55 posts tagged “mohammedanism”
Here is a ‘be educated in Mohammedanism’ moment: Mohammedanism is not the religion of peace that Muslim apologists or even the majority of Muslims believe it is.
Here is Bill Warner diffusing the propaganda of the American Left – read and educate yourself.
JRH 8/13/09
My Criticism of Islam (Mohammedanism)
John R. Houk
© July 16, 2009
I have been very critical of Mohammedan claim that Islam (Mohammedanism) is a religion of peace. One of the biggest examples is from the Mohammedan writings considered holy and Mohammedan history. I have come to realize that there is an element of peace inherent in Mohammedanism related to the hisba; however that inherent peace is ONLY toward believing Mohammedans. Mohammedanism is intolerant of any creed or religion that runs counter to its holy writings and of Mohammedans that deviate from Mohammedanism. This intolerance can aptly be called Islamic Supremacism.
In Mohammedan dominated lands (and increasingly where Mohammedans are a large minority in the West) Mohammedanism is cruel and brutal. Christians, Jews and (those considered) pagans are the victims of this cruelty.
That said it should be noted that Mohammedan intellectuals and apologists (which ironically includes non-Mohammedans usually of the Leftist persuasion) often attack Christianity in retaliation to the “Islam is violent” mantra that I stand by. The Christian attack is usually first displayed by bringing up Christian history.
Those who have called themselves followers of Christ have too often committed atrocities of cruel violence and genocide in the Name of Christ. I have to admit the history does not lie; human beings calling on Christ have warred between themselves, persecuted and killed Jews and unleashed vengeful and unrelenting violence and death upon Mohammedans during the Crusades.
The Revelation of John is loaded with violent images; however those images are the result of evil rather than the continuation of God invoked violence.
I have to point out that Christianity’s Holy Scriptures expressly tell a Christian not to be violent among themselves or to any human being. The only exception to this is the fine line in which Scripture provides for those in authority (e.g. military, police, government and so on). Mohammedan apologists should cease their hypocrisy and own up to the perpetual violence commanded in their holy writings.
Then Mohammedan apologists usually counter with an “aha!” The Christian Old Testament which is the Jewish Tanakh is full of genocidal violence. The classic example is Moses and Joshua leading the Twelve Tribes of Israel into the Land of Promise. As the Hebrew/Israelite Tribes possessed their Promised Land the Scriptures tell the Jews to exterminate those being dispossessed. The extermination indeed proceeds. God told the Jews to completely possess the Land and completely destroy the inhabitants. The Mohammedan apologist says, “See!” How is the genocidal dispossession of the Promised Land’s original inhabitants any different than Mohammed and his descending followers from rapaciously conquering non-Mohammedan land to fulfill the will of Allah to convert the world to Islam (Mohammedanism)?
Here is a difference!
The Land given to the Tribes of Israel was populated by idolatrous religions that taught such things as sacrificing humans (usually babies) and the practice of temple prostitutes. The land was populated with evil hateful people. Once the Land was possessed the Jews were not to continue exterminating other people even though they also may have been morally deviant as well. In fact the Jews were told not to mix whatsoever with non-Jews as a practice.
On the other hand Mohammed and Mohammedan conquerors through out the ages have used their prophet’s example and their holy writings to conquer, convert or kill all humanity that lost their nation to victorious Mohammedans. This often resulted in cruel slavery and sex-slavery (for the beautiful women). If the conquered were lucky for being the people of the book (i.e. Jews and Christians), those people had a choice of converting or living a sub-human life as an oppressed dhimmi.
Even to this day Jews do not seek out converts although converts to Judaism do occur on a willing basis. Christianity Scriptures tell Christians to share the Gospel (Good News) Truth to all humanity. If the Gospel is rejected the problem is between God and the individual in the Last Judgment.
Now in practice as Christianity was embraced by militarily powers in the West, the faith of the military became the faith of the indigenous people. In the case of the West colonizing the New World and parts of Africa, the Christian faith was forced upon the indigenous people. Again this is not part of the Gospel plan; however Christian nations saw a political advantage to govern easier if everyone prayed to the same God. The very Christian faith which was misused politically in time brought tolerance of the multiplicity of Christian tenets and eventually tolerance the practice or non-practice of a religion.
In contrast Mohammedan holy writings are an example that Mohammedans have used to brutalize the globe in the name of Allah for centuries; indeed the Islamic terrorists of the 20th and 21st century believe they are merely reforming Islam to the purest form as delivered the their prophet Mohammed. There has been little to zero advancement in the Liberty and Rights of humanity as a result of Islamic Supremacist intolerance.
Before I move on I have to discuss one pet peeve of mine pertaining to the Christian Crusaders. The Crusaders are accused of brutal intolerance toward Mohammedans as they brought the Christian faith back to the Holy Land by military force.
The Mohammedan protesteth to much me thinks.
The Crusades were not about one day a group of medieval knights got together and said, “Hey, we’re kind of bored. Let’s go the Middle East and slaughter some Saracens.” In fact the Crusades were a result of Mohammedan incursion on Christian lands stretching from present day Turkey through to present day Spain. Part of those conquests was continuous raiding parties along Mediterranean Europe which resulted in the bloodthirsty acquisition of booty and slaves. One day a combination of an appeal from the Byzantine Emperor and the report that Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land were being enslaved or murdered inspired a call for military action.
After 500 years of Saracen/Muslim brutality against the West, it is hardly surprising that the warrior caste of medieval Europe embarked on military incursions against Mohammedan lands which when victorious slaughtered everyone in sight.
My point is this: the Crusades were more like a football metaphor; viz. the best defense is a good offense. The Crusaders end came when European rulers lost in interest in any benefit the political control had for their kingdoms. The result was the slow evisceration of the Crusader kingdoms ending in the Holy Land in 1291 with the fall of Acre. There were more Crusades however the period of political control was only a 192 years. Compare that 192 years to over a thousand years of brutality that kept coming from Mohammedans. In Europe the Mohammedan military prowess lead to a slow retreat after John III Sobieski smashed Mohammedan Turks at the Battle of Vienna in 1683. The Hindu Genocide continued in ebbs and flows on the Indian Sub-continent really until the British usurped total control in 1857.
Beginning with Mohammed’s brutality in the early 600’s to the end of the last vestige of a Mohammedan empire (Ottoman Turkey) in 1918 we are talking about nearly 1300 years of historical murder and mayhem at the hands of Mohammedans. There are no Mohammedan military super powers today; however where Mohammedanism reigns intolerant totalitarianism is more the rule than the exception.
Ironically the most democratic of Mohammedan nations (which are self-reliant) is Turkey. The nation representative of total intolerance is the Saudi Arabian kingdom in which public beheadings and whippings are still practiced. It is a place where women cannot have a driver’s license. It is a place in which a rape victim is punished for breaking the law. It is a place where thieves may loose an appendage.
Below is further example of Mohammedan intolerance and violence based on the “Reliance of the Traveller.” The critique of the “Traveller” is by Ben of Ben’s Blog posted at a Facebook page. Ben broke his Facebook post into several stages probably because you can only post so much at one shot there. I am going to piece them together on my SlantRight.com page.
JRH 7/16/09
The Leftists of the West have long lamented the poor Mohammedans suffering in the Land of Israel or blamed for poverty of Western exploitation from the past. The Mohammedan whine is that of a victim that is owed a reimbursement for their societal ills which must be the result of Western oppression. I am certain that most of the blame for that oppression is wrapped up into a package with the United States of America as the address. The blame towards America is remarkable since there was no involvement by the USA in colonial adventurism as accomplished by the Europeans.
The Leftist or Mohammedan will say, “Yeah but … What about American corporations taking advantage of the poor Mohammedan populace?” Here is another question: Was American capitalism as exploitive of Middle Eastern Mohammedans as Mohammedan imperialist expansion of the past? I do not think so.
Middle Eastern leadership sold out their constituents for self-serving oil profits or for weapons to harass either Israel or America or both. Then the mostly authoritarian Mohammedan regimes either directly blame America and Israel or allow their clerics to sow seeds of hate to Americans and Jews.
So get over the self-deprecating victimhood of the so-called religion of peace. From the time that old Mohammed used a religion borrowed on the backs of Judaism and Christianity as a tool to create an army from backward Arabs to conquer the world. The tool became the glue that exacted discipline and the promise of carnal pleasures in this life and the next for adhering to the imagination of Mohammed.
The Left and Mohammedans go to great lengths to point to the savagery of the Christian Crusades. Yet the Crusader savagery was contrary to the Christian Scriptures. Also much of the Crusader savagery can be attributed to hundreds of years of Mohammedan brutal imperialism as the tool of religion was utilized to keep the militarization of Mohammedan peoples. The end game of Mohammedan imperialism was to instill the Theo-political cult into conquered peoples who often converted to Mohammedanism to avoid brutality or death.
Thus brutalized people became brutalizing people ready to practice the Theo-political cult to spread Mohammedanism as an all consuming blight upon the earth.
The poor victimized Mohammedans of the Middle East are looking back to the past of imperialistic conquest and persecute non-Mohammedans in ever increasing cruelty in the late 20th Century and early 21st Century. This travesty has particularly affected Christians in the Middle East that have resulted and results in harsh persecution and maiming deaths.
David Horowitz has founded David Horowitz Freedom Center to expose this reality of the violence inherent in Islam/Mohammedanism. In a recent email from the Freedom Center focuses on the plight of Christians in the Middle East. The Christian fate in the Middle East is not a pretty one. Indeed, the email has a link to a slide show which is extremely graphic of the atrocities committed in the name of Mohammedanism in the Middle East. Be forewarned that you will view extremely disturbing pictures as the slide show progresses.
JRH 5/15/09
******************************
Horowitz Request for Financial Support
David Horowitz
Email sent: May 13, 2009
Dear Freedom Center Supporter,
Over the past few decades there has been a systematic and brutal campaign being leveled at the world's Christian community. This has been happening in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. As disparate as these regions are, the common thread in all of these cases of persecution is that the perpetrators are Muslims. The Muslim persecution of Christians has reached Genocidal proportions.
It is an issue that no one wants to discuss. The level of international attention given to this issue is deafeningly quiet. No outcry, marches, protests, no speeches on the floor of Congress, no speeches at the United Nations. There are no major Hollywood productions and no Tibet-like bumper stickers.
Millions of Christians have been put to death for the sole reason that they are Christian. All of these deaths have been at the hands of Muslims, who kill the "infidel" in the name of their prophet Muhammad.
The time for silence at this Genocidal persecution of Christians is over. The Freedom Center has written pamphlets and numerous articles on this issue, screened an exceptional movie by Pierre Rehov and brought speakers on the campuses of America to shine a light on these atrocities.
Now, the Center is releasing another in its series of flash videos to show in striking reality, the plight of the world's Christians and to explain the threat they face. Our flash videos have been viewed by millions, from students to activists, the media and public officials.
This flash video, The Muslim Persecution of Christians is a vital tool that can be used to spread the truth and expose the nature of Islam and the threat it poses to all peoples of the world and in this case specifically, the plight of the Christians. The once vibrant Christian communities of the Middle and North Africa are disappearing before our eyes.
It is vital that not only Americans, but the whole world see what is happening. In order for us to have this flash video reach the millions that is necessary for it to have a full impact, we need to raise $55,000 over the month. Those funds will be used to secure targeted lists, post ads on websites, campus newspaper ads, radio spots and mailings.
We hope you can help us today by following this link to give $25 or more. This donation will go a long way in helping us reach our goal and bringing the plight of millions of Christians into the light. Thank you for your support.
Sincerely,
David Horowitz
President & Founder
The Clarion Fund is emailing bloggers to let them know about the premiere release of the full version of a documentary entitled,
The movie exposes radical Islam’s goal to eradicate America by inserting Sharia Law into the land of free and the home of the brave.
When I get the dough I will definitely by the DVD and/or see it on the big screen if the film makes its way to my urban area.
Here is the new release promotion from the Clarion Fund:
(YouTube Link to 4 abridged parts: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=1DADACB9B181EA09&search_query=The Third Jihad
JRH 5/11/09
*****************************
CLARION UNVEILS NEW FILM ABOUT THE THREAT OF RADICAL ISLAM IN AMERICA AT NATIONAL PRESS CLUB
CAIR DECLINES INVITE TO DISCUSSION WITH DEVOUT MUSLIM
FILM NARRATOR, WHO IS EXPECTED TO SPEAK OUT
AGAINST RADICAL ISLAM AT THE THIRD JIHAD PREMIERE
From: Clarion Fund - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Email Sent: 5/10/09
(New York, NY – May 10, 2009) The Clarion Fund announced today that it will premiere its newest documentary film, The Third Jihad, at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, May 13, 2009. In addition to the screening, several American Muslim groups have been invited to participate in a roundtable discussion where the film’s narrator, Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser – a devout Muslim and chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) – and its producers will speak out about the threat of radical Islam in America.
Clarion’s first documentary film, the award-winning Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West, communicates the global threat posed by the radical elements of Islam. The Third Jihad shifts the focus to the growth of radical Islam on American soil via “Cultural Jihad,” the use of the democratic system to transform the American way of life from within to a society governed by Sharia Law (Islamic religious law).
“Clarion Fund recognizes the propagation of radical Islam and the promulgation of Sharia Law within our borders as a clear and present crisis affecting the Muslim American community and the American public at large,” said Peter Connors, Executive Director of Clarion. “Our educational tools and media properties will serve as a platform for the American public – including Muslims – to embrace Western liberties and speak out in a meaningful way to silence radical elements in our midst.”
Among these tools is RadicalIslam.org, the foundation of Clarion’s grassroots movement. The user-friendly website was developed to spread awareness about the threat of radical Islam in America as well as to provide practical response tools. For the launch of the film, the site has been redesigned to include up-to-the-minute updates from major news sources as well as social media-driven networking capabilities.
“We are focused on educating the American public about this eminent threat to their rights and freedoms, with the goal of bringing ‘Creeping Sharia’ to a screeching halt,” explained Raphael Shore, producer of both The Third Jihad and Obsession and the founder of Clarion. “We want to expose the true intent of radical Islam in order to secure the future of the American public at large, including its Muslim community.”
Among those organizations invited to participate in the roundtable discussion is the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). However, CAIR has declined the invitation, a surprising turn of events considering the group’s usual insistence that a representative of their “mainstream Muslim” staff be present at such events to offer a “balanced perspective.” In fact, since the beginning of 2009, CAIR has requested such representation in at least three U.S. events focused on radical Islam.
“We invited CAIR and they said they wanted nothing to do with this film,” said Connors. “CAIR’s response is unfortunate, as The Clarion Fund believes that the only way to address this issue is to discuss it openly and honestly with those who agree with us and those who disagree. Then, based on that education, the American public can decide for itself.”
The Third Jihad, which is narrated by devout Muslim American Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, centers on the FBI discovery of a Grand Jihad Manifesto calling for the destruction of the U.S. and the establishment of a radical Islamist theocracy in its place. The film features interviews with experts on radical Islam and American security specialists, including leading expert professor Bernard Lewis, as well as a first-hand account from a former terrorist. All those interviewed agree that the spread of Islamic fundamentalism in America is a societal reality that cannot be ignored.
Though a shortened version of The Third Jihad has spread virally on the Internet since the beginning of the year, the Washington, D.C. screening will serve as the official launch of the feature-length version of the film.
______________________________
The Clarion Fund (www.clarionfund.org) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that aims to educate Americans about issues of national security. The organization focuses primarily on the emergent threat of radical Islam. To that end, Clarion produces and distributes documentary films and facilitates online education to help Americans better understand the real dangers posed by radical Islam. In addition to RadicalIslam.org, the organization’s interactive online educational and social networking tool, Clarion has a popular live-blogging presence on Twitter: @No2RadicalIslam.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gave a campaign reelection speech in Karaj, Iran on Sunday. YnetNews.com reports on the campaign speech. The Ahmadinejad speech definitely is not nice. In fact one should compare this speech with some of the speeches Adolf Hitler made to the German people blaming all the woes of German on the vermin Jews.
Prior to and during Hitler’s rise to power, the power nations that had embraced some form of democracy with Rights as a governmental nature considered Hitler’s words as hyperbole meant to achieve political power at the voting booth of a German constituency.
There exists once again in the time line of history’s progress an anti-Semite who is promoting the destruction of Jews and is trying to get his Iranian constituents to validate his agenda.
That agenda is globally scary. The appeasement process currently uniting the USA and the EU will lead to another global conflict that has the potential to cost even more lives than did WWII. Why? The educating of Middle East Muslims (Sunni and Shia alike) is to promote hatred of Jews.
Mohammedanism when in an act of war can create crazy suicidal warriors with little or no care for life because a death for Allah is an express train to a paradise of 72 nubile virgins ready to be eternally plucked for male sexual gratification. This means as Muslims are trying to execute a Jewish genocide, Muslims will die in the tens of thousands to affect that genocide.
JRH 5/5/09 (Hat Tip: Christians United for Israel)
If you have been reading my posts on Islam/Mohammedanism you may be aware I have been working out a stand concerning the religion founded by Mohammed (e.g. Here and Here).
The decision is between banning Mohammedanism in America or considering Mohammedanism a religion protected by Free of Religion and Free Speech ala the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (Cornell University Law School)
There are three points that need to be examined pertaining to Islam:
1. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.
2. (Congress shall make no law) prohibiting the free exercise thereof (i.e. religion).
3. (Congress shall make no law) abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.
A few other points could well be addressed pertaining to Islam however without an understanding of these three points the later is irrelevant or relevant depending on the conclusions of those points.
The first point about the Law and the establishment of religion is one of my pet peeves because Leftists over the last sixty years or so have extrapolated ex nihilo that this means a wall of separation exists between the government (Federal, State and Local) and religion.
This extrapolation has zero to do with the Constitution or with those attributed to reasoning out the meaning of the Constitution in the Federalist Papers. Rather it comes from a letter (A LETTER!) to the Danbury Baptists in which President Jefferson trying to calm the fears of Baptists about the traditional concept of Christian nations establishing a State Church.
Baptists had never been privy in any nation as a State Church. In those days part of taxation was to support the State Church. Many of the Thirteen Colonies and then the Thirteen States of the United States of America initially had State Churches on the State level.
Saying all this, the majority of America’s ruling elite from the Revolutionary War days considered the rule of law and morality based on Christian principles. My conclusion (though admittedly an opinion) is that the First Amendment did not prohibit religion from being involved in the State; rather it prohibited the State from being involved in religion. The religions of the day were the varieties of Christianity in the new USA with a smattering of Judaism. The Courts of the day would not even consider extrapolating ex nihilo a law prohibiting the involvement of religion in the government apparatus.
The second point is that Congress shall make NO laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. This opened the door for religions other than Christianity to practice freely in principle; however you have to be aware the populace in the late 1700’s and early 1800’s would look with prejudice upon a non-Christian religion such as Islam/Mohammedanism. Nonetheless the letter of the law in the Constitution is very concrete. The specific word “religion” was used rather something such as the “religion of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Although Christianity would have been considered the faith of America in post Revolutionary War days, an extrapolation of diverse religious worship is free to occur.
An uncorrupt Court would have to rule to prevent public or private harassment of non-Christian religions in America because Congress can make NO law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.
There are over a billion people who consider Mohammedanism a religion. At this point one has to realize my quandary about banning Mohammedanism. I’ll back to this thought in a moment.
The third point is that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or the press. This takes care of America’s atheists who choose to live by a philosophy, philosophical principle or merely not care about the existence of religion/deity one way or the other. It is the freedom of conscience without fear of retribution.
Even today ideologies such as Communism or Nazism are allowed freedom of expression in America as long as the expression does not lead to breaking the law via murder, assault, theft, incitement to riot disturbing the public welfare and so on.
Thus today fringe Leftist and fringe Rightist groups test how close they can get to the line of the rule of law without crossing it. Prosecution followed Communists in what was known as the McCarthy Era and today White Supremacists are prosecuted for arms violations and the breaking of other citizens’ civil rights.
It is the THIRD POINT I believe that Mohammedanism crosses the line.
Mohammedanism as a religion simply has too many tenets in their revered books or traditions that cross the line of the rule of law according to the American Constitution. Mohammedanism is a warrior religion that its revered books call to establish the ideological-religion globally first by peace. If peace does not work then war is forced on unbelievers of Mohammedanism until there is Mohammedan conversion or submission to second class citizenship forced to not do anything anti-Islamic or death in a heinous way.
So even though there is a theological nature of otherworldliness to Mohammedanism, the political nature of Mohammedanism in practice in this world tends toward an ideology of political world domination. This world domination mentality has the ferocity inspired by Adolf Hitler’s Nazis on the German population of a superior race. In the same way the German Nazis sought to exterminate human beings (not just Jews) considered as subhuman as not worthy of life. Those outside the Nazi vision of the Germanic Aryan nation not deemed subhuman would be second class citizens serving the Nazi German State.
The Mohammedan ideology of the days of Mohammed in which one can label as radical Islam today is really a Reformation movement on the scale that Protestantism was a movement to reform the Catholic Church to a return of the perception of the Early Church and Patristic Church.
Ali Sina has an awesome essay that points out that “reform” is a movement to go back to the way it was rather than a transformation to another a better way of thinking. The appellation of “Progressive” Churches is a case in point. Progressive Churches are not reforming Christianity; rather they are inserting Leftist humanism to eliminate what is perceived as archaic and of no value in today’s society.
Ali Sina thus stipulates Mohammedanism is not able to be reformed. If there is any reformation occurring in Mohammedanism it is the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, Wahhabi and Shi’ite aims to bring Mohammedanism back to a closer vision of the Prophet Mohammed.
The implication is that Mohammedanism would have progressive thinking added to it to bring it back to a religion that is otherworldly seeking inner peace in this life and the life to come. For this to happen a progressive Mohammedanism would have to deny Mohammed’s revelation from Allah pertaining to convert or die, sex slavery, honor killing and intolerance of everything non-Islamic.
Part of Sina’s point is to not trust Mohammedans that claim to be reform minded. Sina does not specifically point to a website called Muslims Against Sharia but implies that one should not trust Muslims who say they wish to reform Islam. The link for Muslims Against Sharia does not have its name in it, rather the link is http://www.reformislam.org/.
Sina implies there is a religion that is a progressive version of Mohammedanism. That religion is known as Bahá’í.
The Bahá'í's believe in an essential unity of the great religions of the world. However, this does not mean they believe the various religious creeds and doctrines are identical. Rather, they view all religions as having sprung from the same spiritual source. The social and outer forms of different religions vary due to the circumstances at the time that they were founded. Other differences in doctrine and belief can be attributed to later accretions, after the death of the founder.
…
Bahá'í beliefs promoted major social changes when they were first circulated in the 19th century: they supported gender and race equality; world government; freedom of expression and assembly; world peace; religious tolerance, and religious cooperation. In many ways, they were a century or more ahead of many other faiths. Their followers are heavily involved in promoting these concepts today. Also, unlike many other religions, Bahá'ís view scientific inquiry as essential to expand human knowledge and to deepen their members' faith. They feel that science needs to be guided by spiritual principles so that its applications are beneficial to all humanity. (Excerpted from Bahá'í Faith: Beliefs and Practices)
I have come around to the conclusion that if Mohammedanism wishes to evolve into a true religion of peace (Note as a Christian I did not say the true religion) then Muslims would embrace Baha’ism which is an actual root from Mohammedanism.
So now I am pretty much in the “Ban Islam” crowd even though it is not completely etched into stone in my thoughts. It is entirely reasonable to view Mohammedanism as a Theo-Political cult with the emphasis on political ideology. The inherent political ideology of Islam definitely crosses the line of American Constitutionalism and the rule of law to protect citizens from harm.
Thus to ban Islam could be viewed as terminating an ideology which would harm the Constitution of the United States of America.
As a Christian Right kind of guy I view Islam/Mohammedanism as the greatest threat to American Liberty and freedom of thought or conscience since Soviet Communism was extremely active in infiltrating American social settings as well as infiltrating the government.
I have been on the fence between grouping Islam with radical Islam and trying to see a separation between the two.
As an American and a huge supporter of Freedom of Religion (although not to the extent Leftists shut down Christianity on related taxpayer connected community or national apparatuses) I struggle with the concept of Islam being a religion that can practice in America. There is absolutely no tolerance within Islam for other faiths or lack of faith for that matter.
In Mohammedan dominated nations being a non-Muslim makes you a second class citizen and susceptible to retribution for practicing another faith (or lack thereof) openly, especially if the other faith promulgates its tenets as better to Islam or is critical of Islam. Retribution could be as horrible as death and destruction.
According to Islamic sacred writings there is no separating the acts of worship from the acts of politics. Thus the American and/or Westerner needs to comprehend the concept of Political Islam. Part of honoring the Mohammedan Allah and its Prophet is wreaking havoc on non-believing Muslims (kafir) until there is a humiliating submission (the second class citizen) or conversion or death. This Political Islam concept is hugely prevalent among Mohammedan dominated nations.
In the West it is obviously not quite so virulent; however there is evidence that the back to the basics ideology of radical Islam is making an inroad into America and the West. Honor Killings is something the Western Public is beginning to slowly understand is part of the strict Islamic paradigm even though the politically correct Mainstream Media (MSM) has gone to great lengths to obfuscate the murder of a Muslim (usually woman, daughter or sister) to any connection to Mohammedan practices. I have even read the denunciation of Honor Killing from Muslim-American groups as being un-Islamic and more a cultural phenomena from foreign nations. Hello, the foreign nations alluded to are Mohammedan dominated.
Just as I am about to join groups and people that are on the “Ban Islam” bus I across such websites similar to Muslims Against Sharia or committed Muslims who denounce the Political Islam of Mohammedan retro-revivalists. One such person is M. Zuhdi Jasser who condemns Political Islam because he wants his Islamic family to be partakers of the American dream of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness while freely practicing his faith.
Now that is the real American Way: individual autonomy merged with an American consciousness or assimilation while honoring the roots of your heritage. This kind of assimilation has occurred with countless immigrants to America in the past yet this is the kind of assimilation that retro-Islamists abhor as insulting to their Prophet Mohammed and his god known as Allah.
Jasser has an essay entitled, “Obama Administration Stacking the Deck with Islamists”. It is an awesome essay which points to the Obama Administration having connection with Islamists in America and abroad who are definitely anti-American and live for the premise that America will slowly be infused with a enough Muslim converts to take over the political process thereby ending the American paradigm of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. READ IT!
JRH 4/17/09 (Hat Tip: ACT! For America)
Bill Warner has placed a FrontPage interview conducted by Jamie Glazov on his Political Islam blog.
In the interview Warner speaks of a kind of Orwellian new order being placed on America (I would include all Western style Representative Governments). Warner even uses Orwell-speak by calling this emerging new order the “Newstate.”
Essentially the interview line of thought is the “Newstate” is in the tank for Mohammedanism to such a degree that American Free Speech is being anesthetized to squelch anti-Jihad free speech while accommodating Muslim Supremacism in American society.
It is an enlightening interview to read. I suggest you do so.
JRH 3/14/09
I am a huge supporter of Israel. I am one of the guys that have accused pro-Arab American and European politicians of anti-Semitism. Because of this I have began to receive comments on various social blogs telling me they are incredulous that I would make such an accusation.
The incredulity is based on a very valid thought: How can criticism of Israel be racist or anti-Semitic?
Of course a legitimate disagreement with Israel is not anti-Semitic; however when one agrees with anti-Semitic (to the extreme) murdering Islamic terrorists, it is anti-Semitic at the very least by extension. Remember both Hamas and the PA teaches hatred of Jews to Arabs called Palestinians from primary school to graduation. The heritage of the Islamic Arab created as Palestinians is a 2nd and 3rd generation in racist education toward Jews. It is ingrained in their brutal culture.
Also I have been accused as being a bigot because I am a determined anti-Islamic writer. I know it sounds lame when I profess that I am not an Arab race hater or a hater of those that practice Islam nonetheless it is a true axiom.
The way in which Islam/Mohammedanism is developed as a Theo-political ideology makes the cult/religion in essence a racist-violent-supremacist way of living.
That sounds harsh and contradictory does it not?
Here is the thing as Bill Warner explains in a December 24 post at Political Islam, if a Muslim follows the dictates of the Quran, Hadith, Sunna and Sira and whatever else tradition that emulates Mohammed, then that Muslim is practicing their faith as a true Muslim. That practice according to all those developed documents is a compendium of violence against non-Muslims (kafirs) and toward Muslims who abandon Islam/Mohammedanism. Those Muslims (which are sensible) that practice the portions of the Quran and traditions which are indeed peaceful, drawing near to their Allah or introspective are NOT following the letter of what most Muslims consider the pure divine will of Allah.
My endeavor toward Islam/Mohammedanism is to find information on the true nature of the Theo-political cult and expose it to the light of scrutiny. Unfortunately Muslims (the exact practitioners and the deluded inexact practitioners) find what I write to be offensive; thus the accusation of racism toward me.
On that December 24 post by Bill Warner he writes about the huge lack of understanding by America’s own so-called experts that are Muslim apologists because they base their expertise on what they are told or on who they know. It is an excellent post and you need to read it!
JRH 1/3/08
Gary Johnson, Jr. believes that focusing on what I would the Political Islam nature of Mohammedanism diminishes from understanding the totally of the Theo-political cult. In other words anti-jihadist writers that focus on the Mohammedan dictum of “convert, pay alms or die” does not provide enough understanding of Mohammedanism to demonstrate and/or educate the West of the Islamic Supremacist attitude prevalent among Mohammedans.
Mr. Johnson may be correct in the long run nonetheless I am still convinced that an activism to expose the Theo-political nature of Mohammedanism is the best way to understand the cult’s threat to 21st century Western Civilization that has achieve a high degree of representative democracy, civil rights and human rights. Political Islam would swallow modern Western Civilization into a black hole of Islamic Supremacist repression particularly to those who choose not to convert.
Mr. Johnson uses the wording “convert, pay alms or die.” Paying alms (money or charity for the poor) is not what a non-Muslim is expected to pay in the sense of regarding the poor. Anti-Jihadist would point out the dictum for non-Mohammedans (aka kafir or various similarities) are a repressive tax (jizya) designed to humiliate the kafir for paying for so-called “protection” that their lives are not terminated. A better wording thus would be “convert, pay the jizya-protection tax or die.”
Let me be clear: I am not saying Mr. Johnson is inaccurate. Indeed, a complete understanding of Mohammedanism would provide a greater sense of Western empowerment to overcome the deceptive “political correct” zone the West is determined to maintain. In addition I am hardly an expert on Islam. I am a reader of various experts on Islam. I know the anti-jihadist writers do not agree on everything; however they do agree on one thing – Islam is NOT compatible to the Western way of life.
JRH 12/23/08
