Archive for January 2015

Imam Choudary: Obama Is ‘Lying’ About The True Nature Of Islam

January 12, 2015

“He’s only inventing Islam according to what his own foreign policy is.”

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/imam-choudary-obama-lying-about-true-nature-islam

Interview with Iman Anjem Choudary talking about the consequences when you insult Islam

http://mynorthwest.com/category/podcast_player/?a=9981897&p=1093&n=The%20Ben%20Shapiro%20Show

In the Ben Shapiro Show Thursday, Imam Anjem Choudary said the President Obama is “inventing” his own version of Islam to forward his foreign policy agenda and that the “radical” form Choudary espouses simply aligns with the principles of the Koran and Sharia Law.

Shapiro led into the segment by quoting from Choudary’s USA Today Jan. 8 opinion piece titled “People Know the Consequences,” which blamed the French government for allowing publications to “provoke Muslims” and argued that Muslims do not in fact believe in the freedom of expression:

Contrary to popular misconception, Islam does not mean peace but rather means submission to the commands of Allah alone. Therefore, Muslims do not believe in the concept of freedom of expression, as their speech and actions are determined by divine revelation and not based on people’s desires.

Shapiro then asked Choudary to discuss the Muslim view on the freedom of expression, specifically with regard to the Charlie Hebdo massacre. Choudary explained that Muslim scripture made clear that those who insult the Prophet, like journalists at Charlie Hebdo, must be punished: “Those who would insult the Prophet, kill them.” Sharia Law he said, clearly requires any who would insult those Muslims deem “prophets,” including Moses and Jesus, be tried in court and punished. This a system, he added, that Muslims are willing to “fight for and even die for.”

When Shapiro asked him if he believed that Western governments should ban the blasphemy of Mohammed, Choudary said he wanted Sharia Law in its entirety to be imposed on Western governments because it was a “better” system. However, if that were not possible, laws should be put in place against “provoking Muslims.” As he stressed in his article, Choudary said that killings like those Wednesday are “the consequence of insulting the Prophet.”

Pointing to the incompatibility of the Western and Sharia systems, Shapiro asked Choudary why the West should allow people like him to live in their boundaries. Choudary said he was born in England so he had the right to live there, and that “people always change” and “change is good,” so he believed that it was time for the West to change.

Choudary: The difference between divine law and man-made law—in other words liberal democracy and [inaudible] moralities and liberties—is that divine law can’t be changed. We can’t change the Koran, we can’t change the sayings of the Prophet, which include insulting the Prophet and the consequences. But you can change your laws…

If the West’s laws are not change, he warned, we’ll have a “blood bath.”

Choudary argued that what we’re witnessing is a “clash of two civilizations,” with al-Baghdadi leading on one side and Barack Obama leading on the other, leading Shapiro to ask about Obama’s portrayal of Islam:

Shapiro: President Obama has repeatedly attempted to what he has characterized as “defend” Islam, saying that ISIS is not Islamic. He has said that “the future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” […] But the way he characterizes Islam is not the way you characterize Islam […] How many people do you represent versus how many people does President Obama represent when it comes to Islam? Are you in fact representative of a “tiny minority” within Islam or are you representative of something larger?

President Obama, Choudary said, is “lying” about Islam, along with other Western leaders. The Koran itself shows that “Barack Obama is a liar” about the religion’s true nature:

Choudary: Islam for them is whatever they think Islam is in terms of their own interests. Islam is in accordance to the Koran, of the sayings and actions of the Prophet. That’s it. […] I say to you, look at the Koran, look at the sayings of the Prophet, and check for yourself. Is Barack Obama a liar or am I lying? I think that you will find that he’s a liar. He’s only inventing Islam according to what his own foreign policy is.

Shapiro asked Choudary if he took offense to being called a “radical” by the Western media, to which he responded that in Scripture “every prophet of Islam was demonized,” adding that he simply teaches Sharia Law as it truly is.

Iran denies aiding Assad in alleged nuclear project

January 12, 2015

Iran denies aiding Assad in alleged nuclear projectForeign minister says ‘ridiculous’ Der Speigel report aimed to discredit the Islamic Republic’s own program

By Marissa Newman and AFP January 12, 2015, 9:52 am

via Iran denies aiding Assad in alleged nuclear project | The Times of Israel.

 

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif speaks at a press conference in Tehran on August 31, 2014. (photo credit: AFP/Atta Kenare)

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif speaks at a press conference in Tehran on August 31, 2014. (photo credit: AFP/Atta Kenare)

 

ran on Sunday dismissed as “ridiculous” a report that it had supported Syrian President Bashar Assad in alleged efforts to construct a secret underground nuclear plant.

Germany’s Der Spiegel news magazine had reported on Friday that Assad was seeking nuclear weapons, adding that the Lebanese terror group Hezbollah, which has provided military support to Assad’s regime in the bloody conflict in Syria, has been guarding the secret project. The report said North Korean and Iranian experts were involved in the project development.

Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif rejected the report, which he said aimed to discredit the Islamic Republic’s own contested nuclear program.

“The magazine’s allegation is one of the attempts made by those circles whose life has been based on violence and fear to cloud the international community with illusion and create imaginary concerns about the Islamic Republic, and this is a ridiculous claim,” Zarif was quoted by the semi-official Fars news agency as saying.

The foreign minister also insisted, based on an Islamic edict issued by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, that “we believe that all nuclear weapons should be dismantled.”

Citing information made available by unidentified intelligence sources, Der Spiegel reported Friday that the Syrian plant was located in an inaccessible mountain region in the west of the war-ravaged country, two kilometers (1.2 miles) from the Lebanese border.

It is deep underground, near the town of Qusayr and has access to electricity and water supplies, the magazine said in a pre-released version of the story made available ahead of Saturday’s publication.

It said it had had access to “exclusive documents,” satellite photographs and intercepted conversations thanks to intelligence sources.

Western experts suspect, based on the documents, that a reactor or an enrichment plant could be the aim of the project, whose codename is “Zamzam,” Der Spiegel said.

The Syrian regime has transferred 8,000 fuel rods to the plant that had been planned for a facility at Al-Kibar, it added.

In 2007, a bombing raid on an undeclared Syrian nuclear facility at al-Kibar was widely understood to have been an Israeli strike, but it was never acknowledged by the Jewish state.

Der Spiegel said North Korean and Iranian experts are thought to be part of the “Zamzam” project.

Where did Gaza’s Concrete Go?

January 12, 2015

A leftwing organization is complaining that not enough building materials are being let into Gaza, but admits that what goes in is not being used to rebuild Gazan home.

By: Shalom Bear

Published: January 12th, 2015

via The Jewish Press » » Where did Gaza’s Concrete Go?.

 

A Hamas policeman walks past trucks loaded with cement which entered the Gaza Strip from Israel through the Kerem Shalom crossing.
A Hamas policeman walks past trucks loaded with cement which entered the Gaza Strip from Israel through the Kerem Shalom crossing.
Photo Credit: Abed Rahim Khatib / Flash90

It’s difficult to get a handle on the tone of a recent report by the radical left-wing organization Gisha.

In a recent article, they report on how much building materials such as concrete and cement have been brought into Gaza since the end of Operation Protective Edge in August 2014.

Trucks Tons of Material
Private use (Reconstruction) 722 34,570
Qatar projects 1,496 104,198
International Organization Projects 960 57,636
Totals: 3,178 196,404

Gisha complains that this amount isn’t nearly enough, making up only 3.9% of the amount of building material that Gaza needs to for reconstruction.

They claim that Gaza needs 5 million tons of building materials.

It would appear that Gisha is ignoring the estimated 3 millions tons of concrete rubble already in Gaza that can be recycled and reused for many projects — though that 3 million tons presumably includes the 800,000 tons of concrete originally used to build Gaza’s terror tunnel network that Hamas claims is already being rebuilt.

In the article, Gisha mentions that not a single home from the 20,000 destroyed homes hasbeen rebuilt since the construction material was first allowed back in.

But it is not clear who exactly Gisha is criticizing for that, or what they are implying.

So where did the concrete go?

An Israel Channel 2 reporter spoke with Gazans in December, and they said they haven’t seen any private reconstruction going on, only some main roads.

Based on the international mechanisms that were set up between the UN, Israel and the PA, every individual Gazan whose home was damaged need only fill out a form and they will receive the building materials they need to rebuild.

And yet the left-wing organization Gisha divulges that not a single new home has been rebuilt, despite nearly 35 tons and 722 trucks of construction material being brought in specifically for that purpose.

The Channel 2 reporter asked the Gazans about the construction material they were supposed to receive, and one Gazan in the construction business told him that the Gazans are reselling all their building materials on the black market to buy food and supplies – even though organizations like UNRWA supposedly supply them with the basics.

He claims that individual Gazans can’t afford to rebuild their homes, even after being given all the raw materials for free.

Which brings us back full circle, with one basic question.

Israel is allowing in building materials, more than enough for the Gazans to be rebuilding their homes.

There is enough recyclable construction material in Gaza to last them for years.

Individual Gazans are selling their construction material on the black market (to someone).

Despite the presence of international organizations who are supposed to be in Gaza helping them rebuild and ensuring that building materials do not go to Hamas, no one actually sees any help from them in rebuilding their homes, other than providing them raw material which they resell, presumably to Hamas.

Despite the multiplicity of NGOs supposedly concerned with Gaza, none of those NGOs seem to be helping the Gazans physically rebuild.

Despite having all the raw materials and the manpower, no one in Gaza is helping one another rebuild their homes, and certainly Hamas and the PA, their own government(s), isn’t helping either.

Which leaves us with one question: how many terror tunnels is Hamas currently rebuilding with all the redirected construction materials?

A Dream Imposed Before its Time Becomes a Nightmare

January 12, 2015

A Dream Imposed Before its Time Becomes a Nightmare

Posted on January 10, 2015

By Seneca III

via A Dream Imposed Before its Time Becomes a Nightmare | Gates of Vienna.

 

A Dream Imposed Before its Time Becomes a Nightmare

by Seneca III

With a deeply saddening reference to the gruesome Charlie Hebdo massacre, the latest but by now quite routine Muslim atrocity, I find it extremely ironic that all online UK newspapers that accept comments below their outraged articles lauding freedom of speech are in fact ‘moderating’ the comments. I’ve already had two knocked back this morning, neither of which contained foul language or specific threats, but merely addressed the truth that dare not state its name.

To understand why this is so one only has to look at the track record of our vote-whoring, deconstructionist lawmakers in the Mother of Parliaments — and their counterparts throughout the West — and how they have gagged and suborned the Fourth Estate.

Essentially the Islamic invasion of the West is only a secondary threat to our freedom. It is an unanticipated by-product of that utopian pipe-dream, the great globalisation project. The purveyors of the latter have gleefully welcomed it and are now busy utilising it to achieve their own malignant ends.

Over several decades, by means of a carefully planned and orchestrated campaign whereby the young and the gullible of all ages have been infected with Pathological Altruism, that terminal Ebola of the mind, inculcated through the vectors of false cultural anthropomorphism and white guilt, they have carefully removed the goalposts of our democracy and established a wide open playing field upon which the Great Game must be played according to their rules — which are essentially any rules that they care to impose.

Now, with each passing day, they draw ever closer to achieving their objective through the clandestine encouragement of the Religion of Death and Slavery by establishing a protective shield around these cretinous barbarians as they subjugate us, the indigenous inhabitants, through a campaign of terror, intimidation and disinformation. The demonising and criminalisation of free speech is a minor but very important part of this process, for when freedom of speech has gone all other freedoms will follow. Thus are the deconstructionists close to establishing the desired socio-political environment wherein they can justify and thence implement their long planned unilateral seizure of absolute power via a ‘diversity’-indoctrinated and enriched Judiciary, Legal Apparatus and Police Service.

Thus it is that Islam can only be effectively (and easily) dealt with once the primary threat — our homegrown, ambitious and morally destitute global totalitarians — have been dealt with in their entirety.

However, the self-serving ambition of these avaricious traitors has until now blinded them to the reality that they are but drones on a mating flight they will not survive, irrespective of the outcome of the coming conflict, and that is going to be a very messy business indeed. Furthermore, there are indications that this fact is slowly dawning upon them, that the first frissons of fear are trickling down their crooked spines, and very soon they will have to try to save themselves by applying their only remaining option: cracking down with draconian ferocity upon those who are opposed to and actively resist the imposition of an Islamic Caliphate upon the West.

Hence it is no longer of any use for anybody to try to speak truth to power be it through the ballot box or otherwise. In the final analysis the only course of action left to each of us is Sauve qui peut — ‘Save himself who can’ (or ourselves collectively) by every and any means we can muster, without fear of what history may think of us, for if we do not we will have no history.

Understand this — those who should be our guides, our saviours, our protectors, together with their fellow travellers, sycophants and hopeful beneficiaries, are in fact the deadliest enemies of all free men and women.

Seneca III
Middle England, 8th January 2015

For links to previous essays by Seneca III, see the Seneca III Archives.

Oppression Instead of Admission

January 12, 2015

Oppression Instead of Admission

via Oppression Instead of Admission | Gates of Vienna.

In his latest essay, Takuan Seiyo notes the many ways in which the bill is now coming due all across the West for mass Muslim immigration. He also details recent examples of denial and repression against anyone who dares to identify the cause of what is happening.


Vincent van Gogh, ‘Prisoners Exercising’, 1890

Oppression Instead of Admission

by Takuan Seiyo

A recent headline informed that TSA Considers All-Out Ban Of Carry-On Bags After Latest Terror Threat. That reminded me how and why I gave up my comfortable life and turned instead to the solitary, unrewarded labor of writing pro bono for samizdat publications shut out of the wider sheeple’s ken by the flock’s herders and shearers.

It was in the mid-2000s. My longtime home country, California, to which I had contributed much as a taxpayer, employer, educator, buyer of homes and planter of trees, had been pulled from under my feet by the usual postmodern wrecking crew. I had expatriated to Japan.

I like Japan and its culture, but I didn’t want to spend the rest of my life there. So I started flying across the Pacific periodically, in search of a future home in my country.

My first recon destination was Denver. What I experienced on that trip and on subsequent ones to other American cities was so shocking that words and paragraphs started pouring out of me. Not so much to change the course of this runaway train — I am not that naive — but to leave information for future archeologists puzzled over the piles of rubble where a great civilization once flourished.

That first flight from Tokyo placed me in a long line of Americans shuffling shoeless and beltless in silence under the watchful stares of uniformed state functionaries barking orders at the silent, snaking file of cowed, conquered people. As they moved along, the herded subjects were discarding their clothing here, nail files and pen knives there, watches and coins yet elsewhere, having that last drink of water before that too was taken away from them, in order to then step virtually naked into a contraption that showered them with a stream of particles.

To one born where I was born — an easy day’s hike to Auschwitz — whose own mother had been processed in a similar if more sinister manner before boarding a cattle car to a labor/death camp (she escaped en route), the analogy could not go unnoticed.

And now they want to ban carry-on luggage too. Your laptop, your valuables, your necessities for that 20-hour flight to Melbourne. What a windfall to TSA security minders, over 400 of whom were fired between 2003 and 2013 for theft from check-in — by law, unlocked — baggage, and even that just “the tip of an iceberg” of the larceny.

Things have progressed in other ways too, in the manner in which progressive Western countries now like to make progress. You go now to transact any business in a U.S. Government office, you’ll get the full airport security treatment. Soon, all manner of cops driving around in unmarked “mobile backscatter radiation x-rays” vans will be able to zap you inside your car and under your clothes, giving them the same prurient thrill currently available only to TSA employees at airports. But even that will soon give way to progress, as a private company, Q-Tel, working with the US Department of Homeland Security, has developed a “molecular level” (and of course clothes-penetrating) scanner that will “instantly know everything about your body, clothes, and luggage” from 50 meters (164′) away — including what you ate for breakfast and how your hormones are doing this morning.

They have facial recognition embedded now in electronic billboards, cameras on every lamppost — over thirty million already — chips on supermarket shelves that record what merchandise you look at. The FBI’s Next Generation Identification system can now identify people just by looking at their faces, with all that data streaming from tens of millions electronic spy eyes and chips, and soon remote identification by iris scans, palm prints, voice analysis, DNA signature and even walking stride will be possible as well. There is Trapwire, exposed through Julian Assange’s Wikileaks, that sieves all this raw surveillance data for patterns of “suspicious activity.” And now there are “pre-crime surveillance cameras” too, thanks to BRS Labs, that we should all be grateful to know, identify criminal activity before it happens.

And that’s not counting the drones. There are about 18,000 state and local law enforcement agencies in the United States, increasingly employing surveillance drones. There is a whole alphabet soup of federal law enforcement agencies, and who knows what fleets of drones and other devices they too deploy. And that’s not talking about the dedicated spying agencies such as NSA and the whole large domestic and global U.S. government spying program revealed by Edward Snowden.

Such spying includes access to all electronic communications of anyone — no court-order required and no Constitution consulted. Snowden revealed among other things, and it was verified by the Washington Post, that 90% of individuals monitored by the NSA are ordinary, innocent Americans. According to a lawsuit [pdf] by several former NSA employees, “The NSA has the capability to do individualized searches, similar to Google, for particular electronic communications in real time through such criteria as

target addresses, locations, countries and phone numbers, as well as watch-listed names, keywords, and phrases in email.” It can also seize and store “most electronic communications passing through its U.S. intercept centers.”

All for your own security, tovarisch. And there is a giant training regimen going on to get you used to the idea that your constitutional rights, your privacy, even your privates, are not your own but your benevolent, caring government’s as represented by its stalwart thirty million or so employees (federal, state and local, and growing on steroids).

Talk back to a TSA person, you will be detained. Visit some websites critical of NWO, Empire, Mira, Muslimization and fiat paper money, but extolling self-sufficiency, freedom, the Constitution and the natural right of a people to its territory, and you are a strong candidate for the “No-fly” list without a prior notice, due process or recourse. Visit a prepper website, and the FBI will insert a cookie in your electronic rectum. Run your phone’s video on an arresting cop, and he will smash you and your camera and you will not find a sympathetic judge. Search on Google for a rice cooker and a backpack — implements used by the Musloid-immigrant Boston bombers — and within hours your door will explode and your dog be shot dead by armored gummint ninjas with machine guns and stun grenades.

Ostensibly, all of that cattle treatment in airports and the freest country in the world turned into Orwell’s Oceania was to protect Americans from “terrorists.” TSA was created because on September 11, 2001 some jihadi Muslim retards took advantage of the even more retarded non-discriminative mindset of the country they hated. Ever since, and before too, practically all foiled or executed acts of terror have been by Muslims.

There are so very few exceptions to the “All terrorists are Muslim” rule that they are worth listing, as curiosities. One kind is White communists like Bill Ayers in the United States and Joschka Fischer and Danny the Red in Europe. They are themselves VIPs now at the apex of the Establishment: either friends and collaborators of the President of the United States or major, adored politicians themselves. The other White kind are mental cases like Timothy McVeigh and Anders Breivik, who see Leviathan’s weight crushing their peoples and for some twisted reason elect to kill innocents in reprisal. Then there are racist psycho Blacks like John Allen Muhammad or Ismaaiyl Brinsley, seeing “racism” everywhere and murdering whitey for that.

But all those existed before 9/11 too, conspicuously in the 19th century, and America and Great Britain were not fascist-leaning police states then. It’s Muslim immigration and Muslim residence in the West that changed all that, quantitatively and qualitatively.

And we must, say the commanders of this compound and their kapos, the sheeple-herders of every former nation state and home to a European-origin people, keep importing Muslims, and other indigestible brown and black tax eaters, because… because… we must!

The more we import them, the greater the number of the curious lupines of distinctly Islamic gait and the stronger the fractious forces smashing Western nations’ social capital, government budget, culture, history and tradition to smithereens. Commensurately growing are the size and intrusiveness of every Western government, the extent of its totalitarian-style control imposed on the victims of its pet imported population, and persecution of autochthon dissidents averse to being de facto evicted from their ancestors’ home country.

The mind reels when reading such stuff, for it appears that we are regressing to dark, feudal, fanatical times when church-and-castle held everyone in an iron grip, while most of us believe we are creating a better, freer, more “just” future.

And there is no escaping it. In Australia recently, the long-time criminal Islamic activist Man Haron Monis hoisted the ISIS flag, held up 17 people and murdered two in a Sydney café. All the elements of the infectious bovine spongiform encephalitis spores that the sheeple’s herders spray onto the flock were there: from “nothing to do with Islam,” to “lone wolf and “lunatic,” to media accounts and pictures focusing on the shock and dismay of other “Australian” Muslims and their fear of “backlash.”

What wasn’t there was a serious public discussion why Monis had been admitted to Australia in the first place, or why any other Muslim was, for that matter. After all, even law-abiding Muslims fundamentally deplete the social capital of a formerly unicultural, Christian-origin country such as Australia (Yes, I know, the aboriginals — but this is an advanced course not designed to cure basic ignorance of comparative history and anthropology). Besides, Muslims have large and forever-expanding extended families that they like to import from one hellhole or another: Balochistan, Fafan, Saada — stab the map of Dar al-Islam with your finger at random, you’ll find one.

Nor was there a serious public debate whether Australia’s draconian gun prohibition laws have contributed to this Muz Mayhem, and will to future ones. After all, Monis wielded a pump-action shotgun in a country where even outback ranchers aren’t allowed to have one.

A single senator did argue that gun prohibition turned Australia into a nation of victims, but only to elicit the usual Progressive clucking, “Parties reject pro-gun Senator David Leyonhjelm’s call for more Australians to carry guns”.

Australia passed its gun control laws on a groundswell of feelings, in 1996, after a psycho shot up some 58 people in Tasmania. Feelings are the bane of the femino-progressive West now, substituting for facts and reason. As is always the case with mass firearms confiscations, in Australia too, the only sole achievement was to punish the law-abiding, leaving only the criminals and “lone wolves” armed (with illegal guns).

France is already choking. 10% of its population (per official stats, but there is more) are feral Muslims imported from Africa; Marseilles has been permanently transformed into a backward region of Morocco; native Frenchmen are mowed down by imported Muslims’ cars, bullets or blades seemingly every other day; 1000 cars of Frenchmen are torched every year for a Muslim celebration of Christmas; and 750 areas with over 4 million “Frenchmen” are officially designated as “Zones urbaines sensibles” i.e. zones where no real Frenchman, if he is sensible (that’s my esoteric translation, the weasel French word means “sensitive”), ought to set foot, or else it’s his limbs or life.

And still, the fanatical socialist Francois Hollande can deliver an impassioned speech in mid-December hailing the benefits of immigration to his country and unloading on the “scaremongers and prophets of doom, “who dream of a smaller, spiteful, retreating France that is no longer France” He follows suit with a New Year speech setting a “fight against racism and anti-Semitism” and a battle against staunch conservatism and “dangerous” populist movements his national cause for 2015.

As though the “scaremongers” and “dangerous populist movements” were not the thin line opposing dangerous Muslims’ racism and antisemitism. As though native white Frenchmen have less right to their own territory where their ancestors lived already in the Iron Age, than the Abron or Dyula have to their homelands in West Africa.

Hardly a week after Sydney, the same occurred in France, without guns. That was Reality, asserting that what kills people is Islam (and black or imported narco-brown dysfunction in the United States), not guns. In Dijon, a “man” screaming Allahu Akbar drove his car into a crowd and injured 13. In Nantes, a “man” screaming Allahu Akbar drove his car into a crowd, injuring 11. In Joue-les-Tours, a “French convert” screaming Allahu Akbar attacked three policemen with a knife.

And the same sick syndrome: pronouncements by the politicians and the clucking classes were all about “mental illness”/ “lone wolf”/ “no connection” [between the three attacks]. Islam was specifically excluded from consideration.

A few weeks later, three imported Muslim “Frenchmen” burst into the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, open fire with automatic AK-47s, kill 12 and injure 8, then get away, screaming Allahu Akbar. French police officers who arrive on the scene are unarmed and have to flee. The clucking class (e.g. Piers Morgan) remains strangely silent about this obvious failure of France’s highly restrictive gun laws. Such proscriptive laws obviously cannot restrain Allah’s soldiers; they acquire military-grade weapons on the flourishing black market.

Alain Juppé — Mayor of Bordeaux, former Prime Minister and a possible future President — goes on television that very morning of January 7th, saying, “Islamophobia is a mortal peril. It’s a danger of war. We cannot allow ourselves to develop that detestable movement.”

As if to prove how detestable Islamophobia is, within 48 hours two more gifts of Muslim Africa to France kill another policeman in Paris, and the male of them, armed with two AK-47s, shoots up and takes over a kosher supermarket, resulting in the death of four hostages. In Montrogue, an unarmed police woman is shot with an automatic firearm and killed, and a street sweeper is injured. Two “suspects” are later arrested and Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve warns against “jumping to conclusions.” In Nîmes, an “automobile driver” rams a police car and is shot for his trouble. In Carcassonne, a French soldier in uniform — they still wear them in France, unlike in the Netherlands — is assaulted by an “imbalanced” man armed with a machete, tear gas bomb— and Allahu Akbar.

French intelligence services are busy 24/7 foiling terror plots by “Frenchmen,” the vomitable Hollande is begging to buy off Muslims with an official jizya that he calls “tackling inequality”, but it’s obvious that the situation in France is out of control, as it is in the rest of Western Europe. It’s equally obvious that the situation will continue deteriorating — after all, demography is destiny — and that the ruling elites will continue every possible lie and means of suppression available to them, to prevent the flock from any effective counteraction.

It’s no wonder that on January 15, a French journalist, Laurent Obertone, will publish a book entitled La France, Big Brother, subtitled (in translation) “The lie is the truth.” French Amazon.com synopsizes: “Who is Big Brother? The peak of the pyramid. The government. The administration. The media. The experts. The ideologues. Intellectual orthodoxy. The screens. An organization that assumed all the appearances of a free and democratic society.”

To which I might add: multiply all that times every single Western country, plus all international organizations of any kind.

The madness and the pertinent social controls have burrowed deep also into the flesh of what used to be the sanest, best-managed country of the West, Switzerland. One who has seen the brown and black loiterers at a Swiss Railway station, or who reads between the lines of crime reports, soon realizes that this once-great country has done itself in, in the manner of its neighbors.

After research into the effect of imported barbarian tax-eaters and lawbreakers on Switzerland in 2007, I wrote:

“Last year, there were 639 rapes in Switzerland. 309 of the 489 identified perpetrators, i.e. over 63%, were foreigners. 198 homicides were committed in Switzerland in 2006. Of the 226 identified perpetrators, 51% were foreigners. There were 9272 assaults with bodily damage and 8568 identified assailants. Almost 50% of the assailants were Swiss residents of foreign extraction. All these and statistics on kidnappings, theft, burglary etc — all the specialty of foreigners — may be gleaned in the 2006 Statistical Report on Crime, issued by the Swiss Federal Police. [snip]

It is common knowledge here that Albanians and other European Muslims commit crimes far out of proportion to their numbers [snip]. The names one reads in drug and smuggling arrest reports are usually Balkan-Muslim or Turkish. [snip]

The Federal Department of Justice and Police ordered a study of delinquency and nationality that found in 2001 a criminal conviction rate about 12 times higher among asylum seekers (4%), and twice as high (0.6%) among other resident foreigners, compared to Swiss citizens (0.3%). Given the enormous share of crime by Third World asylum seekers, one would think that a wide consensus existed to shut down this and other immigration-related gates to dystopia. But Switzerland is as PC-bound and multiculti handicapped, as confused about its identity, as the rest of the West is.”

And the Swiss keep packing them in. According to Eurostat, between 1.1.2014 and 30.9.214 Switzerland took in 2220 refugees per million inhabitants, second only to Sweden. At the same time, Swiss jails are so overloaded — and as I showed above, the majority of the inmates are the same people that the Swiss ruling elite keeps inviting in large numbers — that the country is now seeking to export its prison inmates to France and Germany.

Germany, waking up after decades of treasonous demographic malpractice by its establishment, is marching under PEGIDA banners (Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West) in Dresden, Berlin, Cologne, Kassel, Hamburg and Munich. But a powerful counterattack has been mounted by what I call SWORIL (Swells Who Ride in Limousines).

Frau Merkel diagnosed that the will of the people was moot when clashing with the fancies of SWORIL. It’s done easily these days: you just call PEGIDA “right-wing extremism, hostility towards foreigners and anti-Semitism” — the very words Merkel used — or “nationalists and racists, who are fanning people’s fears and want to divide society” — the magic mantra of a leader of the Social Democratic party, Thomas Oppermann.

Both Cologne’s famous cathedral and Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate switched off their lights to protest against the anti-Muslim rallies. The head of the confederation of German employers opined that Germany’s image is being damaged by an anti-foreigner movement, and that “Germany needed immigration to sustain its job market and social system, given that its population is aging.” He refrained from elaborating further whether Germany needed immigration of sub-90 IQ, fanatical followers of a 7th century desert brigand to sustain its job market and social system…

If only Merkel and Oppermann and the German anti-PEGIDA demonstrators were that insightful in 1935, when the time was right and proper… If only Cologne Cathedral’s Cardinal Schulte switched off the lights in 1936, instead of staging a fawning reception for Hitler as “The Liberator of Rhineland.” If only German factories enticed foreign immigrants to power the industry of the Third Reich, instead of forcing millions of Slav slaves to work nonstop on a bowl of potato peel water a day, under whip and cudgel, until they died…

How grotesque, to be a German counterpolar idiot to the German idiots of the other pole — the one of the 1930s-40s. How stupid to destroy your country by toppling it into an abyss this way, just because your grandfather toppled it into an abyss that way…

But there must be even larger forces abroad, and who knows to whose orders the political and cultural SWORILs march. The hysteria, the bold-faced, desperate lying, the besmirching and persecution of resisters, the packing into every Euro peoples’ land of more imported voters for the Corporatist-Socialist-Feminist Multiculti Oligarchy, though they be also soldiers for the Caliphate — all that bespeaks of cataclysmic forces roiling the ruling class under its cultivated surface.

One of the agitprop tools of the European Union opined: “Anti-Islam protests ‘tearing apart’ German society — the inverse of the obvious truth that Islam is tearing Germany apart. Geert Wilders, who alone among major political leaders has been warning that Islam tears all of Europe apart, is now to stand trial for “insulting a group of people based on race and incitement to discrimination and hatred,” after similar legal chicanery against him failed in 2011.

Brigitte Bardot, who merely challenged Muslim treatment of our furry friends, has been hauled to court by the French nouveau Vichy permanent regime and punished five times, over eight years. Fjordman gets out of line with his critique of Eurabia’s insane captains, they remove the shoelaces from Anders Breivik and tie them onto Fjordman, with much media fanfare in Quislingland.

European president Jean-Claude Juncker warned “established political parties,” i.e. those that do not challenge the accepted lies, not to imitate “populists” parties — i.e. those that timidly challenge some of the lies, particularly about the wonders of Immigration and Islam. Should mainstream parties like Christian Democrats become “populist,” warned Monsieur Juncker, European countries would become “ungovernable”.

Oy vey, what will all those Europeans do, if they are not “governed”!

But this portends a deeper tragedy. The French and other European ruling elites lie to their state serfs and repress dissent to save their own sinecures, their perverted schemes. They wish to evade accountability for the greatest malfeasance ever inflicted on a people since Stalin and Hitler, to kick the time bomb downstreet so that it explode not in their own times. But the United States was always there since its inception: liberty’s last, best hope, as the inspiration of Europe’ liberty and, for the past 100 years, its guarantor.

No more. The same cabal of progressive politicians, self-dealing bureaucrats in giant Leviathan structures, postmodern-Marxist academics, labor socialists, financial criminals, mega-crooks, emotive airhead celebrities, feminists, self-haters, and their large, immigrant clientele has transformed America just as it has Europe. Should Eurabia become “ungovernable,” the U.S. Multiculti Marines will be landing in Normandy to help not the wrecked, conquered people but to protect their “governors” and their pet Muslim minority from the horrific consequences of the former’s madness and the latter’s barbarism. United States’ “majority minority” population will be cheering them on.

These are the times that try men’s souls.

Takuan Seiyo is a European-born American writer living in exile in Japan. For links to his previous essays, see the Takuan Seiyo Archives.

“Radical” “Extremist” Islam is mainstream Islam

January 11, 2015

“Radical” “Extremist” Islam is mainstream Islam, Dan Miller’s Blog, January 11, 2015

(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)

Many who consider themselves our “betters” continue to tell us that only “radicals” or “extremists” slaughter people for “insulting” Allah and Mohamed or try otherwise to force submission to Islam upon us. They refuse even to use the word “Islamic,” except when pretending that such actions are “not Islamic.” They are wrong and it’s time to wake up. Apathy and ignorance can be deadly.

As explained in my January 10th post, citing and quoting from an article in Catholic World Report by Father James V. Schall, S.J, the Islam we saw in Paris, France is neither “radical” nor “extremist.” It is mainstream Islam, as commanded by the Koran and Sharia law. It is the purpose of this article to explain further why that is the case.

National Review article by Andrew C. McCarthy is titled Don’t Blame the Charlie Hebdo Mass Murder on ‘Extremism.’ It explicates the Sharia law bases of “radical” Islam as set forth in Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law. It is the authoritative Sharia manual:

Reliance is not some al-Qaeda or Islamic State pamphlet. It is a renowned explication of sharia’s provisions and their undeniable roots in Muslim scripture. In the English translation, before you get to chapter and verse, there are formal endorsements, including one from the International Institute of Islamic Thought — a U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood think tank begun in the early Eighties (and to which American administrations of both parties have resorted as an exemplar of “moderation”). Perhaps more significantly, there is also an endorsement from the Islamic Research Academy at al Azhar University, the ancient seat of Sunni learning to which President Obama famously turned to co-sponsor his cloyingly deceptive 2009 speech on relations between Islam and the West. [Emphasis added.]

In their endorsement, the al-Azhar scholars wrote:

We certify that the . . . translation corresponds to the Arabic original and conforms to the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni Community. . . . There is no objection to printing it and circulating it. . . . May Allah give you success in serving Sacred Knowledge and the religion.

There could be no more coveted stamp of scholarly approval in Islam.

Mr. McCarthy’s article provides many quotations from Reliance. Here are some of them:

Apostasy from Islam is “the ugliest form of unbelief” for which the penalty is death (“When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed”). (Reliance o8.0 & ff.) [Emphasis added.]

Apostasy occurs not only when a Muslim renounces Islam but also, among other things, when a Muslim appears to worship an idol, when he is heard “to speak words that imply unbelief,” when he makes statements that appear to deny or revile Allah or the prophet Mohammed, when he is heard “to deny the obligatory character of something which by consensus of Muslims is part of Islam,” and when he is heard “to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law.” (Reliance o8.7; see also p9.0 & ff.)

Jihad means to war against non-Muslims. (Reliance o9.0.) [Emphasis added.]

It is an annual requirement to donate a portion of one’s income to the betterment of the ummah (an obligation called zakat, which is usually, and inaccurately, translated as “charity”); of this annual donation, one-eighth must be given to “those fighting for Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster. . . . They are given enough to suffice them for the operation even if they are affluent; of weapons, mounts, clothing and expenses.” (Reliance, h8.1–17.) [Emphasis added.]

As commanded in the aforementioned Sura 9:29, non-Muslims are permitted to live in an Islamic state only if they follow the rules of Islam, pay the non-Muslim poll tax, and comply with various conditions designed to remind them that they have been subdued, such as wearing distinctive clothing, keeping to one side of the street, not being greeted with “Peace be with you” (“as-Salamu alaykum”), not being permitted to build as high as or higher than Muslims, and being forbidden to build new churches, recite prayers aloud, “or make public displays of their funerals or feast-days.” (Reliance o11.0 & ff.) [Emphasis added.]

The penalty for spying against Muslims is death. (Reliance p50.0 & ff; p74.0 & ff.)

The penalty for homosexual activity (“sodomy and lesbianism”) is death. (Reliance p17.0 & ff.) [Emphasis added.]

A woman is required to be obedient to her husband and is prohibited from leaving the marital home without permission; if permitted to go out, she must conceal her figure or alter it “to a form unlikely to draw looks from men or attract them.” (Reliance p42.0 & ff.) [Emphasis added.]

A woman has no right of custody of her child from a previous marriage when she remarries “because married life will occupy her with fulfilling the rights of her husband and prevent her from tending to the child.” (Reliance m13.4.) [Emphasis added.]

The penalty for theft is amputation of the right hand. (Reliance o14.0.)

The penalty for accepting interest (“usurious gain”) is death (i.e., to be considered in a state of war against Allah). (Reliance p7.0 & ff.)

The testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man. (Reliance o24.7.) [Emphasis added.]

If a case involves an allegation of fornication (including rape), “then it requires four male witnesses.” (Reliance o24.9.) [Emphasis added.]

The establishment of a caliphate is obligatory, and the caliph must be Muslim and male. “The Prophet . . . said, ‘Men are already destroyed when they obey women.’” (Reliance o25.0 & ff; see also p28.0, on Mohammed’s condemnation of “masculine women and effeminate men.”) [Emphasis added.]

Great Zeus! It almost as bad as the (alleged) “Republican war on women,” about which many “feminists” complain. There is no “Republican war on women.” Islam and Sharia exist and are growing. It does seem at least a tad strange that many quite vocal “feminists” remain silent about the Sharia laws imposed on millions of their sisters. Perhaps they should savor those quaint laws, personally, for a month or three and then (if still alive) return to tell us of their experiences.

Mr. McCarthy concludes,

This anti-liberty, supremacist, repulsively discriminatory, and sadly mainstream interpretation of Islam must be acknowledged and confronted. In its way, that is what Charlie Hebdo had been attempting to do — while, to their lasting shame, governments in the United States and Europe have been working with Islamist states to promote sharia blasphemy standards. That needs to end. The future must not belong to those who brutalize free expression in the name of Islam. [Emphasis added.]

Brutalizing free expression is bad enough. But that is not all that Islam tries to do to us. In the following video, Sean Hannity interviews Imam Anjem Choudary, who lives and preaches in Londonstan. As the Imam explains, “Islam” does not mean peace. It means total submission.

In the next video, Mr. Hannity and guests discuss the threat of “radical” Islam. It should, however, be referred to simply as Islam, because it is not radical; it is mainstream:

In a generally facetious article, Bernard Goldberg suggested that Muslims who disapprove of Islamic slaughter and demands for submission should engage in a million man march against them in Paris. Here is an also facetious video of the Million Muslim march as it happened. Watch closely.

I saw only one Muslim, and he was cleverly disguised as a pigeon.

Imam Obama frequently uses the phrase “on the wrong side of history.” He doubtless considers “Islamophobes” to be among those on the wrong side. There are, however, few if any “Islamophobes,” because the term means an irrational fear of Islam. Anyone other than a Muslim, who is capable of rational, reality based analysis and even occasionally indulges in it with respect to Islam, is very afraid of it. Fear, however, is not a solution and can lead to submission, the meaning and goal of Islam. We recently saw submission by most of the “legitimate news” media, which declined to republish any of the Charlie Hedbo cartoons, even as news. They were news, dammit, because they were the basis for the Charlie Hedbo slaughters.

Steve Emerson, of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, contends that Europe is finished. I am afraid that he is correct.

In America, there may still be time to deal with Islam to prevent it from gaining ascendancy as it has in much of Europe. The first steps — taken thus far by very few — are to recover from denial and apathy, to recognize the problem and give it a name: Islam. Not “extremist” or “radical” Islam. That will be a worthy beginning, but it is not sufficient.

Appeasement won’t work. Until we find and implement viable ways to deal with the Islamic problem, there will be less and less peace as we understand it, and more and more Islamic “peace,” in our time.

I offered some suggestions here. Comments suggesting additional or alternative ways to deal with the Islamic problem will be greatly appreciated.

How Paris attacks are a wake up call to radical Islam threat?

January 11, 2015

How Paris attacks are a wake up call to radical Islam threat? You Tube, January 10, 2015

(Why do they refer to “radical” and “extremist” Islam when, as noted in the video, a majority of Muslims want to impose Sharia law and all of the “blessings” it brings? The actions of the “radicals” are clearly commanded by the Koran. Please see also this article, which provides a Koranic analysis. —  DM)

 

Charlie, Muhammad, and the Saudi 1000 Lashes of Raif Badawi

January 11, 2015

Charlie, Muhammad, and the Saudi 1000 Lashes of Raif Badawi, The Gatestone InstituteDenis MacEoin, January 11, 2014

(Is Saudi Arabia “not-Islamic,” like the Islamic State and its many cohorts? Nope, all are Islamic to the core and it’s high time for our “betters” to realize and acknowledge it. — DM)

“My commitment is… to reject any repression in the name of religion… a goal we will reach in a peaceful and law-abiding way.” — Raif Badawi.

If he ever leaves prison, his life will have been destroyed — by voyeurs as sexually twisted as those of ancient Rome.

“Our Prophet,” Malik said, “would have been crystal clear and unequivocal in condemning [the Charlie Hebdo massacre]. But his statement points out why there is a problem. Malik was — quite innocently, I am sure — completely wrong. Muhammad did the same thing – many, many times.

Today we all are Charlie, and we are all Raif.

His first 50 lashes were administered Friday. After the noon prayers, outside the mosque, Saudi writer and blogger Raif Badawi, 30, received a sentence perhaps worse than death. Accused of “insulting Islam,” he is to receive 1000 lashes: 50 per week for 20 weeks — nearly half a year. “The lashing order says Raif should ‘be lashed very severely,'” a twitter notice read. “If they lash him again next week we do not know if he is going to survive. He has no medical assistance,” another notice said.

After that, he is to spend ten years in prison and pay a fine of $266,000. If he ever leaves prison, his life will have been destroyed — by voyeurs as sexually twisted as those of ancient Rome.

His wife and three children have been given asylum in Canada. Her family has filed for divorce on the grounds of his supposed apostasy.

874Raif Badawi and his children

His crime is said to have been “insulting Islam.” Badawi had written, “My commitment is… to reject any repression in the name of religion… a goal that we will reach in a peaceful, law-abiding way.”

He is alleged to have criticized the Wahhabi clergy who run his country hand in hand with the royal family.[1] Muslims seem not to be able to handle questions, reasoned criticism or satire. Perhaps where many come from, there is only one opinion — the dominant majority one. If there are more, as there are, there seems a wish to stamp them out. Here in the West, a major role of government is to protect the minority from the majority.

The day before, January 8, 2015, just after the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris, BBC News in London broadcast a report that contained short interviews with a number of moderate Muslims who decried the attack and feared repercussions on their own communities.[2]

One of the interviewees was Nadeem Malik, the UK Director of the Bahu Trust, a Sufi Muslim charity that “espouses the virtues of tolerance, peaceful co-existence and equality.” Malik said: “Our Prophet would have been absolutely crystal clear and unequivocal in condemning any such action. That’s not in the name of Islam at all, and Muslims are sick of having their faith hijacked in this manner.”

I do not doubt Mr. Malik’s sincerity, and I respect the Islamic tradition (Barelwi) from which he comes as one more in keeping with a non-violent interpretation. But his statement sharply points out why there is a problem. He was — quite innocently, I am sure — completely wrong.

There is an inspiration for attacks like those on writers, cartoonists, and film-makers: France’s Charlie Hebdo journalists; Amsterdam’s Theo van Gogh; Denmark’s Kurt Westergaard, Carsten Juste, and Flemming Rose, and Sweden’s Lars Vilks — as well as the assassination attempt on the Nobel Prize winning Egyptian novelist Naguib Mahfouz and the fatwa for the murder of the British writer Salman Rushdie. The inspiration for this behavior is not that the Prophet Muhammad was lampooned or criticized or mocked. The inspiration for this behavior is that Muhammad himself would have ordered or approved such attacks as revenge for assaults on his honour.

How can one make such an outrageous suggestion? The answer is that Muhammad did exactly the same thing — many, many times. This may appear to be an Islamophobic calumny, perhaps something concocted by medieval churchmen in Europe (who did make up some fancy legends about Muhammad), but it is solidly recorded in the almost canonical biography of the Prophet by Ibn Hisham and in the canonical collections of prophetic traditions (hadith) by Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.[3]

Shortly after his move from Mecca to Medina in 622 CE, for instance, when he became the effective ruler of the town, opponents emerged in the Jewish and wider communities. Poets wrote lampoons and disrespectful verses. Muhammad had them killed. Not just poets, but almost anyone who disagreed with him and his “revelations.”

In 624, for example, a Jewish poet named Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf wrote verses condemning the killing of notables from Mecca. He later became a one-man Charlie Hebdo, writing obscene and erotic verses about the Muslim women. Muhammad took offense and instructed one of his companions, Muhammad ibn Maslama, to assassinate Ka’b. When Ibn Maslama expressed doubts about having to lie to Ka’b in order to trick him into going with him, Muhammad told him lying was permissible for such purposes. Ibn Maslama and some other Muslims went out with Ka’b under false pretenses and murdered him.

Ka’b ibn al-Ahraf was not Muhammad’s only victim. The poets Asma’ bint Marwan (a woman), Abu Afak, and Al-Nadir ibn al-Harith, and Abu Rafi’ ibn Abi Al-Huqaiq were all assassinated in the same year for the same offence of mockery. In the next few years, several other poets were killed, such as Abdullah ibn Zib’ari, Al-Harith bin al-Talatil, Hubayra, Ka’b ibn Zuhayr ibn Abi Sulama, and Huwayrith ibn Nafidh. Abdullah bin Khatal and two of his slave girls were murdered for having recited poems insulting the Prophet. There is a list in WikiIslam of 43 people — as well as all the men from the Jewish tribe of the Banu Qurayza — who were killed on Muhammad’s orders or whose murders were sanctioned by him.

Today the lashes of Raif Badawi stand with the slaughter at Charlie Hebdo as further symbols of the determination of many extremists to reject the norms of reason, tolerance, pluralism, equality, the Universal Declaration human rights and the value that begins every chapter but one of the Qur’an: mercy.

Some people ask what inspires those who kill authors, cartoonists and journalists, while others insist that it has nothing to do with Islam. If we do not learn, if our leaders do not learn, what hope is there for us?

Today, we are all Charlie. And we are all Raif.

_______________

[1] The Al al-Shaykh are descendants of Wahhabi founder Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab (1703-1792), who allied himself and his puritan belief system with the Al Sa’ud, an Arabian family with pretensions to grandeur.

[2] BBC News at Ten, 8 January 2010.

[3] For details, see Uri Rubin, “The Assassination of Kaʿb b. al-Ashraf”, Oriens, Vol. 32. (1990), pp. 65-71; the entries on Ka’b in both editions of the authoritative Encyclopedia of Islam; Sahih Bukhari 5:59:369, Sahih Muslim 19:4436

‘What?!’ Gutfeld Calls Out CNN’s Amanpour for Labeling Terrorists ‘Activists’

January 11, 2015

‘What?!’ Gutfeld Calls Out CNN’s Amanpour for Labeling Terrorists ‘Activists’ You Tube, January 9, 2015

 

EXCLUSIVE: Peaceful Muslims Take to the Streets Protesting Terrorism

January 11, 2015

EXCLUSIVE: Peaceful Muslims Take to the Streets Protesting Terrorism
By Michael Becker January 10, 2015 Via The Minority Report Blog


(Million Muslim march against violence? Dream on brother. – LS)

Finally, we’ve got exclusive footage of Muslims – the moderate kind – taking to the streets of Paris protesting terrorism in the name of Allah.  It’s about time the Religion of Peace showed their true nature.

Your Curmudgeon has been very critical over the years of Muslims because it seems they barely pay lip service to separating themselves from Muslim radicals and terrorists.  This exclusive footage from today’s demonstrations in Paris against Islamic terrorism, led by Imams calling for fatwahs against terrorist acts and calling the radicals who are terrorists anti-Mohammed and anti-Muslim.

It’s about time.

Says it all, doesn’t it.  You’re seeing every Muslim in Paris, and probably the world, protesting against terrorist and standing for peace with those the “radicals” call infidels.

Makes you feel better, right?