| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
Yamin Zakaria at Al-Jazeerah (not the Qatari TV station) takes issue with the recent knighthood of the Muslim Council of Britain's Iqbal Sacranie -- and with the very idea that a Muslim can have allegiance to a non-Muslim state. Sacranie and MCB spokesman Inayat Bunglawala should refute this article using Islamic texts -- if they can -- if they don't want young Muslims in Britain to be swayed by it. But 10 to 1 they just ignore it.
The problem is not so much that he is saying that Allah's law supersedes human law, but that the content of that law is so much in opposition with Western norms and values. How long will Britain and other Western countries survive without facing up to that opposition?
"Knights and Lords of the 'Muslim Council of Britain' in Service of Whom?" from Al-Jazeerah (thanks to Nicolei):
“Although those with narrow minded view point may seek to rebel in France, and I think a very tiny number of school girls have still defied the ban but the vast majority have obeyed it...” (Inayat Bunglawala – Secretary, Media Committee of MCB)These are the words of a leading member of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), who are supposed to be the voice of the Muslim community in the UK. In reality, the MCB was setup by the British government and (one might question whether) the government contributes substantial funding towards it.
Only someone who is Islamically-illiterate or a belligerent enemy would scorn Muslims for striving to uphold Islamic commandments (Sharia laws) as “narrow-minded” or “rebellious”. Had the likes of Kilroy-Silk, Richard LittleJohn, Melanie Phillips or Polly Toynbee uttered those words, it would have been understandable; and expected because they have said much worse about Islam and Muslims. But, how can such hateful anti-Islamic rhetoric emanate from the spokesman of the MCB, Inayat Bunglawala.
Even someone with an elementary education in Islam would know that countless verses of the Holy Quran and numerous Hadiths (sayings of the Prophet (SAW)), confirm that rewards of heaven (paradise) in the Hereafter for those who abide by the Sharia laws; especially when one is striving to fulfil them under hardship. We are talking about something as fundamental and well-established as Khimar (Hijab, Islamic scarf) that is worn by the Muslim women all over the world from the inception of Islam. If the MCB claims to be a voice for Muslims at the very least one would expect its prominent members to defend the basic core values of Islam, in the face of an attack by the non-Muslims and even remaining relatively silent or neutral is unacceptable.
However, to the contrary, the courageous sisters in France were mocked by the MCB ‘man’ (Inayat Bunglawala) instead of coming to their defence! A clear sign of treachery and cowardice! The MCB to date has not reprimanded ‘him’ nor have they officially voiced their opposition to the despicable words uttered by Inayat Bunglawala in the same public forum in which he spoke, for all to observe. Therefore, ‘he’ (Inayat Bunglawala) must be either a belligerent enemy of Islam like those newspaper ‘columnists’ and/or Islamically-illiterate.
Now you get the classic spin, as many would claim that words of Inayat Bunglawala were expressed in ‘his’ personal capacity and nothing to do with the MCB as an organisation. But surely, even the personal opinions of a leading member of the organisation cannot run contrary to the core values of the organisation. Just like a Rabbi cannot occupy a post within the leadership of an Islamic organisation! Either the Rabbi is not genuine or the organisation is not Islamic in nature.Any Muslim passed the age of puberty knows that any order to commit a sin (Haram) is invalid, and should be disobeyed even it comes from an Imam, let alone an infidel. Even many non-Muslims view our sisters in France for wearing the Khimar, in defiance of the French government, with admiration instead of scorning them as “narrow minded”. So, why the MCB allows this ‘man’ (Inayat Bunglawala) to utter such outrageous words with impunity that are deeply offensive to the Muslims and contrary to the basic teaching of Islam?...
Obeying the “Law of the Land” or the Islamic Sharia?
‘Mufti’ Inayat invoked a principle in support of his claim that the Muslim women in France are obliged to obey the French law, therefore they should not wear the Khimar as prescribed by the Quran; otherwise it is a sign of rebellion and constitutes being a “narrow minded” person. Inayat Bunglawala stated that: “Even if the law of the land contradicts the Sharia then you still have to obey the law of the land or you get out of the land, go some where else where you are able to live by the Sharia.”
According to this form of reasoning, if the French government ordered the women to wear a bikini in schools, the Muslims women should also obey the “law-of-the-land”. Likewise, if the government forced the recognition of gay marriages on mosques, then that too should be obeyed under the same principle; and according to Inayat Bunglawala’s argument it would be ‘Islamic’. Oh really? I am sure by now most Muslims, or even the non-Muslim readers, can see the sheer idiocy of this sort of argument. Something emanating from a non-Islamic source by definition cannot be Islamic, especially when the two positions are in contradiction.
There is no such principle within Islam that says you have to obey any laws other than what Allah (SWT) has revealed. It is outrageous to claim that the “law-of-the-land” supersedes the Sharia laws, if so then what value and authority does the Sharia laws have? Who then has primacy, the Creator or the created? You cannot make the servant the master over his Lord. Common sense and logic tells us that our Lord could not have ordered us to obey Him and then ordered us to disobey him if the “law of the land” contradicts it? One cannot obey and disobey the same authority simultaneously. To legitimise obedience to anyone or anything else, other than Allah (SWT), is a clear act of major Shirk (polytheism) and Kufr (disbelief) which takes ! one out of the fold of Islam.
Living under the authority of the non-Muslims, we are permitted to ‘obey’ (observe) and disobey their laws depending upon the circumstances, but the precise explanation for the possible scenarios is as follows:
a) If the authority commands us to commit an act that is explicitly forbidden or to abstain from an Islamic obligation, then we are obliged to give total disobedience and offer maximum resistance within our capabilities; that is the basic principle. However, due to the implication in terms of facing duress from the authority, for example prison sentences, individuals will be permitted (not obliged) to obey the rules. But for those who strive against the evil, even up to martyrdom, will be rewarded. They are praise-worthy and most definitely not "narrow minded".
b) There are laws that have been enacted by the non-Islamic authority which could also have been enacted within the Islamic state, such as collection of taxes, we are permitted to observe these laws, if we are able to, out of respect, and maintaining harmony and to prevent harm from falling upon the Muslim community as a whole and harming the cause of Islamic propagation (Dawa). However, note that we are permitted to observe these laws from the Sharia, but it is not mandatory, unless the above-mentioned reasons are applicable.
c) There are laws that have permitted actions that are not sanctioned by Islam; we are not permitted to commit these acts, as for example engaging in gambling, drinking, fornication etc. The principle of obeying the, “law-of-the-land”, would permit those actions of major sins that are explicitly forbidden by the Islamic texts. Because even observing non-mandatory laws display a form of obedience to the “law-of-the-land”.
d) Finally, those laws that consanguine with the Sharia, as an example the prohibition to cause nuisance to your neighbours. We observe these laws out of the Sharia obligations not because we should obey the “law-of-the-land” but because obedience is only to Allah (SWT) and to claim that we should obey other than Allah (SWT) is a clear act of Shirk (polytheism)!
Allegiance
As Muslims, our allegiance is only to Allah (SWT) and His messenger and the Muslim Ummah (community). This is something expected from any community, Jews, Christians, atheists, agnostics, etc each would observe allegiance to their own community. So expecting the MCB to show its allegiance towards the Muslims is not only natural but demanded by the Sharia very clearly.
The obvious implication is that we are prohibited from fighting against Muslims in alliance with the non-Muslims. For those who fought under the American flag in the first Gulf war committed a clear act of Kufr and apostasy. May Allah (SWT) give them their just reward in this life and the hereafter. Similarly those Muslims joining up to fight fellow Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq have committed similar acts of highest treachery, Kufr and apostasy.
Read it all. As with Zarqawi's recent letter justifying the killing of Muslims in his operations, this is a detailed Islamic argument. Those who profess Islamic moderation should refute it if they can, and if they really wish their views to prevail in the Islamic community. But again and again they don't do this -- now why is that?
Posted by Robert at June 26, 2005 6:54 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
I wonder if Yamin will carry out his plan to pee on our Constitution and burn the American flag for the fourth of July?
Muslim leadership in action.
Rebecca
Posted by: rb![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at June 26, 2005 7:25 AM
It is important that Americans note the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as President of Iran. I've posted extensively today about him. Aside from Iran, there is SOMETHING going on. The MSM is either not aware or doesn't care that Zarqawi's recent videotape is loaded with "signals" and that nuclear facilities in the northeast have been warned about an impending terrorist attack (info on the homelandsecurityus.com website).
Posted by: Dave Lucas at June 26, 2005 9:59 AM
I have just sent the link to this al Jazeera editorial to those British newspapers who won't reject it automatically because it is either non PC or not a naked lady. Just so they know the sort of treason that is regularly incited.
Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at June 26, 2005 10:38 AM
This is standard Muslim doctrine. The world is divided in two: between Believers and Unbelievers, between Muslims and Infidels. Loyalty of Muslims can only be offered to fellow Muslims and to Islam. Muslims are taught that it would violate the will of Allah to offer loyalty, or even friendship (the canonical texts make clear that friendship must never be offered by Muslims to Christians and Jews, "for they are friends only with each other"), to Infidels. And the Infidel nation-state, such as that of the United States, which stands in the way of the spread of Islam, permits freedom of conscience so that even Muslims might be allowed to apostasize, and does so many other things, stands for so many principles -- such as that the will of the people is the source of legitimacy, and the individual, whose rights are protected especially by the Bill of Rights (the first 10, or perhaps better 8, amendments), has rights which, in a totalitarian system such as Islam, must always give way to the rights of the ummah, the Community. The individual, his freedoms and choices, and right to choose what to believe, simply does not exist in Islam.
Given all this, one would like Muslims to explain why, and how, we Infidels should be expected not to object to their presence here, and why, and how, we should not be expected to doubt their loyalty?
Why not? Because it would be unkind, impolite -- or because it would be untrue? Because if it is impolite, but true, then it has to be said.
Emily-Post niceties will have to be abandoned. Home truths must be uttered, when it is not merely a question of cocktail-party chatter, but matters of whether or not this country, in its present arrangements, and its people, living not under constant assault to their senses and sensibilities by Muslim demands, Muslim threats, Muslim pretend-victimisation, Muslim
We are under no obligation to endure any of that. None.
Posted by: Hugh at June 26, 2005 11:13 AM
Given all this, one would like Muslims to explain why, and how, we Infidels should be expected not to object to their presence here, and why, and how, we should not be expected to doubt their loyalty?
Why not? Because it would be unkind, impolite -- or because it would be untrue? Because if it is impolite, but true, then it has to be said.
Very Aptly put.
Posted by: voletti at June 26, 2005 11:55 AM
But for those who strive against the evil, even up to martyrdom, will be rewarded. They are praise-worthy and most definitely not "narrow minded".
at June 26, 2005 12:02 PM
Of 'ELECTIONS'...
These words always have been, and ALWAYS will be, true.
Psa 75:6 For promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south.
Psa 75:7 But God is the judge: he putteth down one, and setteth up another.
Dan 4:17 ...to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.
Dan 4:25 ...till thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.
Dan 4:32 ...until thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.
Dan 5:21 ...till he knew that the most high God ruled in the kingdom of men, and that he appointeth over it whomsoever he will.
(When GOD repeats something that many times we OUGHT to pay ATTENTION, don't you think?)
SOVEREIGN MEANS SOVEREIGN, ALWAYS AND FOREVER!
OUR SOVEREIGN GOD PLACED BUSH WHERE HE IS, AND THE MAD MULLAHS WHERE THEY ARE, AND HE STIRS THEM UP, FOR HIS GOOD PLEASURE AND PURPOSES....;o)
THE MAD MULLAHS...
Gen 16:12 And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him
And whilst wringing hands over EVENTS of the day,
what EXACTLY did you THINK this...
2Ti 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived
would LOOK LIKE?
Not to worry, READ THE BACK OF THE BOOK, WE WIN!!
In His Service,
Craig, aka, 'PreachIt'
at June 26, 2005 12:27 PM
"our allegiance is only to Allah (SWT) and His messenger and the Muslim Ummah (community). This is something expected from any community, Jews, Christians, atheists, agnostics, etc each would observe allegiance to their own community."
This Muslim terribly misunderstands the modern Western concept of secular government.
Our modern West has evolved an understanding of a civil "umbrella" which organizes, orders, protects and nourishes under its purview ALL communities -- no matter what religion they are, no matter if they are atheist or undecided or don't give a shit one way or the other.
This sociopolitical "umbrella" requires an official & public Agnosticism. The vast majority of the West's Christians and Jews have, with maturity and rationality, accepted this premise of the "umbrella". The vast majority of Muslims, given their pathological culture, will not be able to accept this premise of the "umbrella".
But, as I keep saying over and over again here: our problem is not that Muslims don't understand our Civilization's principles of order. That is to be expected from most Muslims, given their pathological culture.
Our problem is that millions of our own Westerners don't understand and appreciate our own Civilization! And their diseased ignorance is directly impeding our self-defense against an Islam Redivivus.
at June 26, 2005 1:38 PM
Why bother with bombs when 'multiculturalism' is a more powerful weapon. And fun to use too! You can laugh all the way to the bank with the appeasement jizya you receive for the wrongs you have suffered.
Posted by: reset at June 26, 2005 2:24 PM
VIDEO WARNING IRAQI SUICIDE BOMBERS THAT THEY GO TO HELL NOT HEAVEN, Visit www.shepardusgov.com
By Dr. Jack Shepard, founder of People for Peace Group.
Hello let us all pray for Peace.
I have made a 2.5 minute video Warning the Iraqi Suicide Bombers to beware; if they kill themselves they go to Hell not Heaven.
Please visit www.shepardusgov.com to see my Video warning to the Iraqi Insurgents.
If my message gets somehow to the Iraqi Insurgents and the Palestinian Suicide Bombers, and they learn what they do is against the Koran I think they will stop.
Then God willing we will have Peace In Israel and Iraqi and Love and Peace will have a chance.
Please copy my CD if anyone wishes TO HELP SPREAD THESE WORDS TO THE SUICIDE BOMBERS BEFORE THEY KILL THEMSELVES AND MANY OTHER POOR INNOCENT PEOPLE.
Then take it to your local TV Station to play for 2.5 minutes to stimulate a discussion about Suicide Bombing as a Weapon of War. Please advise the TV station after they play my brief 2.5 minute video.
I would suggest that the TV station organizes to have a group of religious scholars from all faiths give their opinion what each religion teaches its followers about Suicide.
May God Bless the World with Love and Peace
Dr. Jack Shepard, founder of People for Peace
To contact Dr. Shepard with ideas or comments
Email: middle.east@flashnet.it
at June 26, 2005 3:30 PM
Since all Muslims believe in the Koran, and its corollary- Sharia Law, none can honestly be a member of any Western (non-Muslim) state.
It is only a form of tactical lying (taqiyya) to pretend to swear allegiance to anything secular- like the U.S. Constitution or other Western equivalents.
This should be an adequate basis for the deportation of all subversives who plot the overthrow of the government and state (with violent means, when the time is right, as the Koran itself approves, commands and exhorts -SURA 9:5, ad nauseam).
It will take more pain (WMD) for this realization to become clear.
The more "tolerant solution" of "Loyalty oaths", -to those whose religious requires them to deceive those who oppress them (all non-Muslims kafirs in power over any Muslim), -are rendered meaningless by the Islamic injunction to lie, so it will have to be something simpler:
-A Declaration of Faith and Intent-
"Do you believe that the Koran is the word of God? (Which means that you think the current infidel Laws need to be wiped away and that Sharia Law needs to become the rule of the land?)
If so, you cannot live in a country which your 'holy' book orders you to destroy. You are thereby self-professed invaders."
The answer:
Free tickets to Mecca, and a month to vacate.
(The "eminent domain" clause would then have to work overtime, but, thanks to the recent Supreme Court decision, their MUCH broader definition of "public good" would allow the properties of all invaders to be seized for the best reason that the public knows of- survival- and "just compensation" could be paid -which is cheaper than dying out as a nation.)
But, this won't be taken seriously until a hundred thousand American are dead.
If not more.
Posted by: BigSleep at June 26, 2005 3:51 PM
BigSleep: This should be an adequate basis for the deportation of all subversives who plot the overthrow of the government and state (with violent means, when the time is right, as the Koran itself approves, commands and exhorts -SURA 9:5, ad nauseam).
Ah! A Muslim Exclusion Act, one like the Dutch just might enact after their next election. This could the source of an enormously entertaining Congressional train-wreck. Republicans that opposed it would be labelled as Grover Norquist financed Osama-lovers. Democrats, being in the minority, would just sit on the sidelines enjoying the show. The President, of course, would play handsies again with Crown Prince Abdullah.
It will take more pain (WMD) for this realization to become clear.
I fear this is the truth, and probably in Europe first (Paris or Amsterdam most probably, but anywhere, actually).
at June 26, 2005 6:09 PM
“Even if the law of the land contradicts the Sharia then you still have to obey the law of the land or you get out of the land, go some where else where you are able to live by the Sharia.”
003.059 O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons when abroad: that is most convenient, that they should be known as such and not molested.
024.031 And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms
They are to wear head coverings - and they are to cover their bodies.
No such command is given in the New Testament:
In the beginning of this chapter - Paul is repeating some things to the Corinthians - that he was being told about them - fighting over this very tradition - head coverings. And this was the final conclusion:
1Cr 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
1Cr 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
1Cr 11:15 If a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. [The True God leaves NOTHING undone} Jos 11:15 ]
1Cr 11:16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God. [their fighting over it was worse than if they did or if they didn't. It then becomes a form of idol worship - fearing the tradition more than God Himself]
The Truth shall set you free
As Muslims, our allegiance is only to Allah (SWT) and His messenger and the Muslim Ummah (community). This is something expected from any community, Jews, Christians, atheists, agnostics, etc each would observe allegiance to their own community.
Ok - here goes:
The Works of Christ - The Son of God:
Mat 5:44 I [Jesus] say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. [Because God is the Judge in the end - of each individual]
1Th 5:15 See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good.
Rom 13:9 Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Rom 13:10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
The works of Muhammad:
009.005 fight and slay the Pagans ''''wherever'''' ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war.
033.061 They shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain (without mercy). Cursed: wherever they are found they shall be seized and murdered, a (horrible) murdering
009.123 O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you.
047.004 Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers in fight [jihad], smite at their necks. [Behead them!]
005.033 THE PUNISHMENT of those who '''wage war''' against Allah and His Messenger IS: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet.
See the difference? between the two?
The two cannot reside together - because the one is commanded to slay the other.
Which one is the one violating all of the 'humanitarian' laws?
Why is it - the leaders can not see the sure bloodshed to come by mixing the two?
009.030 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; in this they but imitate what ''' the unbelievers ''' of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
037.151 Is it not that they say, from their own invention,
037.152 Allah has begotten children? but they are liars!
019.089 Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous!
009.123 O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you.
047.004 Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers in fight [jihad], smite at their necks. [Behead them!]
The next time some 'leftist' spouts off about the 'Christian right' show them these.
Oh - and show them this one also:
Gal 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. [The same goes for nations]
Regardless of whether that statement comes from God or not - it still stands true.
As the Koran is being handed to many American children - our future.
at June 26, 2005 11:01 PM
BigSleep: This should be an adequate basis for the deportation of all subversives who plot the overthrow of the government and state
Posted by: Loxias
SEE} The Koran Violates the U.S. Constitution:
http://palestinename.com/usconstitution.htm
Posted by: Beth at June 26, 2005 11:03 PM
WHITE AMERICAN Patriot is indeed a pig.
Robert has to tell us how to exclude him from this campy conversation.
Posted by: Loxias at June 27, 2005 5:44 AM
Loxias:
the only thing to do when you see a post from the likes of white american patriot (who may be one and the same as the Ernst Zundel acolyte who was posting noxious materials a few weeks ago), is to immediately report them to Robert. Don't engage with him.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at June 27, 2005 8:58 AM
the law of the land takes precedence over sharia, that is, if we want to remain free.
we should ban islam outright to save ourselves the trouble of having to accomodate islam, accomodation of which assures freedom's defeat. i am saying the design of islam and islam's laws, assures the neutering and compromising of the principles of freedom, and all in the name of a vengeful god named allah. we are up against a very crafty foe in islam, otherwise known as satan, who can take over cultures and nations without firing a shot. he does it by playing the accuser in all sorts of conditions.
if we don't cut this marginalization of freedom off at the source by banning islam, there will be further eroding of freedom with various excuses, all based on the demands of allah. ban allah and our problems with islam will begin to diminish. let allah remain legitimate and we will pay in bondage to various guilt trips which islam will spring on us. muslims want free people to be in bondage to the cult of islam just like they are.
for the muslims who, because of the demands of allah, instigate civil disobedience against authority, i say deport such muslims and ban islam outright to spare us such rebellion down the road.
i have to say that, as far as old covenant doctrine such as the ten commandments, islam has copied christianity in almost every way, but islam cannot copy or replicate the personage of jesus christ. jesus christ nailed the ten commandments to the cross and made them obsolete regarding the pleasing of god. we are now encouraged to live by the spirit and not by laws written on stone. we are to die to the law and come alive to christ because jesus christ fulfilled all of the law and is a superior way.
no man will be justified before god by observance of the old covenant law. this fact should burst the bubble of all self-righteous muslims who think they are doing so well in god's eyes, when in fact such muslims are bankrupt before god and posess no standing whatsoever before the living god until and unless they accept jesus christ through faith.
for all muslims who want to attain heaven through their own self-effort and works, i refer them to the thief on the cross who had no righteousness of his own but attained heaven that very day, only because of his acceptance of jesus christ.
to the self-righteous muslim i say, do not rely on your own works or your training from islam to please god. you are "pleasing" the wrong god named lucifer. rely instead on the sacrifice of the lamb of god, jesus christ, and his life living in you.
muslums, to think that you can ever deserve heaven by your own behavior, no matter how good it is, is a lie. the virtue that matters to god is only accomplished through abiding in jesus christ with no effort on your part. heaven is only attained by what has been accomplished for you through jesus christ. only the one raised from the dead, jesus christ, can grant eternal life. antichrist will counterfeit this miracle of resurrection but it will be bogus.
allah's law has no validity with god regarding the attainment of righteousness. muslims, you have been lied to by islam. only the acceptance of jesus christ has such validity.
if this is belligerent talk to islam, then so be it. the truth must be told. if the truth in jesus christ is deeply offensive to muslims, then jesus was right when he said that he came to bring a sword of division. islam cannot handle the truth. islam must protect itself behind stifling laws that prohibit free speech, press and media.
the truth divides, especially among muslims who have been brainwashed by islam.
at June 27, 2005 9:57 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)