Pakistan: 50 Islamic scholars issue fatwa for jihad against U.S., order Muslims to stop calling America a "super power"

Good.

Let's rumble.

Ooops! - posted this to the wrong thread. Here it is again:

I used to think that Islam could be defeated non-violently, but over the last year I have become far more pessimistic, with the realisation that Islam is utterly ruthless, violent and warlike to its core.

The very name the they call us, 'Dar al-Harb', means the that Muslims recognize that war against us will be essential if stealth jihad fails to subvert us into dhimmitude.

So World War III is unavoidable, with violent warrior-culture countries such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran as the Axis Powers of our time.

If we wish to keep the casualties of this coming war to the minimum (at least on our side), then we need to accept the inevitability of conflict and prepare for it. We need to stop all further enemy immigration, use whatever methods may be necessary to encourage the ones already here to get out of Dar al-Harb altogether (rather than just move around like parasites jumping from one host to the next ), and keep critical occupations such as the armed forces and essential infrastructure free from Islamic subversives and saboteurs.

Did the Pakis miss the memo? I thought there already was a fatwa against the U.S.!

LAHORE – As many as 50 religious scholars associated with the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC), a conglomerate of 20 Barelvi school of thought groups, have declared that Jihad against the US would be obligatory for the entire [sic] in case of aggression against the country.
..............................

"Obligatory for the entire..."—that would be "Fard Ayn", or obligatory for every Muslim to perform (unlike "Fard Kifaya", which is a duty which imposed on the whole community of believers—and which the individual is not required to perform it as long as a sufficient number of community members fulfill it).

More:

The term "aggression" used in the fatwa is vague, and likely to be deliberately so: all hell can break loose at a time and place of their choosing...

According a press release issued here on Sunday, the scholars had issued a decree for Jihad against the US, terming it real Jihad in defence of the homeland...

In recent months, the SIC has threatened "anarchy" if Asia Bibi is pardoned for blasphemy, and staged protests demanding Pope Benedict XVI apologize for criticizing the blasphemy law.
..............................

*This* is an example of what Islam considers "defensive"—the murder of a peaceful Christian woman for claiming that Jesus offers more comfort than Muhammed.

And anyone who dares name this barbarism is guilty of threatening Islam.

They can shove their fatwas up where the sun don't shine. .

FRom the article:

"The scholars called upon the government to end the country’s role as front-line state in the so-called US war on terror and try to establish a new bloc comprising China, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan"

'China, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan'.

That's interesting. Not one *Arab* Islamic state appears to be featured here. All the Islamic states featured in this proposed 'new bloc' comprise non-Arab 'converted' peoples who haven't a hope of ever being treated decently or regarded as equals by the superior 'best of peoples' who are the Arab Muslims, but who are still desperately trying to achieve status and curry favour by being as Muslim as they possibly can...and to bring down the biggest and most prestigious prey item, the USA, the most infidel state of all, is one way of proving spectacularly how super-Muslim they are.

As for the others - Muslim (Sunni) Turkey and Muslim (Shiite) Iran have been traditionally rivals and enemies. Good luck with keeping them pointed in the same direction for any significant period of time.

And China is, of course, officially atheist, but is being made use of, because of its rivalry with and enmity toward the United States (and India). Bringing China into it is the classic Muslim tactic of attempting to one Infidel power off against another. Classic 'split the camp'. Of course, the Chinese - as many a foolish Infidel power has sought to do, in the past - presumably sees the Ummah (in particular, Islamic Pakistan) as a means of punishing or weakening or destroying its fellow-non-Muslims who it perceives as rivals/ enemies...but those who try to use the Sword of Islam in this way are wont to discover that it is an accursed weapon that turns against the wielder and slices off his hand ...or his head.

People might be interested in reading this: http://tribune.com.pk/story/259907/girl-accused-of-blasphemy-for-a-spelling-error/
An eight grader writing her Urdu exam in a small Pakistani town misspelt "naat" (a verse praising Mohammad) as "laanat" (curses). In the Urdu script this error is too easily made by merely putting the dot over the first letter just a couple of millimeters to the left. This girl and her mother will be lucky to survive.

China has its own muslim problem with the Uigars. And watch how they deal with it.

I can't see them bowing to some mad moon god any time soon.

" 'Defining 'Defeat'
Why the US has not been able until now to defeat Islamic Jihadists
By Tawfik Hamid
www.tawfikhamid.com
Ten years after September 11, 2001, the war on terror has not yet ended with a clear result. When we compare the huge power of the US and its vast resources to the power and resources of Islamic jihadists, we must feel surprised how the US is still struggling to achieve a clear victory. The US has spent trillions of dollars since 9/11 and has been engaged in its longest war in its history, but yet, it is unable to declare victory.
One of the reasons that led to this situation is failure to understand the concept of 'defeat' against a non-state actor.
Defeating an enemy can occur if the enemy is completely unable to launch or organize significant attacks and more importantly if the enemy lost its 'will' to continue fighting.
The first option (to make the enemy lose the ability to launch attacks) is difficult to achieve since the enemy uses primitive methods and focuses on attacking soft targets. We can try to defend the maximum number of soft targets but this still cannot be called 'victory' as the enemy continues its attempts to attack us.
The central idea to defeat an enemy is to make it lose the will or the desire to continue fighting. This can occur if the enemy is:
1- Afraid of death
2- Afraid of humiliation (if caught)
3- Afraid of being tortured
4- Afraid of a backlash against its cause
5- Become convinced that its ideology or core beliefs are wrong
6- Recognizes beyond doubt that it is losing the war and not accomplishing its strategic objectives
Let us now take these items one by one to understand why - despite the enormous costs to the US economy, the greatest nation in human history is still struggling with ending the Jihadism phenomenon.
1- The ideology of the enemy make the Jihadists unafraid of death and willing to die for Allah as martyrs to inherit paradise. This is, for example, in sharp contrast to the situation in World War II when the emperor of Japan surrendered as he did not want his people to die and thus ended the kamikaze attacks.
2- The enemy knows well that if they are taken as prisoners of war they are likely to be protected by the values of Human Rights in the West. Caring for giving Halal meat to the Guantanamo Bay detainees and allowing them to pray and read the Quran in the prison confirmed to the Jihadists that they will not be humiliated if they are caught by the US.
3- The Jihadists are aware that the US government does not allow torture any more.
4- The defense of Sharia law by Islamic apologists, the defense of building a mosque at Ground Zero, and the support of the Islamic Hijab by some US officials reassured the Jihadists that despite the criticism of Islam in the media, the real actions of the US government give the perception of supporting[ii], instead of directly countering, their ultimate aim of establishing Sharia all over the world.
5- Unlike communist ideology that can be proven wrong on an economical basis (in this life), proving to the Jihadists that their ideology is wrong is virtually impossible as they expect its outcome to be in the second life (NOT in this life).
6- The definition of victory and defeat is a relative term. For example, a Jihadist will still feel victorious in the war against the US when he sees US diplomats and soldiers wearing the Hijab as he considers this as a 'surrender' to Islamic Law.
In brief, it is vital that the US makes the Jihadists feel 'defeated'; otherwise it can continue to spend enormous resources without achieving real victory. Defining 'Defeat' is the first step towards achieving victory.
---
Quran 3:169 Think not of those who are slain in Allah's way as dead. Nay, they live, finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord.
One of the reasons that partially explain why France, unlike UK and Spain, has not been attacked by a significant terror act after Sep 11 is that it sent the Jihadists a clear message that its response to the attacks would be against the Hijab. The hijab, along with all religious symbols, was banned in French schools in 2004 This is a huge blow to the Jihadists' strategic objective of creating an Islamic state which typically starts by making Muslim women wears the Hijab".
-----

The votes are in. Turn Pakistan into a parking lot(improving our relationship with India), but we can't do anything yet. We need to free-up some people. Time will tell.

But the scenario is set. The religion, drags the country into a war that they can't win......
As always islam goes looking for a fight, and their doctrine can use anything as a catalyst. Kafirs on the planet, the eating of pork, Monday, Tuesday