Three jihad plots in the U.S. in one week

"I can believe it in US muslims only 0.8 percent can do damage like this, imagine 10 percent,what will happen?"

Hope this helps to answer your query.

http://docstalk.blogspot.com/2008/03/islam-is-not-religion-nor-is-it-cult-it_16.html

Besides, that is, by destroying America, by increasing its debt, subverting free enterprise, and promoting radical Islam and the enemies of freedom.

It is almost every day now. Jihadi attacks in America. This past week there were three attempted jihad attacks.
..............................

If you had told me just a little over ten years ago that violent Muslim plots would *be the norm* in America, I'm not sure I would have believed it.

Why aren't people *outraged*? Also, how long before another one of these Jihadists slips through the FBI net?

More:

And what does the media consider the problem? Racistislamophobicantimuslimbigots, of course.
..............................

That's right—it's not that Islam wants to kill us—it's our taking issue with that fact that seems to be the problem. Madness...

More:

Media reports said that Osmakac, a devout Muslim, was "self-radicalized." You have to wonder if Western dhimmis stay up nights thinking up new terms for jihad. Pathetic.
..............................

Well, I think *they do*. We seem to ave run through "Islamic extremist", and "Muslim radical", and "The War on Terror", and have rejected them all—even the last—as too explicit.

The ludicrous "Man-Caused Disasters" never really caught on. I am of two minds about that—on the one hand, what could possibly be vaguer and more nebulous than referring to deliberate violence as something that sounds as though it would describe honest human error?

On the other hand, even such an absurd term as this—if used consistently—would give us something to hang Jihad on. Instead, we have a vacillating, amorphous state where violent Jihad often is not referred to in any way at all—not even euphomistically.

More:

Soon after his arrest, video emerged that showed how pious and violent Sami Osmakac really was, as he attacked and bloodied Christian street preachers. The pious Osmakac, who was completely the aggressor, then cried victim to the police, saying that he had been "insulted," the same fictitious narrative that we are bombarded with...
..............................

Oh, but Osmakac *was* insulted. That wouldn't mean any of the preachers need have said anything pejorative about Islam—the mere fact that they were out there, proselytizing for a non-Muslim faith, was an "insult" to Islam as far as this good Muslim was concerned.

And so he did what any pious Muslim would do, and *physically attacked* these preachers.

More:

The police, in what has become standard practice in dealing with Islamic supremacists, treated the perpetrator and the victim with equal contempt, actually charging the bloodied Christian with battery. This was in the same town, Tampa, that classified what was obviously an honor killing of a Muslim woman, Fatima Abdallah, as a "suicide."
..............................

This blatant dhimmitude is as alarming in its own way as is the Jihad.

More:

Even worse, after the terrorism arrest, Hassan Shibly, director of the Florida chapter of CAIR, cried "entrapment."
..............................

As Robert Spencer notes, what would it take for the average American to want to commit violent Jihad?

Much crime hinges on basic—and in other contexts, rational—human desires. "Entrapment" for soliciting a prostitute, engaging in theft, or even buying drugs, can, to a point at least, be argued. Why? Because the average person might be expected to want to have sex, or obtain a new stereo system. The only issue is its legality in context.

But—who but a Jihadist would *want* to murder random Infidels, even if he thought he could get away with it and have someone else pay for the explosives?

This is *not* a normal desire for Westerners—and no amount of yelling "entrapment" will make it so.

More:

This is, of course, typical of jihadis, but what is really outrageous is that the FBI briefed Shibly prior to Osmakac's arrest. Hamas-CAIR was briefed? Was Qaradawi briefed, too?...
..............................

Again, the dimmitude is *outrageous*. Is the NAACP notified before the arrest of every African American? Would they even demand to be?

Regarding CAIR as a legitimate "civil rights" group in the first place is *insanity*.

More:

So three jihads in one week, and an ongoing sharp increase in jihad activity in Obama's America. Yet this is never remarked upon. It is deliberately ignored. And it's astonishing...

What's it's going to take? America, where are you on this?
...

Michael Kho wrote:

I can believe it in US muslims only 0.8 percent can do damage like this, imagine 10 percent,what will happen?
..............................

I *absolutely agree*. While there are no exact figures, Muslim represent as little as .6% of the population in the United States—certainly under 1%.

Even the ridiculously inflated figures you sometimes hear from supremacist Muslims claiming 7–12 Million Muslims would put the population at about 3%.

Yet post 9/11 Jihad attempts have *mushroomed*. This is partly due to insane immigration and "refugee" policies which have seen more Muslims entering the US.

But more that this, since Muslims still represent a *miniscule* part of the population, is that Jihadists are feeling increasingly emboldened. This is due to foolish American policies on both the national and local levels as much as to the Jihadists themselves.

And—as other have asked—*where is the outrage of the American people*? How is it possible that we seem ready to accept this as some sort of "new normal"?

Would we accept the carnage of Nigeria as "normal", as well? The oppression and violence of Egypt? The savagery of Somalia under Al-Shebab or of Afghanistan under the Taliban?

At one time, I would have angrily rejected such suggestions of passivity and surrender out of hand. Now—God help me—I am not so certain...

Here is an excerpt from Kitab al-jihad:

"[س من يجاهد من] الكفار على ضربين:

1 - ضرب يقاتلون إلى أن يسلموا أو يقتلوا أو يقبلوا الجزية.

وهم ثلاث فرق: اليهود، والنصارى، والمجوس.

2 - والآخر لا يقبل منهم الجزية، ويقاتلون حتى يسلموا أو يقتلوا: وهم كل من عدا الثلاث الفرق المذكورين.

[The ones against whom one does jihad from] the kuffar are of two types:

1 – The type that are fought against until they accept Islam, or until they are killed, or until they accept the jizya.

And they are three groups: the Jews, the Christians, and the Zoroastrians.

2 – The others from whom the jizya is not accepted. They are fought until they accept Islam or until they are killed. And they are everyone apart from the three mentioned groups."

Smredneck5 wrote:

Shia have barely any works of Tafsir on the Qur'an, Hadeeth books, Islamic law books etc. in general, not to mention in English...

Until I found a website that has those resources.
....................................

Thanks for the resource, Smredneck5. I'll go through them more thoroughly when I have time.

I did skim some of these "Hadiths", and the most notable thing for me was that they tend to lump in the Zoroastrians with the Jews and Christians.

This tells me two things: 1. they had already reached Iran when they wrote these "Hadiths", and 2. the only reason Jews and Christians were "allowed" to pay Jizya and not simply all murdered was that—unlike the pagans in dark-ages Arabia—there were simply too many of them for the Muslims to kill them all. Well, that—and the fact that they presented a milch cow that Muslims could endlessly exploit.

The same was true of Zoroastrians in Iran. Of course, they are now—1300 years later—just another threatened minority.

The same thing happened, eventually, in India with the Hindus—just too many people to slaughter outright.

God, I hate Islam.

Horrifying, not terrifying. Terror is what Islam wants to spread in order to paralyse opposition. It won't work. As well as reading Islam's history of brutal and genocidal expansion, read of its reverses, chaotic collapses and internecine schisms.

Ruslan,

I have to comment on your post.

I have done a bit of reading on the post-Yugoslav conflicts. One huge mistake the Serbs made is that they massacred innocent Muslims. There was provocation, the massacres were done by militias (I think), and were the Muslim forces also carried out massacres. Yet, the history of the Balkan conflict shows that any army, country, or territory puts itself at risk by throwing away its ethics.

If Israel had acted like that in any of its wars, chances would be much less of its survival. Israel is more directly threatened than any American or European country right now, and Israel has strongly maintained its ethics in its dealings with internal and external enemies. This doesn't mean the Israelis have been gentle, but by and large, they have not used more force, and often used less force, than the situation demanded.

I do not know why the US under President Clinton became involved in the conflict to the extent it did. We definitely engaged in nation-building. We definitely mass-bombed the Serbs. It is my impression that Serbia itself now renounces and punishes the perpetrators of crimes against civilians. And yet, that action gave the Serbs enough bad publicity that the US military intervention was not strongly opposed.

The US intervened, RonaldB, in 1999 not to first and foremost punish Serbia but to reassure European NATO members that the continued breakdown of former Yugoslavia would not spill over to their countries inordinately. It was message-time big time.

Serbians were guilty of atrocities to be sure, but so were many other ethnicities in the region. The Serbs were singled out because they were the easiest of all peoples to identify as some kind of bad guy. And, and this is critical, after the 1999 bombings the acute stage of Yugoslavia's breakdown ended and "only" the chronic stage ensued (which is where we still are). I wish most everyone would get this by now. I write this as one who thinks the Serbs no worse, nor no better, than their neighbors, and also as one who was completely against a separate state for Kosovo, which is a first-rate example of geopolitical overkill.

dear ruslan,

your comment posted @2;26am is unfortunately, the plain sad truth, demonstrated on a global scale. however the common denominator is this: muslims by nature are COWARDS, emboldened only when they sense they have the upper hand, the minute they have lost this advantage they have the shameless audacity to claim victim status. as you have said "innocent Muslim men and boys"...yeah right!
when they riot and burn cars in france, they are 'unemployed youts'...
and of course, on june 4th 1967 they were jordanians waiting to 'yitbach al yahood' (slaughter the jews!)...but just one day after... (!!!) they have miraculously been transformed into an oppressed people, 'the balestinians'...

so sick of muslim lies, cowardice, dishonesty...truly, scraping the bottom of society's barrell would still be considered 'la creme de la creme' as far as they go...

i share the same rage with you as far as the 'abominable media' goes.

Ruslan,

I have found the site you mentioned. It is extensive, so it will be awhile before I am able to discuss it.

Myron

welcome.

Here, there is the deepest sympathy for the Armenian survivors of jihad genocide in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Do share whatever your grandparents or others in the Armenian community did tell you, or others, about what happened to them and their families and communities.

You will find, here, people from India whose families survived Muslim assault during the Partition of India in 1947.

You will find here Jews whose forebears endured the seven hells of dhimmitude within the 'Muslim world', or who know Jews from that communiity.

You will find here Copts - some of them descended from people who escaped from dhimmitude in Egypt, some of them still trapped within the belly of the beast.

Every piece of testimony counts, because it all adds up, and every story from every part of the so-called Muslim world confirms every other story, and dovetails with what is known here about Muslim doctrine.