“Mustafa…said she is deeply disturbed by Parrish’s comments, saying they demonstrate a lack of understanding about Islam. She said Muslims in America have demonstrated a respect for both the U.S. Constitution and their religion and his comments are unfair to the Muslim men and women who have served in the U.S. armed forces.”
Note the sleight of hand. Parrish said that “Islam, Sharia and the Quran are the antithesis of the U.S. Constitution.” In response, Mustafa “said Muslims in America have demonstrated a respect for both the U.S. Constitution and their religion and his comments are unfair to the Muslim men and women who have served in the U.S. armed forces.”
Parrish wasn’t talking about Muslims, he was talking about Islam. The two are conflated endlessly, but they are not the same, any more than Christians and Christianity are the same. Any given Christian may not love his neighbor and turn the other cheek, but Christianity nonetheless still teaches that they should. Any given Muslim, like any other human being of any faith or no faith, will have a variety of priorities, perspectives, influences, etc. He or she will not necessarily live 100% in accord with everything that Islam teaches, but that does not change what Islam teaches. The central question here, of whether or not Islam is compatible with the U.S. Constitution, is not answered by what some or even many Muslims do or do not do. It can only be answered by examining the teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah.
In those sources, we find a denial of the freedom of speech in the prohibition of criticism of Islam, a denial of equality of rights for women, and a call for violence against and the subjugation under the hegemony of Islamic law of those who are non-Muslims, denying them basic rights. Regina Mustafa should explain whether or not these teachings are compatible with the U.S. Constitution. But an establishment media that invokes the hard-Left smear group the Southern Poverty Law Center as if it were a neutral and reliable source is never going to ask Mustafa such questions.
“Candidate under fire for calling Islam ‘antithesis of Constitution,'” by Heather J. Carlson, PostBulletin, January 19, 2018:
A long-shot Republican gubernatorial candidate is getting national attention for writing that he does not consider Islam a faith and that it is “the antithesis of the Constitution.”
Phillip Parrish, of Kenyon, wrote the comments in an email to Community Interfaith Dialogue on Islam founder Regina Mustafa. Mustafa, of Rochester, sent Parrish an email inviting him to sit down with her after learning he had recently attended a meeting featuring Usama Dakdok, an outspoken critic of Islam.
“I do not object to you attending his presentation, but wanted to know if you would like to speak to a Muslim about Islam. Since you have attended this talk about my faith, I figured you would also like to hear from a person who actually practices Islam,” wrote Mustafa, a former DFL candidate for the 1st Congressional District seat.
Parrish responded by saying he would be willing to meet but that “I separate Islam from the word faith because faith takes belief and Islam requires only submission.” He added that he would ask her to publicly denounce Sharia law and declare that “Islam, Sharia and the Quran are the antithesis of the U.S. Constitution.”
Mustafa posted the email exchanges on her Facebook page. Since then, Parrish’s response has drawn sharp criticism from civil rights organizations. The Southern Poverty Law Center wrote about Parrish’s comments on its “Hatewatch” blog. Muslim Advocates, a nonprofit based in Oakland, Calif., blasted Parrish’s remarks.
“Anti-Muslim bigotry like this emboldens those who would discriminate or commit acts of violence against Muslims. We’ve seen hate crimes, violence, and bigotry skyrocket as politicians have increased their attacks on Islam and Muslims,” said Muslim Advocates Policy Director Scott Simpson.
Mustafa has called on Parrish to drop out of the Republican gubernatorial race. In a press release, Parrish pushed back, saying he has no intention of leaving the race. In an interview, Parrish accused Mustafa of making a “disingenuous request” to meet with him in order to advance her own propaganda.
What is his response to being called anti-Muslim?
“I see myself as a person attempting to expose those who are attempting to set up rules and laws and regulations contrary to the U.S. Constitution,” Parrish said….
“It’s causing harm to people. Thousands of analysts like myself, thousands of law enforcement specialists have been trying to tell leadership this same message for over 20 years. And no one seems to want to listen or they live in some kind of utopic world of no, people really don’t think like that. They don’t really mean to cut somebody’s hand off because they stole something. They don’t really mean to put someone to death because they defiled themselves with an unclean woman. They don’t really mean to rape little boys on Thursday night because the imam gave them permission to do that,” Parrish said.
Mustafa rejected the idea that her invitation was in any way insincere. She said she is deeply disturbed by Parrish’s comments, saying they demonstrate a lack of understanding about Islam. She said Muslims in America have demonstrated a respect for both the U.S. Constitution and their religion and his comments are unfair to the Muslim men and women who have served in the U.S. armed forces.
“If you don’t think (Islam) is a faith, then my religious freedoms to you are negotiable and are at risk and I find that very alarming, and if he is saying that to his supporters, it’s the epitome of fear mongering and hate,” Mustafa said….
Rochester DFL Rep. Tina Liebling, a candidate for governor, called on Republican candidates to “denounce Mr. Parrish’s ignorant, islamophobic statement and pledge to encourage peace and understanding among Minnesotans regardless of race, religion, or national origin.”
Jaladhi says
As usual if anyone tells the truth about Islam Muslims get upset!! Muslims have truthophobia!!
Halal Bacon says
Kafirophobia actually…
CRUSADER says
Kafir-o-phobia
got spell checked autocorrected to
Kefir-O-Phobia….
(How is THAT!!!???)
Angus66 says
“A long-shot Republican gubernatorial candidate is getting national attention for writing that he does not consider Islam a faith and that it is “the antithesis of the Constitution.”
So he is being targeted and harassed for telling the TRUTH?
WOW
jihad3tracker says
PLEASE TAKE 5 MINUTES OUT OF YOUR BUSY DAY TO SEND AN EMAIL TO THIS COURAGEOUS GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE.
He will certainly be deluged with “Islamophobia” crap from Muslim organizations — LIKE CAIR — and probably also the chronic moron Keith Ellison.
That could lead to a diminished chance of his eventual victory in elections and a shortened career in politics, so your encouragement, education, and support of him is VERY IMPORTANT.
Let me also suggest strongly — INCLUDE A LINK TO ROBERT’S SUPERB ANALYSIS OF THE FAULTY REASONING by Regina Mustafa, in his post above.
And include links to best websites for truth, not illusion, regarding Allah’s bloodthirsty pathology. My personal favorites are —- www [dot] citizenwarrior [dot] com / www [dot] barenakedislam [dot] com / www [dot] politicalislam [dot] com / www [dot] inquiryintoislam [dot] com.
Finally — Robert is always available for dialogue with those who need his expert knowledge, I am sure he would make time available for Phillip Parrish, so let him know of the contact path — director (at) jihadwatch (dot) org.
If enough of us send emails to Mr. Parrish, we might be crucial in boosting the chances of this “long shot” up sufficiently for a win at the poll. And he, in turn, would pass along what he discovered about Islam in its widest deepest manifestation to other Republican allies in the decades long counter-jihad.
jihad3tracker says
FOR THOSE OF US WHO CONSIDER IT A PATRIOTIC DUTY TO SHRED IGNORANT SELF-RIGHTEOUS FOOLS —
Here is path to contact path for Democrat Dina Liebling, quoted in the last paragraph of the Post Bulletin article: rep.tina.liebling@house.mn
To save time, just copy & paste relevant parts of your email to candidate Parrish. BTW, he is even braver than I realized — now that I’ve read all of the remarks he made.
This is someone DEFINITELY WORTH LETTING KNOW YOU CONSIDER A RARE AMERICAN, not our typical spineless politicians.
blitz2b says
Mustafa says “….his comments are unfair to the Muslim men and women who have served in the U.S. armed forces.”
Boo hoo …. Cry me a river…. Will ya ! ! These Muslims who call themselves moderates, have no clue about what Islam is really about., or its evil world domination agenda.. Do they?
How can anyone with even an ounce of grey matter in their cranium think there is any comparability between the damned Sharia and the US constitution?
Carolyne says
How about that psychiatrist who shot up Ft. Hood and murdered and injured scores of our military men and women as well as civilians. He was in the military. that proves that while likely most Muslim military personnel are not terrorists, some are, and Hassan definitely was.
Angus66 says
“Anti-Muslim bigotry like this emboldens those who would discriminate or commit acts of violence against Muslims. We’ve seen hate crimes, violence, and bigotry skyrocket as politicians have increased their attacks on Islam and Muslims,” said Muslim Advocates Policy Director Scott Simpson.”
Yet there has been little/no proof of any of these events actually happening.
MORE lies intended to promote islam and silence it’s critics……
Bob Ingersoll says
Nonsense. Islam is no different faith/submission wise than this sucker’s stupid backward Christian nonsense.
Terry Gain says
Ingersoll
Islam mandates killing infidels and punishes apostates. Muslims are faithful to Sharia which is an alternative legal system in opposition to the constitution. You are ignorant.
6woods says
I know, Bob. I’m getting sick of these Christians flying planes into buildings, driving cars into pedestrians, throwing gay people off buildings, beheading unbelievers, raping non-Christian women, stoning adulterers, raping children, blowing people to smithereens, throwing acid into women’s faces, stabbing unbelievers, suing for imagined slights (and winning), faking “hate crimes”, demanding women wear black tents, demanding public foot baths, demanding no one else eats when they “fast” , demanding, demanding, demanding, killing, raping, destroying….ad infinitum.
Someone needs to do something about these goddam Christians. And don’t even get me started on those Hindus. Sarc/off
Carolyne says
You don’t know anything about Islam, do you Mr. Ingersoll?
blitz2b says
Bob Ingersoll,
We are indebted to the infinite wisdom of comparative religions of you are your ilk on the left, consequently for which the west is being overrun by the barbaric adherents of the Islamic faith.
What a total ignoramus your unthoughtful comment has proven you to be.
No difference??? Are you kidding me? We could expect a comment like that from a deluded Muslim, someone who has completely lost their mind or are a zombie liberal leftist? Do you fall in any of these categories?
Here is a thought experiment for you. If you think there is no difference and are currently living in the civilized west, consider giving it all up and moving to an Islamic hellhole of your choice, the difference between a nation founded on Judeo-Christian principles and one based on the Sharia will jump right up and bite you in the face…. It’d that obvious…
But like I said, either you are a Muslim troll, an unthinking liberal or just plain stupid to think that Islam and Christianity are the same.
StellaSaidSo says
‘…the epitome of fear-mongering and hate..’
That would be the Koran, Ms Mustafa; not Mr Parrish.
gravenimage says
+1
Johnny Cuyana says
“In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” Eric Author Blair
Johnny Cuyana says
**** low marks for my spelling faux pas
Peter says
Slap
agha ali arkhan says
I before e, except after c, in neighbour and weigh.
George Orwell says
You mean George Orwell? And he was right.
CRUSADER says
Thank you George Orwell.
Yes you were always Right about the Left.
Johnny Cuyana says
Please, George, out of respect for your father and mother, I prefer NOT to use your pseudonym.
In any case, how can you not recognize your given name? Hmmm … maybe you are not really G.O.
gravenimage says
But high marks for your citing this important quote, Johnny.
Cheryl s. says
He’snder fire for telling the truth!
The death cult that is Islam IS the Antithesis of the Constitution!
Anyone who adheres to the Quran should not be allowed in any country that follows the Bible.
Savvy Kafir says
I don’t think there are any “countries” that really “follow” the Bible these days. Christian theocracies have pretty much gone the way of the dodo bird — in spite of efforts in the U.S. to reverse that trend, in recent decades.
But anyone who considers the Qur’an their holy book should not be allowed to live in any civilized, democratic country that values human rights, or basic human decency.
StellaSaidSo says
Agree, Savvy Kafir, Islam is totally incompatible with Western democratic values and freedoms. Muslims in the West must soon be required to make a choice: either renounce the vile ideology of Islam and join the civilised world, or go back to the sh*tholes from whence they came.
Savvy Kafir says
Yes, Stella — if Muslims in the West are not soon required to make that choice, the West is doomed.
And those supposed apostates who choose to remain in the civilized world will need to be watched closely to make sure they’re not stealth jihadis. And all mosques bulldozed, or converted to serve a more benign purpose.
And, to smoke out the remaining stealth jihadis, Islam and its prophet should be publicly criticized and ridiculed and damned on a regular basis throughout the Western world.
eduardo odraude says
The non-establishment and free exercise of religion (sometimes called the separation of religion and state), by which we currently live, derives in significant part from the Bible. “Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, to God the things that are God’s,” and “My kingdom is not of this world.” In that sense, Western societies do follow Christianity. Those “secularist” aspects of Christianity, furthermore, are rooted in aspects of Judaism.
Furthermore, the assumption that society should be based on contracts (like the Constitution), is in significant part derived from the fact that the Bible conceives the relation between human beings and God as a contractual (covenantal) relationship.
In that sense, our society “follows” Christianity more than most people realize. The main sources of our civilization are Athens and Jerusalem. (Those sources of course developed to some extent out of many other civilizational streams.)
jihad3tracker says
THANK YOU, EDUARDO —
For that excellent concise context on the heritage of Judaism and Christianity leading to our Western guarantee of personal freedom.
Champ says
But anyone who considers the Qur’an their holy book should not be allowed to live in any civilized, democratic country that values human rights, or basic human decency.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Indeed, Savvy …
AND SHARIA LAW CAME STRAIGHT FROM HELL!
*No to islam and sharia*
Linde Barrera says
There are many good Muslims who it seems, just do not obey certain parts of the Quran. I was taught that a Christian either accepts all of the Bible as God’s revealed word, or rejects all of the Bible, that we cannot “pick and choose” those verses we like and reject those verses we do not like, want to obey or acknowledge. But I guess Muslims have the right to pick and choose what is in the Quran. That is the way it appears to me.
StellaSaidSo says
Lots of Christians pick and choose from the Bible, as do lots of Muslims from the Koran. But whereas Christians don’t run around with machetes killing other Christians merely for a differing interpretation or emphasis, Muslims frequently do. A Muslim can risk being killed for leaving Islam, or for not being as devout as any one of his co-religionist’s considers appropriate, or for being from a different sect. We should be very glad that so many Muslims don’t follow the Koran to the letter, or we would be in far greater danger.
PRCS says
“many Muslims don’t follow the Koran to the letter”
Well, as soon as “journalists” ask Dear Regina if she personally follows Qur’an to the letter…
StellaSaidSo says
Who is ‘Dear Regina’, and to which “journalists” do you refer?
PRCS says
Per the article, her name is Regina Mustafa.
Any “journalist” who would pose that question to her.
StellaSaidSo says
Thankyou for the clarification. I had forgotten the cow’s first name, LOL.
PRCS says
Cow would be appropriate.
BTW: she’s also the most ridiculous kind of Muslim: a “revert”.
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/08/muslim-convert-runs-for-congress-but-stays-silent-on-her-faith/
gravenimage says
True, Stella.
Tjhawk says
Hi Linda, I consider myself a cultural Judeo-Christian. The values,ethos, and atmospherics of Christianity were prevalent in the small towns I grew up in. These are ingrained in me. But, shortly after giving up on Santa, I gave up on virgin birth and resurrection from death as literal concepts. I began to see the concept of hell as a blatantly obvious tool of coercion, and I still do today.
There were those who tried to tell me that I had to swallow the whole Bible as the revealed word of god, and I bristled at that like you wouldn’t believe. I almost rejected it all. Then when I allowed myself pick and choose, the awesomeness of Jesus, his life, and his teachings became easier for me to take in.
You may not agree with how I choose to incorporate Christianity into my life, but it is the choosing that makes it possible for me. So, with these differences between us, I want you to know that we are absolutely on the same side with respect to resistance to islam..
StellaSaidSo says
Great post, Tjhawk, really strikes a chord. I think a lot of us have a very similar story.
Tjhawk says
Thanks Stella.
One more thing about choosing ones own theology. This is possible to do in relative safety in Judeo Christian society, but almost impossible to do safely within islamic society.
StellaSaidSo says
Yes, this was one of the points I made in response to Linde’s post – that Muslims don’t have the same freedom to ‘pick and choose’ that we have, and how fortunate we are that so many of them choose to ignore the violent bits. Ironic that she sees the Muslims as having choice, but in her case, it’s all or nothing. I know several Christians who subscribe to this uncompromising version of Christianity, and they are among the most unhappy people I have ever met.
gravenimage says
+1
jihad3tracker says
HELLO TJHAWK — Thank you for that superb comment, including ” … the awesomeness of Jesus, his life, and his teachings …”. As a 69 year old ancient guy on our astonishing planet, I also have trouble with the sincere all-or-nothing Christians, would condemn me to Hell for not being baptized.
After 5 decades of trying to comprehend “that mystery which cannot be organized into a knowable form”, I would describe the Creator this way: BIG MIND. Search the author of that quote, ERIC ALLEN BELL, on Google. A fascinating brilliant person who went through his own brutal awakening about real Islam.
He had a blog for several years, with leads to contemplative + meditation (Hindu / Buddhist / Zen) resources. The URL was — www [dot] globalone.[dot] tv. You might have a bit of difficulty getting old posts from it, but in my humble opinion there were absolutely transcendent contributions.
Terry Gain says
Tjhawk
My Christianity differs from yours but we have this in common, which makes us different from Muslims. Neither of us is mandated to kill the other because of our departure from orthodoxy. And neither of us will.,
Carolyne says
I agree that your post is exceptional, tjHawk, but I go further with my rejection of many of the tenets of all religions as I consider them to be myths. For instance, we do not know where the edge of the universe is and in fact there might not even be an edge since the universe has continuously expanded since the “Big Bang.” With no edge, there is no room for a heaven, nor, in fact, hell. While we know only about 5% of the universe and the other 95% is a mystery to us, maybe someday there will be a discovery which proves religions to be correct but as of now, I don’t think so
Jack Diamond says
“Do you then believe in some parts of the divine writ and deny a truth of other parts? What, then, could be the reward of those among you who do such things but ignominy in the life of this world, and, on the Day of Resurrection? They will be consigned to the most grievous suffering. For God (sic) is not unmindful of what you do.” Q 2:85
“Today I have perfected your religious law for you, and have bestowed upon you the full measure of my blessings, and willed that self-surrender unto me shall be your religion.” 5:3
“It is not for the believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter, that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed into a plain error.” 33:36
“They can have no Faith until they make (Muhammad) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission.” 4:65
Does that answer the question?
Keys says
It answers a lot of questions, especially the “sic”.
“For God (sic) is not unmindful of what you do.”
eduardo odraude says
I gather that according to the core Islamic texts, Muslims do not have the right to pick and choose from the Qur’an. Perhaps Muslims do however have some leeway to be relatively ignorant of what the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira teach. After all, the “five pillars” of Islam do not say that one must be particularly informed about Islam: 1) declare that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger, 2) pray five times a day by reciting from the Qur’an; 3) give Zakat, or charity; 4) during the month of Ramadan fast during the day; 5) if possible make pilgrimage to Mecca at some point in your life.
Notice that in praying, one is to pray in Arabic, but there is no pillar that says one must understand Arabic or know what one is praying. So it seems that many Muslims don’t know much of what the Qur’an says, nor much of what the authoritative Hadith say about Muhammad and his life. In Muslim-majority countries, the established behavior standards, laws, and institutions are often based on Islamic teachings and traditions, and so the people in those nations, even though many of them may have relatively little explicit knowledge of what the core Islamic sources teach, are imbued by institutions and social practice with semi-unconscious, Islamic assumptions about things. By contrast, Musilms in non-Muslim countries are imbued unconsciously with non-Muslim values that are embodied in non-Muslim institutions, practices, and ethos. Such Muslims, unconsciously inculcated in Western values, for example, can make it seem that Islam is quite compatible with liberal democratic views. But once a Muslim community is sufficiently environed by other Muslims instead of by non-Muslims, then the Islamic ethos tends to be the one that penetrates in a relatively undiluted fashion into Muslims. So Islam seems often to penetrate people more by practical functioning in society and by social institutionalization than by conscious study of the Islamic texts or widespread detailed knowledge of what those texts teach. The latter studied conscious knowledge is cultivated mainly by the clerics and imams and elite Islamic teachers.
Jack Diamond says
The “ummah” guides and enforces. The Qur’an is quite clear that a Muslim, one who submits to Islam, is not to decide things for himself. He is one more ant in the army ant colony, or megacolony, let’s say (though ants get along better).
And not to ask a lot of questions. “O you who have believed, do not ask about things which, if they are shown to you, will distress you. A people asked such before you, then they became thereby disbelievers.” (s.101-102)
“The prophet was asked about things he did not like, and when the questioner insisted, the prophet got angry and his cheeks became red. ‘Allah has hated you (for) asking too many questions.'” –Bukhari v.1n.91,92 v.2.n591).
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. The kuffar in Muslim lands were not to read or discuss those Islamic texts either. But how much wiggle room is there for someone who self-identifies as a Muslim and a creed called Islam, which means “submission”? It’s also presumptive to think, at this point in history, most Muslims know or understand Islam less than, say, commentators at Jihad Watch. The presumed innocent defense. Most bad Muslims, Muslim’s weakly practicing Islam, know they are bad Muslims and hope someday to become good Muslims. They are quite aware of what that entails. Besides, given Islam’s elaborate doctrines of concealment and deceit (lying to kaffirs as natural as breathing, both doctrinally and in the “atmospherics” of Islam) it is suicidal to give the benefit of the doubt to
the Muslim collective, ever. And they always become a collective not a group of individuals.
“I counsel you to fear Allah and give absolute obedience…you must keep to my sunnah and to the sunnah of the rightly-guided Khalifahs, cling to them stubbornly. Beware of newly invented matters, for every invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is going astray and every going astray is in Hell-fire.”
–Abu Dawud (Al-Nawawi’s “40 Hadith” n.28, considered a “fine and true hadith”)
Jack Diamond says
typo: sura 5:101-102
Champ says
Linde Barrera wrote:
“There are many good Muslims who it seems” …
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
True, Linde, this cannot be denied. And not all muslims are terrorists, but the vast majority of terrorists are muslims.
Diane Harvey says
“Does your source book state Proposition X as I have just quoted?”
To this simple Yes/No question expect to receive all manner of confusion. But not a straight answer.
gravenimage says
True–just obfuscation.
Cheer Bear Girl says
Muslims becoming the majority would be the worst thing for everyone not just Christians and Jews. Muslims are a problem in Europe, Asia and Africa. They cause trouble everywhere they go. This guy is fired for telling the truth. This is a very scary precedent.
gravenimage says
He wasn’t fired, thank goodness–but this slander makes his campaign for governor much more difficult.
WorkingClassPost says
“… encourage peace and understanding…”
That’s precisely what Parrish did by highlighting the threat, and it’s Mustapha who is furthering conflict and misunderstanding by her objections.
IQ al Rassooli says
Dear Americans, please always remember that as Infidels/ Kuffar/ Non Muslims, you are NOT the only ones targeted for Subjugation to Sharia or EXTERMINATION by Muslims (Arabs or otherwise) hence it is VITAL that you realize that one does not need more than two brain cells of logic to understand Muslims and Islam in a nutshell~
Since every Muslim is Sharia compliant (Keith Ellison, CAIR, ISNA, London mayor Khan (who made Haj to Mecca as well as Linda Sarsour who LOVES Sharia), every Muslim cannot ever be a Law abiding LOYAL citizen in ANY non Muslim nation because these nations do not submit to Allah’s Sharia.
Hence every Sharia compliant Muslim is by his/her belief system the Mortal and Eternal ENEMY of every human being on Earth who is NOT a Muslim (Infidels/ Kuffar) who hide their disloyalty by PRETENDING and deceiving (Taqiyyah) non Muslims that they are part and parcel of the American or European dream such as Regina Mustafa, Linda Sarsour, etc..
Therefore, Ummat Muhammad (Muslims) 20% of humanity aspires to do one of two things to all non Muslims (Ummat al Kuffar/ Nation of Infidels; 80% of humanity): To SUBJUGATE them to Sharia or to EXTERMINATE them.
Let me put it in an even shorter way: It is impossible for Muslims to be BOTH Good Muslims and Loyal citizens among Kuffar/Infidels
Every Muslim is hence a potential Mass Murderer the instant he/ she decides that he/she is NOT Sharia compliant enough (just like in the recent Muslim terrorist attacks in UK and the Afghani Muslim soldiers who murder their American benefactors)
Although it is true that Not ALL Muslims are Terrorists BUT 100% of all Terrorist attacks against Infidels/ Kuffar are committed ONLY by Muslims. Therefore, every Muslim is a hair trigger Time Bomb primed to go off (It is also a FACT that it is IMPOSSIBLE to point out who among Muslims is a terrorist or not)
Only in the WARPED imagination of leftists can one find Moderate, Militant, Radical or Extremist Muslims because in reality Muslims are Muslims just as Nazis are Nazis and no one ever addressed Nazis as Moderate, Militant, Radical or Extremist. (Just ask PM Erdogan of Turkey to prove my statements)
All other explanations are superfluous and redundant It is time for every decent and patriotic person to unshackle yourselves from the pre conceived but erroneous notion that ANYONE who is not a Muslim can make PEACE with Islam.
All anyone in doubt has to do is READ only chapters 2 to 9 of Muhammad’s Quran and watch the repeated mass slaughter of unarmed innocent European, American, Russian, Indian, Chinese, Iraqi etc. civilians by Muslims proclaiming they are doing the butchery to PLEASE their demonic god Allah
As usual, all that Europeans and Americans get from their criminally negligent leaders after every Islamic mass murder are platitudes, meaningless expressions of sympathy to the hapless victims by the very leaders who are not willing to protect their citizenry because of their abject denial of all Facts and Reality regarding the simple TRUTH about Islam and Muslims
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTuFA1fQ-yg…
IQ al Rassooli
Kafir & Proud!
http://www.alrassooli.com
WorkingClassPost says
IQ
It must be difficult staying balanced when you have learned so much about islam, but there are many Muslims who choose to leave it and join the rest of humanity (and who knows how many more would if they could?), so the whole point of this article is most appropriate, it is about not conflating all Muslims with all of Islam.
Good luck anyway – I do check out your work from time to time.
Champ says
IQ wrote:
“Every Muslim is hence a potential Mass Murderer the instant he/ she decides that he/she is NOT Sharia compliant enough (just like in the recent Muslim terrorist attacks in UK and the Afghani Muslim soldiers who murder their American benefactors)”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are absolutely 100% correct, IQ!!
Your comments are always a value *treasure* and I thank you for them!!
Champ says
correction: valuable treasure 🙂
Wellington says
Once again I assert that an ideology should ALWAYS be assessed on what it says and NEVER on the fact that many adherents of that ideology don’t fully, or wrongly, implement its tenets. And Islam says it wishes to dominate all the earth, treat all non-Muslims as second-class human beings (or worse), disallow any criticism of Mo’s creed upon pain of death and kill any Muslim who converts to another faith, among so many other wrongs to be found in the Islamic theological blueprint.
It makes little to no difference that many Muslims are nice people in their daily life (so were many Nazis and Marxists) or that they don’t want to enforce all of Islam’s rules or that they believe in a fantasy version of Islam which is full of buttercups and love for all. This is irrelevant.
Islam is a totalitarian ideology which is a mortal enemy of freedom, lacks a true Golden Rule for all and is completely against real equality under the law wherever Islam dominates. It is also the only religion that calls for war to be made upon the unbeliever “until all religion is with Allah.” {Sura 8:39} This is what is relevant.
PRCS says
“a fantasy version of Islam which is full of buttercups and love for all.”
That defines “their own personal Islam” and remains what so many of our friends, relatives, neighbors and co-workers believe is “the real deal”.
Karen says
Wellington says: “Once again I assert that an ideology should ALWAYS be assessed on what it says and NEVER on the fact that many adherents of that ideology don’t fully, or wrongly, implement its tenets.”
This is a key truth. One thing I find very disturbing about some of the interfaith events that take place is that often the people who are sent are practicing Muslims, but non-theologians. They are often not particularly knowledgeable about the Koran and Hadith, especially regarding the parts that worry knowledgable infidels. They delve into feelings and personal experience, saying things like “to me, Islam is about loving your neighbor”, etc. These are all very nice and comforting words to the non-Muslims at the event, and probably very sincere. But decidedly unhelpful in knowing the full truth of the matter. So the blind lead the blind.
Wellington says
“So the blind lead the blind.”
Indeed, Karen. The Muslims ignorant of their faith and think it something good are certainly blind, and the non-Muslims, say Christians, who think Islam is something good constitute another kind of blindness (a betrayal too, but I digress).
Just as two wrongs don’t make a right, neither do two blindnesses. In fact, two such negatives, as opposed to “merely” one, only make it all the more likely that double trouble is in the offing. Which it surely is right now in one Western nation after another because ignorance of evil (and Islam is evil and I have long ago ceased giving any respect or credence to those who aver otherwise) is even worse than evil itself because it gives cover to evil and thus prolongs its life. And no evil has had a longer run of things than has Islam, some 1400 years now and still ongoing.
Time to end this nonsense, but since we live in the Age of Nonsense matters don’t look sanguine at the moment. Just sayin’.
CRUSADER says
I like it when Wellington digresses.
I tend to learn more that way.
Good show, chap!
“The Muslims ignorant of their faith and think it something good are certainly blind, and the non-Muslims…who think Islam is something good constitute…. blindness …”
This needs saying more.
More to necessity, it has to get expounded upon
and explained in clear details. Widely.
CRUSADER says
Let’s hope POTUS 45 says something on this topic in State of Union Addy tomorrow….
gravenimage says
Unfortunately, though, all too many Muslims take their violent creed *very* seriously.
Felix Quigley says
Wellington just cannot help himself spreading his filthy lies…”
“It makes little to no difference that many Muslims are nice people in their daily life (so were many Nazis and Marxists) or that they don’t want to enforce all of Islam’s rules or that they believe in a fantasy version of Islam which is full of buttercups and love for all. This is irrelevant.”
The Big Lie here is in his conflating Nazism and Marxism. It is interesting that the same trick is played on Jews where Fascists such as BDS also conflate Zionism and Nazism.
I find some things that Jihadwatch does useful, as in the issues in this post, but also what a sick site that Marxism is allowed to be conflated with Nazism.
Every single word that Marx and Engels, Lenin and Trotsky, the very founders of Marxism, wrote was to answer this dirty dirty lie of Wellington.
And so Wellington also thinks that Nazis were nice people in their daily life. Give some examples you phoney you!
What a claim to make! The Nazis were not nice people in their daily life because they were part of promoting a movement to kill all Jews.
That “Wellington” makes such a statement is sickening in the extreme especially and considering that he makes it with not one word of criticism from anybody on Jihadwatch.
PRCS says
Islam (the ideology) is defined by it’s texts (Qur’an and Sunn’ah), not by the degree to which the flock (Muslims) comply with them.
Westman says
Few devout Muslims would serve as an infantry soldier in a kufar army. We do have experience with an officer, Major Nidal Malik Hasan at Ft Hood, killing 13 “fellow” soldiers for allah.
Data from the General Social Survey in the United States show that 32 percent of those raised Muslim no longer embrace Islam in adulthood; so some will list themselves as Muslim on army records though not practicing Islam.
Muslims are now more than 1% of the US population, and if having the same rates of service as kafirs, would have had 22,000 veterans of the gulf wars. There were about 6500.
Something is fishy about using US Muslim military participation as an apologist tool when in fact it shows that at least two-thirds (2/3) of Muslims are not patriotic and within that 2/3 are the jihadists. If that is pared down futher by the 32% non-practicing Muslims, then the violent jihadists and their supporters will be among 1/3 of the US Muslim population. That is a great many potential violent jihadists and/or Sharia proponents.
StellaSaidSo says
‘…Something is fishy about using US Muslim military participation…’
Yes, I was rather struck by this, too. It came across as an attempt to present Muslims as loyal patriots – heroic even – and my first reaction was to think of Major Hasan.
CRUSADER says
Westman ~
Yet, 1/3 of Muslims in USA are patriotic?
How do you figure that?
?????
gravenimage says
Thanks for those figures, Westman.
Of course, given how many Muslim soldiers and veterans have turned to Jihad, it is just as well that there are not more of them taking advantage of the Infidels giving them military training.
Manny says
Phillip Parrish for President of the United States! Hear, hear!
CT says
I know, right? As soon as I saw that he had the guts to tell the truth about an ideology (NOT a race), I wished I lived in Minnesota so I could vote for him. We need more truth-tellers. Non-orthodox Muslims need more truth-tellers, too, or they forego protection from their more orthodox co-religionists. The Hadith must be drop-kicked into the hearsay bin of history.
Jack Diamond says
1. The Qur’an is plenty sufficient as a manual of war against disbelievers 2. There is no Islam without the Sunnah, without the words and deeds and example of Muhammad. Even the pillars of Islam come from the ahadith. The Qur’an demands that Muslims obey Muhammad. His judgments, teachings and ways, and those are found in the Hadith. To reject them is heresy.
“He who obeys the Messenger has indeed obeyed Allah.” s.4:80.
Every jihadi was once a wishy-washy Muslim.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Jack. Even without the Hadith, the Qur’an and Sira are hideously oppressive and violent.
CRUSADER says
Minnesota better look to the skies as some Eagles from Philadelphia and Patriots from Boston are to swoop over Little Somalia there in “The North” very soon, and give a dose of “what-fer” !!!
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Here’s an excellent document summarizing how sharia and the American Constitution conflict:
https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/upload/wysiwyg/article%20pdfs/Shariah_VS_Constitution.pdf
This PROVES that he is correct!
CRUSADER says
Always good to hear from CSP.
gravenimage says
+1
dumbledoresasrmy says
Good one.
**Send it to him**.
Not just as a link. Print it out, and send it to him by snailmail. With a *brief* covering letter. His staffers will read it even if he doesn’t.
Prabh108 says
America: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Islam: Death, Slavery and the Pursuit of Sorrow.
Normal persons prefer America.
I can’t believe anyone in their right mind or even not so right mind would ever choose Islam over American values and traditions. If USA falls to Islam future generations will curse us. (and rightfully so)
As far as Europe and India, it is race to bottom to see who falls first to Islam. Unofficially, both have already fallen. The proof of this would be the horror stories we read daily at this website.
pr108
excuse any typo
CRUSADER says
Nice sum up.
gravenimage says
Good post.
gravenimage says
Minnesota gubernatorial candidate under fire for calling Islam “antithesis of Constitution”
……………………….
Phillip Parrish is *not wrong*. Thanks to him for speaking out.
Here’s his Facebook page with contact information:
https://www.facebook.com/PhillipCParrishforGovernor/
Let him know yoyu support his honesty.
Champ says
In short: the TRUTH is under fire …
Madness!
Indiana Tom says
Parrish said that “Islam, Sharia and the Quran are the antithesis of the U.S. Constitution.”
I think Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and John Quincy Adams said something to that same effect.
Indiana Tom says
“If you don’t think (Islam) is a faith,
Nonie Darwish really does not think Islam is a real faith. I do not either.
CRUSADER says
As are these stalwarts:
Wafa Sultan
Brigitte Gabriel
Ibn Warraq
CRUSADER says
—> from CITIZEN WARRIOR
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2007/10/muslim-nonie-darwish-speaks-to-hostile.html
“Muslim Nonie Darwish Speaks to a Hostile Berkeley About Islam”
The following is a speech given by Nonie Darwish, the founder of Arabs for Israel, at an event at UC Berkeley for Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week which took place on college campuses around the U.S.
Darwish is an Arab Muslim from Egypt. Her father was a terrorist martyred in the cause. Her speech (below) is preceded by a short intro written by her regarding her impressions of the events surrounding the speech.
The atmosphere required extensive security — which made me feel that without it I would have been physically hurt at UC Berkeley. The first statement from the Al-Jazeera representative to me was: “You are the most hated woman in the Arab world.” The hatred was also felt from the far leftist American audience.
My response to the Al-Jazeera statement was: “Arab media spread a hate campaign against me after my book came out. Egyptian media, without reading the book, called me a traitor to my father because I support Israel.
I love my father and I believe that if he had lived he would have been part of the peace treaty that Sadat had signed with Israel.” I believe the Arab media is trying to misrepresent my views in order to silence me.
A man was sitting in the audience with a black sheer bag covering his head to protest ‘Abu Greib’ when the discussion had nothing to do with Iraq. There were screams from the audience: “Fascist,” then “racist” then “Osama Bin Laden is a CIA agent.”
The noise was getting louder and I could not speak any more. I felt that even in America I am being silenced.
My response was: “Who will speak for women who are stoned and for Muslims terrorized in radical Muslim countries? It is sad that I left oppressive Sharia Muslim culture, where I had no freedom of speech, only to find myself silenced in America, by groups who claim they are for free speech.”
The sad thing about this whole event was the feeling that radical Muslims and their far Left supporters would rather never criticize Islamic culture than stand up against the culture that flogs, stones, beheads and amputates limbs. Not offending a religion has become more important to the far Left (unless it is Christianity or Judaism) than human rights of Muslims and victims of terror. Honor killings and female genital mutilation can be tolerated —but noone better dare utter the word “Islamo-fascism.”
American universities are becoming tyrannical when it comes to conservative values and to Arab Americans who dare to speak out against the culture of jihad. It does not matter how many people in my early life in Egypt suffered from honor killings, female genital mutilation and oppression of women, I must shut up on American campuses.
Now here is Nonie Darwish’s speech:
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2007/10/muslim-nonie-darwish-speaks-to-hostile.html
==================================================================
Infidel says
What about Islam’s LACK OF UNDERSTANDING about other faiths??
PRCS says
Not a Majid Nawaz fan, but this video demonstrates the Taqiyya Tapdance (in which Muslims dance around simple questions about Islam):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDkkiYvnD_Q
Eric jones says
I am concerned that there may be a jihadist attack in Minneapolis during the Super Bowl. There are so many Muslim refugees in Minnesota. I hope the authorities are alert.
May more independents be elected to political office in the USA.
Eric
dumbledoresasrmy says
Apologies. Above, I supplied what I still think might be some very useful materials for Mr Parrish’s use, from John Quincy Adams and Winston Churchill, in which they outline the ways in which Islam is the antithesis of *Christianity*.
Which it is.
But what Mr Parrish said was that Islam was the antithesis of the *American Constitution*.
That is, of course, *also* the case.
Mr Spencer’s good friend and colleague, the incredibly erudite man who goes by the nom de guerre “Hugh Fitzgerald”, touched on the topic in a brilliant essay here at Jihadwatch, ten years ago now.
Fitzgerald: Muslims and America.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/08/fitzgerald-muslims-and-america.html
“We have a message: Muslim Americans are as American as apple pie” – from this article in The Guardian about Muslims at the Democratic National Convention in Denver
If Muslims are “as American as apple pie,” are they as American as pumpkin pie, the pumpkin pie traditionally served at Thanksgiving, which like Independence Day, Memorial Day, and other national holidays, are not to be observed by observant Muslims, for only Muslim holidays, Muslim history, Muslim everything, counts?
“And one more question. If Muslims have no trouble at all being “as American as apple pie” then surely they have no trouble viewing the defining document of the American polity, the Constitution of the United States, as worthy of their complete loyalty.
“And that includes, of course, the guarantees of individual rights in the Bill of Rights.
“And since the Bill of Rights is so very close, in so many of its key provisions — freedom of speech, freedom of conscience (which naturally includes the right to apostatize) — to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, can we conclude that American-as-apple-pie American Muslims find it puzzling that all of the Muslim countries (save for the Shah’s Iran, and most temporarily and temporizingly) have failed to subscribe to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and instead have concocted a Muslim version, the so-called Cairo Declaration, which in every essential respect, involving individual rights, fatally vitiates the original, Universal Declaration?
“These people can carry on all they want with their bromides, and their pledges-of-fake-allegiance, but to the precise extent that they are True Believers in Islam, and Defenders of the Faith, to that exact extent they cannot conceivably owe their allegiance, above what Islam commands and prohibits, to the American Constitution.
“And that means no Believer who owes his loyalty to Islam and fellow members of the Umma, that is, no one calling himself a Muslim who is truthful about the requirements of this Total Belief-System and what it inculcates (above all, the division, permanent and immutable, between Believer and Infidel, until such time as Infidel becomes Believer), can conceivably owe his allegiance to ** a document that is flatly contradicted, in letter and spirit, by the Shari’a** [my emphasis – dda].”
END QUOTE FROM HUGH’S ESSAY.
The Islamic blasphemy ‘law’, notably, flatly contradicts that part of the Bill of Rights that enshrines freedom of speech.
And the Islamic permission and indeed sacralising of slavery – because Mohammed enslaved people, and used sex-slaves for fun and profit, and made money from buying and selling slaves, and Mohammed’s example is deemed *the* yardstick for everything that is admirable and to be emulated, for all time, by Muslims – is also flatly in opposition to a most famous Amendment of the US Constitution.
At the core of the American Constitution is the concept of Freedom.
At the core of Islam is .. **Slavery**. Islam is a slave system, top to bottom, through and through. As William Palgrave memorablly defined it, in the 19th century – the ‘theology’ of Islam may be summed up as “a pantheism of Force”.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Mr Spencer, The gubernatorial candidate and savage mad devil Trump are influenced by your ignorant presentation of Islam and sharia. If you are little learned on the Legal framework which American constitution is shaped, you Will Come to term that Américain Constitution is framed according to the precepts and Legal concepts from common Law, which originated from sharia concepts.See John makdisi :Islamic origin of the common Law. Eg, all fundamental human rights entrenched in the American constitution originated from “maqaside Assharia (objectives of sharia “.These objectives are:(1)protection of life (2)protection of conscience (3)protection of property (4)protection of personal liberty and human diginity (5)protection of freedom of association. which one is missing or added in the American constitution ? Note:sharia principles are not static. It is its sources (mainly Quran and Hadith) that cannot be altered or amended. But the interpretations could change to suit the circumstances and time ,because the interpretations are shaped or colored by prevailing circumstances at à time and place. Eg, thé prevailing circumstances during Abbasid period were quite différent from the circumstances prevailing during the companions of prophet muhammad. It was prophet muhammad himself Who said that thé interpretations could change to suit time and Environment when he appointed muaz bin jabal as governor of Yemen. Muaz asked the prophet muhammad where circumstances arise quite différent from what is obtainable at madina or not determined by prophet muhammad, what can hé do ? . The prophet muhammad told him to use analogical déduction. The governor asked the holy prophet muhammad what if the issues are not similar ? The holy prophet muhammad told him to apply good reasoning within the general objective of Islam, which the Muslim scholars highlighted above. muslims have been applying sharia with such changes in the standard interpretations of sharia principles for centuries at different times and environments.
It is not true that sharia oppresses women and non -muslims in an Islamic state governed under sharia laws. In fact sharia protects women to maintain their diginity like any other human beings, not lead beast way of life as It is the filthy Christian West. sharia also protect non-muslim right to freedom of religion to practice his religion the way he believes. That is why modern muslim jurists opined that PACT of Umar, which restricted right of dhimmis to display their religion, is contrary to sharia objective of freedom of conscience.
But right to freedom to insult and hate campaigns being advocate by Mr Spencer as freedom of speech is not recognised by American constitution. Ï can debate any Legal expert, not layman like Mr Spencer, which Article of American constitution guarantee such right that could breach the right of others.
mortimer says
Ibrahim, take your blasphemy censorship and go to Berzerkistan where THOUGHT ENDED in the 7th century. You are not fit for any civilized country. You are brazenly backward and intensely obscurantist.
You have no idea what critical thought is. To hell with man-made Sharia law… a plague on the world.
mortimer says
Ibrahim … THIS is your insane Sharia law:
1971 FATWA TO RAPE BENGALI WOMEN = 400,000 RAPED BY PAK ARMY
“During the war, a fatwa in Pakistan declared that the Bengali ‘freedom fighters’ were Hindus and that their women could be taken as the ‘booty of war’.[ Herbert L. Bodman, Nayereh Esfahlani Tohidi 1998, p. 208.] Imams and Muslim religious leaders publicly declared that the Bengali women were ‘gonimoter maal’ (war booty) and thus they openly supported the rape of Bengali women by the Pakistani Army. (“BANGLADESH GENOCIDE 1971 – RAPE VICTIMS Interview”. YouTube. 15 December 2009. Retrieved 2 June 2013.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iGn_ziM9EA – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDYVejJ7OGg
mortimer says
GENOCIDAL RAPE is DECREED in K.4.23-24, but it is a crime against humanity.
Sunan Abu Dawud 2155 narrates that K. 4:24 was revealed to Mohammed to encourage his gangsters to rape the female captives even while their husbands were alive, because they were PAGANS and for no other reason. “Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives because of their pagan husbands. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse (K.4.24).”This is GENOCIDAL RAPE and ‘Allah’ staes that genocidal rape was his DECREE. But it is a crime against humanity! Mohammed’s command to rape married captives on the basis of their religion is obvious bigotry and it is a GENOCIDAL CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY. If you do not condemn this amorality, you are amoral. Why not simply DENOUNCE AND CONDEMNS Mohammed’s immorality and evil crimes? Why not join civilized people who hate GENOCIDAL RAPE? Leave this rape cult. There is no escaping the facts in the hadiths and tafsirs and modern fatwas. RAPING MARRIED CAPTIVES is HALAL.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
mortimer, what about genocide in Samuel 15:3 and that all those Who disbelieve in your mithraist god shall be put to death in Deuteronomy 13:8-9? In John, Jesus was god at the begining and such all those commands in OT must be his words. was he wicked god in OT and loving god in NT ?
Joe says
And what the Muslim “picks and chooses” has fatal consequences to others. Whereas, what a Christian “picks and chooses” means that other person many not “go the extra mile” for you.
It is hard to know when a Muslim is going to try to kill you.
Whether a Christian decides to help you is not as important to the casual bystander.
Carolyne says
I think Nancy Pelosi is a Roman Catholic. She is certainly a Democrat.
Mr nafplion says
I live I Rochester where this started. This Regina Mustafa manages to get so many writeup and tv time, you would think she works for the local paper and tv station. She twists the truth and comes accross as a really nice person. Poor little Muslima. What a bunch of garbage. I have heard Mr Parrish speak. He tells the truth and that is something, liberals don’t like. .
Politicianophobia says
Sayyid Qutb, the Muslim scholar said ” No political system or material power should put hindrances in the way of preaching Islam. It should leave every individual free to accept it or reject it, and if someone wants to accept it, it should not prevent him or fight against him. If someone does this, then it is the duty of Islam to fight him until he is killed or until he declares his submission”.
Politicianophobia says
I do agree with Ms. Mustapha, she is “deeply disturbed”, Islam does that to people.
Politicianophobia says
Now I am going to go bake cookies and listen to Mario Lanza sing I’ll Walk With God. Have a sweet day everyone.
Maky Lemur says
Simple ISLAM DELENDA EST.
Fred says
I like this Parrish dude. Got some BALLS. So does Spencer.
PATRICIA FRANCES KOENIG says
phillip@Parrish4MN.com
This is his e-mail address to thank Candidate Parrish for his honesty and courage.
Rich says
Spencer: you do not understand christianity!!
The Second Amendment has Biblical Natural Law foundation. Our Lord said in Luke 11:21, “When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace.” In Luke 22:35, 36 He said, “He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.” The principle of armed self-defense is redundant throughout the scriptures in both testaments. Genesis 14, Esther 8 and 9, and Revelation 13:10 are good places to start. In fact, Revelation 13:10 is an extended commentary on the words of Jesus to Simon Peter in the Garden of Gethsemane when Christ told Peter to put up (not give up) his sword in Matthew 26:52. No passage of Scripture has been more egregiously misinterpreted (except Romans 13*) than this passage in Matthew.
Rich says
If you are a politically-correct bliss-ninny with a coexist bumper sticker slapped on the back of your Subaru, and you don’t have the slightest clue what the following ten words mean, then this essay is not meant for you. You are excused.
dawah, dhimmi, hijra, jizya, kafir, shaheed, shariah, takfir, taqiyya, ummah
But if you are a national security professional, senior military officer or political leader involved in any aspect of the “Global War On Terror,” AKA “Countering Violent Extremism,” these are ten words that should already be a part of your working vocabulary. If you can’t readily discuss their meaning, significance, and relationships, then you are worse than a fool, you are disgrace to your office and a danger to your country.
http://gatesofvienna.net/2016/05/ten-arabic-words-brackens-challenge-to-national-security-professionals/
Rich says
CUT THE CRAP. ISLAM MUST BE EXTERMINATED. HERE’S HOW.
Islam is a political system, NOT a religion, and unless and until humanity wakes the hell up and STOPS referring to it as a religion, there is no hope. Islam is a hyper-aggressive, militaristic, expansionist, totalitarian political system designed to create a super-rich micro-oligarchical ruling class with a massive, destitute, genetically handicapped underclass below.
Here is a quote from Osama bin Laden that sums it all up:
“Our talks with the infidel West and our conflict with them ultimately revolve around one issue; one that demands our total support, with power and determination, with one voice, and it is: Does Islam, or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority corporeally if not spiritually? Yes. There are only three choices in Islam: [1] either willing submission [conversion]; or [2] payment of the jizya, through physical, though not spiritual, submission to the authority of Islam; or [3] the sword, for it is not right to let him [an infidel] live. The matter is summed up for every person alive: Either submit, or live under the suzerainty of Islam, or die.”
–Osama Bin Laden
(The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 42)
Well, you can pour maple syrup on a puddle of bloody, diarrhetic hogshit all you want, but it will never, ever be pancakes.
THIS is how the musloid problem should be faced and solved. It isn’t difficult.
Use the only thing they understand – PHYSICAL FORCE AND STRENGTH.
Aggressively proselytize. Fully acknowledge that even a converted musloid, like a domesticated wild animal, will be dangerous for the rest of his life and can never be fully trusted.
http://www.barnhardt.biz/2017/06/05/cut-the-crap-islam-must-be-exterminated-heres-how/
Felix Quigley says
Anybody who tries to throw stealthily Marxism and Nazism into the one basket I have to warn them I will fight politically to the very end to defend the honour of Marxism. This is always done without reference to any writings by the great socialists. I will fight to the very end to defend the honour of Marxism and with it those great people. Usually the trick is made by hiding that Stalin was a tyrant and a criminal in fact and that he was opposed and fought against bitterly by Lenin before he died, and was fought so courageously by Leon Trotsky. This is just as important an historical issue as is Islam. I am not saying more important. I am saying as important. There is great ignorance in society and I see people like Wellington as adding to that ignorance. If Wellington wants to make his claims then produce some texts from these Marxist leaders. Very simple. No claims without sourcing. Otherwise we have just prejudice being smuggled into the movement to destroy Islam.
Jack Diamond says
What new doctrine did Stalin invent?
“But the forced-labor camps were not the first camps in the R.S.F.S.R… In August, 1918, several days before the attempt on his life, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin wrote in a telegram to Vevginiya Bosh and to the Penza Provincial Executive Committee (they were unable to cope with a peasant revolt): “Lock up all the doubtful ones {not “guilty” mind you, but doubtful} in a concentration camp outside the city.” (And in addition “carry out merciless mass terror”–this was before the decree). {Lenin, fifth ed. Vol.50, p 143-144}
“Only on September 5, 1918, ten days after this telegram, was the Decree on the Red Terror published, which was signed by Petrovsky, Kursky, and Bonch-Bruyevich. In addition to the instructions on mass executions, it stated in particular: “Secure the Soviet Republic against its class enemies by isolating them in concentration camps.” {Collection of Legislative Acts for 1918, no 65, p. 710}
“So this is where this term–concentration camps–was discovered and immediately seized upon and confirmed–one of the principal terms of the twentieth century…this is when it was born–in August and September, 1918. The word itself had already been used during World War I, but in relation to POWs and undesirable foreigners. But here in 1918 it was for the first time applied to the citizens of one’s own country.”
>It was Lenin who laid the foundation for what would become the Gulag Archipelago.
Tthey were in a big hurry to produce a Criminal Code in time for the trial of the SR’s–the Socialist Revolutionaries. The time had come to set in place the granite foundations of the Law… the project Code had not yet been completed, it had been forwarded to Vladimir Ilyich Lenin at his Gorki estate outside Moscow. Six articles of the Code provided for execution by shooting as the maximum punishment. This was unsatisfactory. On May 15, in the margins of the draft Code, Lenin added six more articles requiring execution by shooting (including– under Article 69– propaganda and agitation, particularly in the form of an appeal for passive resistance to the government and mass rejection of the obligations of military service or tax payments). And one other crime that called for execution by shooting; unauthorized return from abroad.”
“{Lenin} Comrade Kursky! In my opinion we ought to extend the use of execution by shooting to all activities of the Mensheviks, SR’s etc. We ought to find a formulation that would connect these activities with the international bourgeoise.” {Nothing left to the imagination there! “Terror is a method of persuasion”}
On May 17, Lenin sent a second letter from Gorki:
“Comrade Kursky!… {to) openly set forth a statute… to supply the motivation for the essence and justification of terror, its necessity, its limits. The court must not exclude terror.”
“The document is especially important because it was one of Lenin’s last directives on earth–he had not yet fallen ill–and an important part of his political testament. Attached to the letter is the rough draft…out of which grow both Article 58-4 and all of our dear little old mother, Article 58. “..propaganda or agitation, or participation in an organization, or assistance…” (and) execution by shooting was extended.”
sources Lenin 5th ed.
A. Solzhenistyn “Gulag Archpelago” v. 2, p. 17; v.3 p.352-354
Felix Quigley says
Jack Diamond
And to your great shame your only source quoted is Solzhenistyn who is the bitterest of communist and Marxist haters and the ultimate and nastiest quoter out of context.
“Context, my dear boy, context”
And who said that? Well I said it!
And I say it now because you have obviously either one…no understanding of the history of the Russian Revolution of either 1905, the dress rehearsal, or of 1917, the result of which rocked the world and is still doing so or two…the forces which were thrown against the 1917 Revolution and the newly born Workers State of Lenin and Trotsky
There is another alternative which is that you Jack Diamond do know more about these things than you are letting on but do not say it because you are a propagandist and not somebody who deals in truth at all costs.
And another thing you are sympathetic to the “Social Revolutionaries” but who are they? They shot Lenin leading to his death in 1924 but more to the point the same anarchist roots as those who attack Trump today. Did you know that? Well you do not state that!
I defend Lenin in these words you quote and I defend the right to use terror against a reactionary opponent who aims to do enormous harm, such as for example ISIS.
You Diamond who does not even address me by my name are talking like a front man or woman for the BBC. I know that talk so well. In war terror is allowed.
What would happen in America to patriots if they were being taken over by Jihadists? That is your answer.
You are claiming to me that it would be kid glove stuff if ISIS was taking over America. Yopu Jack Diamond talk like Obama.
On concentration camps in our modern era…I thought it was the British in the Boer War.
Was it not terror by the Imperialist Armies, who invaded the newly born workers state in 1918.
And Mr Diamond the kind British never used terror on us Irish. Is that what you are saying.
But Lenin and Trotsky, as Marxists, were never the British, they were the freedom fighters against the rotting (even then) capitalist/imperialist brutal and cruel world order.
A capitalist and brutal world order that you are defending.
Jack Diamond says
I’m sorry, did you say something?
Felix Quigley says
I think I said more than you can answer. I know your type very well. You are only able to quote from The Black Book of Communism pile of Fake Facts or such like. But you cannot exhibit any real knowledge of actual history. Though in essence you do not have to or need to understand history because you are representing the status quo. However capitalism is in crisis and there are serious signs of Fascism from the American State used against President Trump. We cannot dodge any section of history.
UNCLE VLADDI says
Islam is the exact opposite of the American Constitution:
The Constitution is not a suicide pact. It does not require us to harbor enemy combatants and fifth columns.
Most basically: Since islam requires its muslim members to adhere to criminal principles which are in direct conflict with the US Constitution, and Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution requires the President elect to take the Oath or Affirmation to: “… preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” the only sane and logical way to keep that oath, is to REQUIRE the crime-gang of islam be banned!
For instance:
Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or abridging the free exercise thereof.
Islam demands that it be the only recognized religion, that all others be suppressed.
That contravenes the Constitution.
The first amendment also provides congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech and press. Islam demands the death penalty for reviling Allah, Moe or Islam.
Islam contravenes the Constitution.
Art. 6 proscribes religious test for office. Islamic law requires that all officers be Muslim, declaring that infidels have no right to authority even over infidels.
Islam contravenes the Constitution.
Can a good Muslim be a good American?
Theologically – no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, The moon god of Arabia .
Religiously – no.Because no other religion is accepted by His Allah except Islam.(Quran,2:256)(Koran)
Scripturally – no. Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the Quran.
Geographically – no.Because his allegiance is to Mecca , to which he turns in prayer five times a day.
Socially – no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.
Politically – no. Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America, the great Satan.
Domestically – no. Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him. (Quran 4:34 )
Intellectually – no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.
Philosophically – no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.
Spiritually – no. Because when we declare ‘one nation under God,’The Christian’s God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in the Quran’s 99 excellent names. … but he is called The Great Deceiver.
Johnny Cuyana says
Response to Uncle Vladdi PART I OF III: I am in agreement with your sentiment; however, I will point out a bit more precisely, a contrast between our American values and those of the mohammedan death cult [particularly as they pertain to sharia].
In general, Americanism, just like for any other nation [or national religion], is based on FOUNDATIONAL VALUES. However, our American foundational values, in several critical characteristics, are quite different from those of most other nations.
Those other nations are defined primarily by the “military” abilities of a king, or some entity, to control a certain region, language, ethnicity, culture, religion and etc, or, a combination of such. America, on the other hand, although, we rely on our military, is defined by its general “philosophy”, i.e., “We the People” hold that all men, endowed from their creator, have certain unalienable rights equally and fairly … and that, as such, we legal citizens of these United States have formed our nation in which we will govern ourselves.
Conveniently, our American values, philosophical as they are, are found explicitly and implicitly in our two CHARTER national documents: [1] our Declaration of Independence [DOI] which is our statement regarding “why” we are an independent nation; and [2] our national Constitution which is our statement of “how” we will be a nation. Our foundational American values, derived from within these two documents, are summarized as follows:
[1]* belief in God … where we recognize God as the progenitor of our inherent humanity and our individuality;
* An aside: I understand that there are many patriotic atheists and agnostics and etc, and I can see where many may not be in agreement with that of our Founders “belief in God”, i.e., recognition and valuation of God. Regardless, whether they like it or otherwise, belief in God was integral to most of our Founders and their rationalization regarding why we are a nation. Note, however, that “God” is not stated in our Constitution; but, neither is the notion of unalienable rights of all men; and, neither needing be mentioned. Further, e.g., God was mentioned in our first Constitution, the Articles of Confederation, and God is also mentioned in the respective constitution of each and every one of our 50 States; and, further yet, even in the Constitution of the Confederate States of America, a recognition of God can be found in its preamble: “invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God”. In the presence of these, and many other historical instances, I do not see how an objective observer, let alone American citizens, can deny that the notion of God is our American foundational value. PS: our official national motto, ordained and accepted into law by Congress is: In God we trust.
Johnny Cuyana says
Response to Uncle Vladdi PART II OF III: [2] this belief in God is critical to our recognition of “certain unalienable rights” of each and every individual, that is, these rights, which can be “denied” by some illegal govt power, but are not any which are given or taken by govt, royalty, religion, warlord, dictator, etc;
[3] our govt is established on behalf of “We the People of the United States”, i.e., the people being “ourselves and our posterity”, where our nation [our Union and our govt] is established primarily to secure, fairly and equally, those rights for each and every individual legal citizen;
[4] we rely on the rule of law — not an arbitrary and capricious law of men or religion — where, most importantly, this law must be of, by and for the LEGAL CITIZENS [aka The PEOPLE]; an important corollary being that, upon the desire of the people, the law can be amended;
[5] our system is one of checks and balances — fair and open competition, if you will — between those who are elected to make our law, those who are elected to execute our law and those who are nominated to adjudicate our law;
[6] our system is a Federal system, where the central govt is to have only limited power, clearly enumerated, where the several States, and the people, are to hold ANY AND ALL remaining power not already so defined.
So, our Foundational American values can be abbreviated as follows: [1] belief in God; [2] unalienable rights equally and fairly for all men; [3] a govt to protect these rights; [4] govt based on rule of law of the people; [5] govt of checks and balances; and, [6] a federal system of limited central govt with all other powers in the States and the people. **
** An aside: all those values expressed in our Bill of Rights, and all the following amendments, have been derived from the above foundational values.
Johnny Cuyana says
Response to Uncle Vladdi PART III OF III: So, Minnesota candidate Phillip Parrish is exactly correct: the evil of the death cult mohammedanism — sharia — is the antithesis of all of our foundational American values:
[1] yes, both accept the notion of a God, and accept their God’s guiding influence; however, it is nearly impossible that the notions of the respective Gods could be any more polar opposite of each other;
[2] death cult mohammedans DO NOT BELIEVE in the unalienable rights equally and fairly for all men; sharia is exactly the opposite
[3] death cult mohammedans DO NOT BELIEVE in the govt obligation to protect the rights of their “subjects”; rather, mohammedans believe the law is there to protect the State [read: religion] … where the rights of the followers, i.e., the subjects, are totally subordinated;
[4] death cult mohammedans DO NOT BELIEVE in govt based on rule of law of the people; rather, they believe in an arbitrary and capricious law based on some “imagined” but immutable texts;
[5] death cult mohammedans DO NOT BELIEVE in govt of checks and balances; rather they believe in a totalitarian central state;
[6] death cult mohammedans DO NOT BELIEVE in a federal system of limited central govt with all other powers in the States and the people; rather, as above they believe in a centralized totalitarian state.
Again, the GOP candidate is completely correct; where, based on past experience, the opposite side of the argument is total hogwash.