tafseer Ibn Kathir and his take on the discussion. He is universally accepted [by modern Muslims] as an authority: 
http://infidelnation.org/Download.htm

I (dda) will add that I have seen Ibn Kathir’s commentary in pride of place on a bookshelt in a small suburban mosque in my hometown, when they held an 'open day'.

I will now give the text of a slightly different English translation of the same material, unearthed and shared by another jihadwatch poster, in March 2007.

"We heard from 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Ghanam [died 78/697] as follows:

" When 
Umar ibn al-Khattab, may God be pleased with him, accorded a peace to the 
Christians of Syria, we wrote to him as follows:

'In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate.

'This is a letter to the servant 
of God Umar [ibn al-Khattab], Commander of the Faithful, from the Christians of 
such-and-such a city.

' When you came against us, we asked you for safe-conduct 
(aman) for ourselves, our descendants, our property, and the people of our 
community, and we undertook the following obligations toward you:

'

We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, 
Churches, convents, or monks' cells,

'nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such 
of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims. 



'We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers.

'We shall give 
board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days. 



'We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor hide 
him from the Muslims.

'

We shall not teach the Qur'an to our children. 



'We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it.

'We shall not 
prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.

'

We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when 
they wish to sit. 

 {Anybody who is reminded of the Jim Crow laws, and of South African apartheid, is seeing correctly; as far as I can see, dhimmitude is a system of religion-based apartheid - dda}.

'We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the 
qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair.

'We shall not speak as 
they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas. 



'We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms 
nor carry them on our persons.

{Nota bene: dhimmis were forbidden to keep or to bear arms. This directly contradicts the famous Second Amendment of the American Constitution - "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." - dda}

'

We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.

'

We shall not sell fermented drinks.

'

We shall clip the fronts of our heads.

'

We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the 
zunar round our waists.

'

We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the 
Muslims.

'We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly.

'We shall not 
raise our voices when following our dead.

'We shall not show lights on any of the 
roads of the Muslims or in their markets.

'We shall not bury our dead near the 
Muslims. 



'We shall not take slaves who have been allotted to Muslims.

'

We shall not build houses overtopping the houses of the Muslims.

'

(When I brought the letter to Umar, may God be pleased with him, he added, "We 
shall not strike a Muslim.") 



'We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, 
and in return we receive safe-conduct.

'

If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, 
we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for 
contumacy and sedition. 



'Umar ibn al-Khittab replied: Sign what they ask, but add two clauses and impose 
them in addition to those which they have undertaken.

'They are: "They shall not 
buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims,"

and "Whoever strikes a Muslim with 
deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact."

- 

from Al-Turtushi, Siraj al-Muluk, pp. 229-230. 


- I am sure that muslims hate the fact that we can read their texts for ourselves now.
Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 8, 2007 11:27 AM

And just to complete the set, the 'Pact of Omar' as adapted by a Muslim in India, for the oppression and degradation of Hindus. Cited here in early 2009 by an Indian poster using the nom de plume AGL.

'AGL' wrote:

'Pakistan is trying to return the Indian subcontinent to the good old days where these were the rules:

http://www.factusa.org/totalexhibit/board06.htm

"From the "tolerant" Sufi leader Mir Sayyid Ali Hamadani (1314-1385 CE) book Zakhiratulmaluk

"1. Muslims' ruler shall not allow fresh constructions of Hindu temples and shrines for image worship.

'2. No repairs shall be executed to the existing Hindu temples and shrines.

'3. They shall not proffer Muslim names,

'4. They shall not ride a harnessed horse.

'5. They shall not go about with arms.

'6. They shall not wear rings with diamonds.

'7. They shall not deal in nor eat bacon.

'8. They shall not exhibit idolatrous images.

'9. They shall not build house in the neighborhood of Muslims.

'10. They shall not dispose of their dead in the neighborhood of Muslim Maqbaras nor weep nor wail loudly over their dead.

'11. They shall not deal in nor buy Muslim slaves.

'12. No Muslim traveller shall be refused lodgement in these temples and shrines where he shall be treated as a guest for three days by non-Muslims.

'13. No non-Muslims shall act as a spy in the Muslim state.

'14. No difficulty shall be offered to those non-Muslims who of their own choice show their readiness for Islam.

'15. Non-Muslims shall honor Muslims and shall leave their assembly whenever the Muslims enter the premises.

'16. The dress code of non-Muslims shall be different from that of Muslims to distinguish them."

Above, I see I omitted the portion of Reliance of the Traveller - a sharia rulebook - that lists some of the oppressive Rules for Dhimmis.

Here they are.

"o11.5
'...non-Muslim subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property.

'In addition, they:

'(1) are penalized for committing adultery or theft, though not for drunkenness;


'(2) are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar);

'(3) are not greeted with “as-Salamu alaykum”;

(4) must keep to the side of the street;

'
(5) may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims’ buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;

{I have a suspicion that one of the reasons that Osama bin Laden specifically attacked the Twin Towers on September 11, and one of the reasons that Muslims all over the world screeched with hysterical delight when the Towers were razed, was because of this petty bully mentality according to which non-Muslims are *not permitted* to possess or build any building taller than a building belonging to Muslims. How dare the Infidels have the tallest building in the world!! OUTRAGEOUS! And it isn't a coincidence, either, that subsequent to 9/11 the rich Muslim gang bosses in the Emirates set out to build 'the world's tallest building' (which is also, alas, possibly one of the ugliest...)...because, with the Twin Towers in ashes, the Muslim Ummah could sit on its dunghill and crow. - dda}

'(6) are forbidden to openly display wine or pork {which is why the Muslims across the road issued mafia style threats to one Mr Friedman, proprietor of the Breslin Bar in NYC, which had *dared* to hold a pork roast Food Festival - dda},

'(A: to ring church bells or display crosses,)

'recite the Torah or Evangel aloud,

'or make public display of their funerals and feast-days {nota bene - there goes Mardi Gras, if Europe is Islamified - dda};


''(7) and are forbidden to build new churches."

Any Muslim who claims that Sharia - which includes the oppressive dhimmi rules - is compatible in any way with the United States Constitution, is either deluded, or a damnable liar.

As for Keith Ellison being a judge of patriotism, Islam among American blacks (whether NOI or orthodox) started out as a rejection of an American identity. That's the history of the thing, pure and simple.

Contact Keith Ellison:
Call

*
Minneapolis Office:
612-522-1212
Office hours:
8:30 AM to 6:00 PM Central Time, Monday Through Friday
*
Washington Office:
202-225-4755
Office hours:
8:00 AM to 5:00 PM Central Time, Monday Through Friday

FAX
* Minneapolis Fax Number: 612-522-9915
* Washington Fax Number: 202-225-4886

BLOW UP HIS PHONES WITH FAXES!!

After watching this interview very closely, my impression is that the interviewer was being careful. Extraordinarily careful! I have rarely seen a guest be allowed to pontificate and rant, uninteruupted, for almost two minutes. Journalists are being bound and gagged as never before. While the interviewer did make a few statements to afffirm Ellison, he also, with a laugh, suggested that the fairness doctrine (although it has been abolished since 1987) be used as a response rather than Juan Williams termination. I don't think he could resist an objection to this blatant political censorship, however veiled.

How are Islamic elements able to intimidate and manipulate our press and politicians? They were somehow able to shut down an episode of South Park, a show that has taken below-the-belt shots at everyone and everything, with no prior censorship. And a columnist who took issue with this is now in hiding, living in fear for her life. Talk about un-American Mr. Ellison!

It's amazing what these Islamic jihadists can get away with. Check out this youtube below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NECXTk3SxKM&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NECXTk3SxKM&feature=player_embedded

check out freedom of speech

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NECXTk3SxKM&feature=player_embedded

First of all this congressman should not be in congress since he hasn't taken the oath of office on the bible, he forced his will and the PC people gave in and let him swear on the koran, which has as much validity as the toilet paper I use.

What validity can this oath have , when it is done on a supposedly religious book that incites you to lie in order to obtain your goal.

The worst part is the precedent he managed to establish. A halt to all muslim immigration has to be put in place. These people are being financed by their government to emigrate and cause an increase on their numbers to obtain political pressure. Look at Europe. Am I a bigot or racist because I try to eliminate what is our enemy? ENEMY, nothing else.There isn't a moderate muslim , there are only follwers of Islam.

We have an army, and not all of us are in the army ,but we support our troops, don't we. Well it is the same with these muslims, they all support their army, which the PC calls the extremist or jihadist. They are all cockroaches from the same nest.

The awful thing is that in Australia we have just had a Muslim - Bosnian Muslim! - one 'Ed Husic' - sworn in as our first Muslim federal MP...using a Koran!! Brrrrr.

Read all about it in an article in the Australian Jewish News.

http://jewishnews.net.au/news/2010/10/04/multicultural-moment-at-parliament-opening/15720

As far as I am concerned, an Aboriginal MP making his maiden speech in a kangaroo-skin cloak given him by the Elders, and three Jewish MPs wearing kippahs and swearing on the Jewish portion of the Bible, are FINE. I know they'll keep their oaths about as well as any other non-Muslim Aussie politician...

But a Bosnian Muslim MP who swears his oath on the Koran is something else entirely.

I read that article, so naively enthusiastic, so ignorant of the distinction between Jewish and Aboriginal law and custom, on the one hand, and the ferociously supremacist Muslim code, on the other; and I remembered Mr Shahzad, the failed Times Square bomber, being grilled about his Oath of Allegiance by his Jewish judge, and replying coolly "I swore, but I didn't mean it".

I do ask myself whether Mr Ed Husic approached his oath to Queen and Parliament - to a non-Islamic sovereign and system of law and government - in exactly the same way as Mr Shahzad. But I don't suppose we'll get a journalist game to put him on the spot and ask him that question, point blank.

I wonder, too, whether one day we'll find out that Mr Ellison, when *he* did *his* swearing-in on Jefferson's Koran, 'swore, but didn't mean it'.

I observe, by the way, that Mr Ellison is growing his beard. That doesn't seem to me to bode well. Does this indicate an increasing level of sharia-mindedness or even jihad-readiness? Is his 'inner struggle' to conform himself to the example of the deceased Warlord, Ha-Meshugga, becoming more intense?

A question for the Australian Parliament, and for Congress.

How thorough are the security checks carried out upon MPs and Congressmen? Are they frisked from head to toe before entering the House, or the Capitol? Do they pass through metal detectors? Are their briefcases and laptops, or whatever it is they carry into the Chamber with them, examined?

What measures are being taken to ensure that a Muslim MP, or a Muslim Congressman, is not able to pull a Major Nidal Malak Hasan even on the floor of Parliament or of Congress, or in the maze of corridors behind?