In a hearing held today September 8, 2009, U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter set a trial date in the Keyes vs. Obama case for January 26, 2010.

Justice Carter recessed the court at 12.30 pst 9/8/09

His rulings

10/5/09 Defense Motion to Dismiss to be heard. Carter indicted only a very strong compelling reason would move him to dismiss at this point. He will review the defense’s 9/4/09 MTD. He wants to hear the case on it’s merits. Discovery to be ordered 10/5/09 if MTD is thrown out.

1/11/10 Pre Trial Set- procedural for other motions, depositions, scheduling, etc

1/26/10 Trial Date Set- Earliest available date for Justice Carter.

“A nation can survive its’ fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor–He speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation–he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city–he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared.

“Cicero, 42 B.C., Roman Statesman, orator, and author.

America's First War vs Islamic Fascists - Ottoman Empire - Barbary Coast

THE AFOREMENTIONED WAS THE IMPETUS FOR THE HOLY CATHOLIC SPANISH INQUISITIONS:

Taqiyya  has  been  used  by  Muslims  since  the  7th  century  to  confuse  and  split  ’the  enemy’.  A  favored  tactic  was   deceptive  triangulation’;  to  persuade  the  enemy  that  jihad  was  not  aimed  at  them  but  at  another  enemy.  Another  tactic  was  to  deny  that  there  was  jihad  at  all.  The  fate  for  such  faulty  assessments  by  the  target  was  death.

And Satan entered into Judas, who was surnamed Iscariot, one of the twelve. And he went, and discoursed with the chief priests and the magistrates, how he might betray him/america to them. And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money. And he promised. And he sought opportunity to betray him/america in the absence of the multitude. (Luke 22:3-6)

Know – What is happening now to The United States, Is What Happened over 2000 years ago to The Sanhedrin And To Jesus The Christ:

Every Law Of The Torah Was Broken To Condemn Jesus To death.

The video embedded here was recorded at a recent Islamic Festival held in Dearborn, Michigan. In it you will see and hear Muslims assaulting and attempting to intimidate a Christian. Observe their expressions and gestures; hear their words and experience Islamic supremacism, triumphalism and arrogance. As their numbers increase, their attitude will intensify. The video was posted to You Tube by Act! For America.

The video has a ten minute run time and is 23MB. If, like me, you are limited to a dial- up cconnection, you will need to download it. For that you will need Firefox or Flock, with DWHelper; you will also need Irfanview to play the flv file.

The video centers around the Islamic response to Christians who wanted to discuss a pamphlet distributed by Muslims at a booth in the festival. The pamphlet’s title was “Uprooting the Forces of Evil:: Islam’s War on Terrorism”. The pamphlet is available on the web as a pdf file at http://www.islaam.ca/downloads/islamswaronterror.pdf.

A critical examination of the pamphlet will explain their reluctance to have a Dialogue about it. The pamphlet is in question/answer format.

• Are these indiscriminate bombings, such as what occurred in the US, London and Madrid, Islamically justifiable?
  • Islam unequivocally prohibits the likes of these horrendous acts and does not condone this awful behavior. Look at what Allah says, in the Quran, about those who kill innocent people.
    • “It would be as if he killed the whole of mankind; and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the whole of mankind.”(Al-Ma’idah: 32)
  • Prophet Muhammad- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him-s stressed the prohibition of killing women and children on many occasions, even at times of war:
    • Abu Bakr; the Prophet’s closest disciple said o not kill women or children or a senile person, do not cut down fruit-bearing trees and do not destroy an inhabited place.”
  • Therefore, this behavior can never be justified in any way, shape or form.

The polemicist quotes 5:32, but completely ignores the verse which follows it, which has a bearing upon the definition of innocent.

5:33. The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.

I have added emphasis to the most critical parts of that ayeh. We must focus our attention upon one key phrase: wage war against Allah; what does it mean?
The answer is contained in Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir:

[...]`Wage war‘ mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. [...]

Waging war against Allah and his Messnger consists of opposing and contradicting Islam and it includes three parallel sub elements:

1. disbelief
2. blocking roads
3. spreading fear.

If you do not believe in Allah, and fully submit to him, then you are not innocent; you may be killed with impunity because you are at war against Allah and his Messenger.

Whenever a Muslim speaks or writes about the prohibition of killing innocent people, he practices kitman: lying by omission. In so doing, he relies upon your assumption that he shares your definition of innocent. He does not; In the Muslim world view, only Muslims are innocent.

By the same token, we are expected to assume that the prohibition on killing women and children is based upon moral principles. It is not! The prohibition is economic, not moral. Kuffar women and children are economic assets for their captors. Examine Allah’s word..

33:26. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.

Note the italicized phrase: whom did they make captives? Once again, the answer is provided by Ibn Kathir.

[...]Those who were killed were their warriors, and the prisoners were their children and women.[...]

What is the disposition of captive women and children? We learn from Shari’ah that they become slaves by reason of capture. Examine this quote from Reliance of the Traveller.

O9.13 When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.

This hadith will clarify the matter for you; it should also fill you with disgust.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459:

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:

I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, “We went out with Allah’s Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, ‘How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah’s Apostle who is present among us?” We asked (him) about it and he said, ‘It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist.”

They received captives. Captive women were distributed as part of the spoils. Moe gave his companions permission to rape those women.

Jeg skrev igår at jeg ikke vil blogge mere, men faldt lige over et par spørgesmål som jeg har fået stillet hos snaphanen, men som jeg lige har set…Jeg synes det er meget vigtigt at få besvaret disse spørgesmål, nogle af af spørgesmålene må jeg indrømme at jeg aldrig har taget stilling til dem!

Jeg vil gerne bede dig svare os på disse spørgsmål:

Er vantros liv lige så meget værd som muslimers?

Jeg ved godt, hvor vedkommende vil hende med dette spørgesmål, jeg er jo ikke født som en idiot! Jeg tillader mig dog at svarer Ja, et vantros liv er ligeså meget værd som en muslims…

Vil du tage klart og umisforståeligt afstand fra enhver tanke om islams herredømme over verden?

Hvorfor tage afstand? Hvorfor overhovedet tænke i sådanne baner, lad os tænke over hvor langt vi er fra et muslimsk hærdømme? MEGET LANGT VÆK! så hvorfor svarer egentlig? Jo, fordi man vil dæmonisere min person!

Og altså erklære at islam blot er en religion som alle andre, som ikke har krav på at undertvinge andre?

Islam har da aldrig tvunget folk til at konvertere! profeten gjorde det i så fald aldrig, dog skulle ikke-muslimerne betale et vis sum penge, for at opnå beskyttelse og sociale vilkår som alle muslimer!

Og som heller ikke skal nyde særhensyn i vores samfund i form af halalmad i skolen osv.??

Halalmad i skolerne? er det virkeligt det du vil have jeg skal svare på?
Jamen jeg går da ind for at jødiske børn får Kosher mad i skolerne hvis de vil have, og Muslimske børn får Halal mad, og at du får den mad du vil have!

Og at demokratiet skal gælde på ubestemt tid, med lige rettigheder for jøder, kristne, polyteister, muslimer og alle andre?

Det er vel op til den enkelte! personligt går jeg ind for demokratiet, om den gælder dig eller andre er jeg heldigvis ligeglad med!

Skal ytringsfriheden gælde på ubestemt tid, så det også er tilladt at lave karikaturer af Muhammed og at kritisere ham?

I mine øjne er det tilladt at kritisere islam ligeså meget man har lyst til! Karikatur tegninger er jo det platteste mennesket har opfundet i mine øjne!

Også i et land hvor muslimerne opnår flertal?

Den dag muslimerne opnår flertal, så kan de via demokrati gør hvad de vil, det bliver nok aldrig i løbet af min levetid, så hvorfor i alverden skal jeg bekymre mig om noget jeg ikke kommer til at se!

Tager du afstand fra Ayatollah Khomeinis fatwa mod Salman Rushdie?

Stor Ayatollah khomeini døde 3 måneder f’ør jeg blev født, og han kan på ingen måde repræsentere mig! så hvorfor skal jeg tage afstand fra folk jeg aldrig har mødt eller har levet i samme alder med, og som jeg slet ikke og aldrig har vist sympati for!

Er det i orden at muslimske værnepligtige sætter loyaliteten over for Danmark over loyaliteten over for ummaen? Hvis de bliver beordret i krig mod muslimer, skal de så adlyde order om at dræbe deres trosfæller?

Dræbe trosfæller?
lad mig spørge dig på den måde, vil du gå i krig og dræbe dansk sindede tyskere? muslimer er 1 millard mand, og hvis du taler om talebanere eller al-qaeda mænd, så er det noget helt andet.

Tager du afstand fra drab på frafaldne muslimer? På homoseksuelle?

hvorfor er afstandstagen så vigtigt for dig? jeg er og forbliver nok aldrig naser khader. Jeg har selv Homoseksuelle venner, og dem har jeg ikke i sinde at dræbe….så kan du vel regne resten ud!

Må muslimske kvinder gifte sig med vantro mænd?

Hmm, ifølge islam eller min mening?
Ifølge islam må de ikke det! så er det vel op til den enkelte at overveje om troen eller kærligheden vejer tungest!

Tager du til enhver tid afstand fra de såkaldte ‘æresdrab’?

Jeg mener at jeg i min blog har gjort det et par gange!

Tager du ubetinget og på ubestemt tid afstand fra henrettelser ved stening?

Ligeså snart man tror at han spørger om jeg tager afstand fra henrettelser dukker ordet stening om! en henrettelse er en henrettelse! og det tar jeg afstand fra…

Er jøder “sønner af aber og svin” som det hedder i Koranen? Vil du tage afstand fra disse ord?

Du har ikke læst koranen ordentligt, kloge åge! det emne er blevet diskuteret flere gange….principielt er vi alle sønner af abere, hvis vi følger Evolutionsteorien!
Koranen siger dog noget andet, der står at disse jøder som ikke adlyd guds ord blev til aber og svine! ikke omvendt som du skriver det ovenover!
og disse aber og svin fik ingen efterkommere, som mange koranfortolkninger skriver!

Er du enig med Koranen 98:6 i at de vantro er “det værste af skabningen”?

heler suraen siger (ellen wulff): De, der er vantro, blandt Skriftens folk og dem, der sætter andre ved Guds side, er i Helvedes ild; dér skal de forblive til evig tid. De er det værste af skabningen.

rent ud sagt så er der tale om de vantro der ryger i helvedet, de er de væreste I HELVEDET! da der også er muslimer der ryger deri! desuden hvis du ikke tror på helvedet, paradiset og islam i det hele taget, hvorfor bekymrer du dig om noget du mener ikke eksistere…det er lidt ligesom hvis min nabo tror vores overbo har 10 atombomber i hans hjem som kan eksplodere når som helst, hvis jeg ikke tror på den! jamen så er jeg heller ikke bekymret!  

Er Muhammed “uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil”, rollemodel og perfekt menneske, eller synes du også det var forkasteligt at han beordrede stening af et par der var anklaget for ‘hor’?

Profeten Muhammed er den perfekte mennesker, har du nogensinde overvejet hvilke konsekvenser utroskaber, hor og lign. har på den enkelte menneske og samfundet i det hele taget!

Synes du også det var forkasteligt at Muhammed havde sex med Aisha da hun blev ni år?

udover at der er nogen som tror hun var væsentlig ældre…den med at hun var 9 år er kommet med orientalisterne før i tiden mente man at hun var omkring de 15 år!

Tager du afstand fra Muhammeds beordring af drab på den kvindelige digter Asma bint Marwan?

Har ikke hørt om den historie før!

Tager du afstand fra at Muhammeds røvere overfaldt Khaybar-oasen, og at Muhammed ‘giftede’ sig med høvdingens kone samme nat, efter at hendes mand var blevet dræbt?

Tager du afstand for folk der ikke kan finde ud af at læse ordentlig i historiebøgerne?

Som du ved skyder der moskeer op i Europa hele tiden. Derimod er der ingen kirker, synagoger eller hindutempler i Saudi-Arabien. Synes du ikke at der skal opføres sådan nogle som en gensidig gestus?

Jeg er ikke sauder, og anser heller ikke saudi arabien for at være den perfekte stat! jeg er iraker, og der hvor jeg kommer fra der har alle mennesker lov og retten til at dyrke den gud de vil!

Betyder ordet islam ‘fred’ eller betyder det ‘underkastelse’?

Det kan du GOOGLE

Tager du afstand fra drab på homoseksuelle i Iran?

Det har jeg mon ikke besvaret ovenover

Skal Israel have lov til at fortsætte med at eksistere? Må jøderne gerne blive boende her?

Jøderne må gerne blive boende hvor de vil, og palæstinenserne har også retten til at vende tilbage til Israel hvis de vil!

Hvem stod bag 9/11? Bin Laden eller Bush og/eller jøderne?

med de mange dumme spørgesmål du er kommet med, så tror jeg rent faktisk det var dig! Jah hvad tror du selv? Nogle gange kan jeg ikke tage jer der kalder jer selv for kritiker seriøst i er for barnlige! hvorfor bliver  i ikke alle som William Jansen, han er en normal Kritiker af islam, som jeg tager hatten af for og respektere højt!

Hvilke grunde kan du give til at vi skal have tillid til dig? Hvordan kan vi vide at du ikke bedriver taqiyya og kitman?

Ved du hvad haji, det er op til DIG! jeg er ikke kendt som alkoholiker, løgnere eller tidsrøver(nyt ord). Kitman og taqiya bruges i shiaislam hvis ens liv står i fare! så vidt jeg ved så er jeg ikke i fare nu

The following are two specific Islamic doctrines that scare me. I wonder how mainstream they are, especially among Muslims who live in democracies. Do so-called moderate Muslims recognize them?

It is OK to lie to unbelievers?
Taqiyya and kitman (concealment and mental reservation from telling the whole truth with the intention to mislead) constitute the Islamic doctrines of religious deception against non-believers. As the prophet Muhammad said, “War is deceit” (Hadith 4:269). They have been adopted and practiced by both Shi’ites and Sunnis.

The Qur’an itself teaches deception of non-believers: “Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers. If any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah; except by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourselves from them” (3:28). The distinguished commentator Ibn Kathir explains this verse, “Allah prohibited His believing servants from becoming supporters of the disbelievers, or to take them as comrades with whom they develop friendships, rather than believers.” However, an exception is made for “those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly.”

http://s3.amazonaws.com/911timeline/2002/bostonglobe080402.html : “One of the doctrines that emerges out of the Salafist school is ”Taqiyyeh,” Arabic for a process of concealment of true beliefs to confuse the enemy.”

The Qur’an’s tolerant verses have been cancelled?
Naskh or nasakhatha Ayat al-Sayf is the Islamic doctrine of abrogation. Basically, it means that Allah does not have to be consistent and can change or cancel what he tells Muslims: “None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: knowest thou not that Allah has power over all things?” (Qur’an 2:106). Therefore, the violent verses of the ninth sura, including the Verse of the Sword (9:5), cancel/void the peaceful verses, because the violent verses were revealed later in the Prophet’s career.

039

هدنة

Hudna, Windstille.

Jahre der Waffenruhe

und der heiligen Sprüche

Frommes Flüstern vor

dem Sturm

Sinnsprüche der

der Kriegsvorbereitung

Von Jacques Auvergne

Im Dezember 2007 erhielten wir auf unseren Blogs Post von einem unbekannten frommen Menschen: Erbauliches in feinstem English. Ich tippte ein paar Sekunden lang auf Zeugen Jehovas oder neuapostolische Nervensägen, dann aber erkannte ich die thematische Nähe zu unserer Islamkritik. Abdul Momin.

Der Mann meint es ernst! Abdul Momin will die islamische Weltordnung.

Sicher, werden manche Muslime sagen, ihr Christen habt Südamerikas Indios ja auch Jahrhunderte lang mit eurem Katholizismus „beglückt“, ihr wisst also damit bereits, was weltweite Missionierung bedeutet“ und: „Sicherlich, der Islam ist der Demokratie sittlich überlegen. Nur der Islam hat menschliches Maß. Jede andere gesellschaftliche Ordnung ist finstere Barbarei.“

Hudna bedeutet Windstille und meint die nach dem Religionsgesetz der Scharia einzig statthafte Weise vertraglichen Zusammenlebens mit der Dâr al‑Harb, dem Territorium der moralisch niederen Wesen wie Christen und Juden. Der Hudna‑Vertrag ist von der Dâr al‑Islam als dem Territorium der Rechtgläubigen mit der Feindseite vorläufig abzuschließen.

Eine Hudna ist zudem ausgesprochen zweckmäßig, um Kräfte für die nächste Angriffswelle zu sammeln, die klassischerweise nach spätestens einem Jahrzehnt unweigerlich bevorsteht und dem frommen Muslim, also letztlich jedem anständigen Menschen, von Allah auferlegt ist.

Aus Sicht der Scharia ist jeder Vertrag einer Moscheegemeinde, eines Zentralrates oder einer anderen islamischen Interessensvertretung mit einer bundesdeutschen Behörde oder Körperschaft auch als Hudna‑Vertrag zu sehen. Der sowohl jederzeit gebrochen werden kann als auch immer nur vorläufiger Natur ist. Insofern hatte Deutschland vielleicht Glück, dass beim letzten Integrationsgipfel die türkischen Verbände im letzten Augenblick abgesagt hatten, denn nur so möglicherweise konnte die Demokratie, gerade noch einmal, nicht in die Rolle der Dhimmivertretung, in die Rolle des Hudnavertragspartners geraten.

Jetzt mag man als friedfertiger oder gar christlicher Europäer einwenden, dieses alles, Scharia, Dhimma, Hudna und Kalifat, sei nicht viel mehr als eine Erinnerung an die Zeit der Expansion des Islams zwischen dem achten und neunten Jahrhundert.

Wer sich aber näher mit dem Islam beschäftigt, wird jene Ansicht der „militanten Friedenstäubchen“ (Broder) und der „tödlichen Toleranz“ (Lachmann) nicht länger zu teilen vermögen. Nahezu sämtliche islamische Geistliche halten auch heute die demokratischen Gesellschaften für satanisch, für gottlos und moralisch minderwertig.

„Der Islam ist eine militante Religion“, sagte Scholl‑Latour. Die Segregationsprozesse unserer Innenstädte, die Herausbildungen ethnoreligiöser Ghettos täuschen kurzfristig über das zunehmende Fremdwerden hinweg.

Die muslimischen Migranten zogen zum Teil aus Sprachferne zu den Deutschen und aus Gründen der „nachbarschaftlichen Hilfe“ in gemeinsame Straßenzüge und segregierten sich dabei von den nachbarschaftlichen Ureinwohnern, wobei da bereits das Wort Nachbar schon falsch ist, da ja die deutsche Familie beim tagtäglichen Fußweg „übersprungen“ werden musste und der türkische Clan, dem man Jahre später „zufällig“ auch die Kinder anverheiraten kann, einige Häuserblocks entfernt wohnte. Das klassische Schicksal jedes Auswanderers überlagerte sich mit dem orientalischen Alltag der arrangierten Ehe. Die zweite Dynamik der Segregation also.

Die Hälfte der türkischen Ehen in unserer Stadt ist arrangiert oder vielmehr erzwungen, das aber steht natürlich nicht gerade in der Zeitung. Doch sind solche Aussagen uns Sozialarbeiterinnen und Sozialarbeitern bekannt: „Ich war 16, als ich, in dieser Stadt geboren, meinen Mann auf meiner ersten Reise in die Türkei während der Schulferien sah und heiratete“, so die eine. „Ich war 15“, so die andere, der Satz endet dann aber nicht ungefähr gleich sondern ganz genau gleich. Importbräutigam, also auch mal nicht Import‑Gelin, auch einmal nicht das Standardmodell Importbraut.

Ehe der jugendlichen Schülerin. Aha, das muss wohl romantische Jugendliebe gewesen sein, so ein mediterraner sommerlicher Urlaubsflirt?

Natürlich nicht. Die Eltern wechselten Geld und die Töchter die Besitzer. Damit hat die Mutter des jungen oder auch nicht mehr so jungen Bräutigams eine lebenslang kostenlos arbeitende Haushaltshilfe erworben. Und die Brautmutter hat eine neue Stufe auf der sozialen Hühnerleiter der türkisch‑islamischen Hackordnung erstiegen, die höchste, die ihr das Schicksal beziehungsweise Allah bereitet hat: Die Tochter als Jungfrau ehrbar an den ehrenwerten Clan zu übergeben.

Radikale islamische Wortführer wie der anfangs erwähnte Abdul Momin benutzen 2007 sowohl das Auswandererschicksal als auch die verlässliche patriarchale Sozialisation, um mit frommen Koranversen den Segregationsprozess noch einmal zu verstärken. Das ist dann die dritte Triebkraft der selbst gewählten Fremdheit auf dem Weg in die islamisch befreiten Zonen: Damit auch kein Kind türkischer Eltern lebt wie ein deutscher Mann oder gar eine deutsche Frau. Stimmt, die ein paar Jahre lang allzu großzügig verschenkten Staatsangehörigkeiten vernebeln diese Vorgänge der scheiternden Integration sehr.

Necla Kelek fand ein starkes und sehr treffendes Wort für die parallele Kultur der Türken in Deutschland, sie sagte: „die zweite Stadt“. Mindestens 60 bis 80 Prozent von Deutschlands türkischen Frauen und Männern, Mädchen und Jungen leben nicht in dem, was die oft von Rezession und Arbeitslosigkeit geprägten Straßenzüge und Stadtviertel darstellen, sondern in einem für Deutsche oft kaum erkennbaren zweiten Stadtviertel nahezu völlig abgekoppelter Geldströme, Nahrungstransporte, Speisepläne, Gespräche, Gedanken, Gefühle und Beziehungen. Sie leben vor allen Dingen im Schutz oder auch Kerker dieser „zweiten Stadt“.

Egon Flaig redet (XII 2007) von einer „Aufsplitterung in viele Parallelgesellschaften“, die der Islamismus durchzusetzen trachtet, von einer veritablen „Apartheid“ von beherrschten ethnoreligiösen Gemeinschaften. Flaig sieht in den heutigen Entwicklungen der gescheiterten Integration besorgniserregende Parallelen zu dem an Koran, Dhimma und Scharia orientierten Kasten‑System des Osmanischen Reiches.

Noch eher ohne islamischen Einfluss sollen die Städte Nordamerikas einschließlich von New York mittlerweile in derartige, voneinander völlig abgekoppelte Parallelwelten zerfallen sein: In die Stadtviertel der Chinesen, Juden, Latinos, Muslime, der Schwarzen und der Inder. In London, Brüssel oder Berlin sieht die Innenstadtkultur von der nordamerikanischen so verschieden allerdings auch nicht mehr aus. Jedenfalls scheint uns die einstige deutsche Illusion von „Integration“ als ebenso zerschellt zu gelten wie der ältere amerikanische Glaubenssatz aller Integration, der im Wort „melting pot“, Schmelztiegel, jahrzehntelang sein Sinnbild zu finden hoffte.

Ernüchterung beginnt sich breit zu machen. Doch der Traum der nicht ernst gemeinten Integration wird in rot‑grünen Elfenbeintürmen immer noch geradezu industriell erzeugt.

Wir werden Integration wollen müssen. Was nicht heißt, die Zuwanderung von weiteren Millionen Menschen zu ersehnen, die in muslimisch geprägten Teilen der Erde sozialisiert worden sind.

Und solange wir das verstörende UNICEF „Bild des Jahres 2007“ in Afghanistan vermuten und in Düsseldorf übersehen, so lange werden wir wohl auch Bekir Alboğa, Faruk Sen und Ibrahim El‑Zayat als Demokraten und Integrationslotsen einschätzen. Zwischenzeitlich können Zwangsverlobungen an muslimischen Kindern in Deutschland ungehindert stattfinden.

In diesen Tagen also verschickt ein Abdul Momin theokratisches Credo per Kommentarfunktion. Ich sollte besser sagen: Theokratische Volksverhetzung, denn nach einer Demokratie ruft der Text nun gerade nicht. Vielmehr, wie ich zu unterstellen wage, lässt der Text in der Taqiyya‑Weise des sakralen Verschweigens, in der Weise der islamischen „Kitman“‑Strategie ganz bewusst aus, dass jedes Menschengesetz Gottes ewigem Gesetz schon durch seine „dreiste“ Existenz widerspricht. Lässt aus, dass Menschenrechte „Allah verhöhnen“!

Menschen können im politischen Islam niemals „gleich“ sein. Jede auch nur etwas radikalere islamische Gruppierung Europas wird die Bürgerrechte für Ungläubige baldmöglich abzuschaffen bestrebt sein.

Der Islam sagt: Demokratie verhöhnt Gott! Jede Beratung im Bundestag oder bereits im Verein oder im Rathaussaal ist eine freche Anmaßung von ungläubigen Menschen dem koranisch verbürgten Schöpfergott gegenüber.

Der Atheist hebt die Hand – das „muss“ ein baldiges Ende haben! Die offen homosexuelle Frau hebt die Hand – ihre Stimme „darf“ nicht denselben Wert haben wie die einer schariatreu minderjährig zwangsverheirateten Muslima. Oder diejenige einer tschador- oder burkatragenden Zweit- oder Drittfrau.

Die islamischen Parteien, die in diesen Jahren überall in Europa im Entstehen begriffen sind, werden aktiv lügen, werden Taqiyya betreiben und sagen, sie dächten an ein Abschaffen der Bürgerrechte nicht. Dieses jedoch zu glauben möchten wir nicht empfehlen.

Wir sollten zudem einigen Zweifel daran haben, dass eine muslimische Frau „völlig konfliktfrei“ ganz anders politisch wählen könnte als ihr Ehemann. Der Stamm wird das Alpha‑Männchen wählen. Die muslimische Community den radikalsten Prediger.

Der Islam ist total, er gilt absolut. Wirklichkeitsblinde Freunde alles Fremden mögen sagen: Der Islam ist „ganzheitlich“. Wir Demokraten hingegen sollten sagen: Der Islam ist totalitär.

Vor mir liegt ein frommer islamischer Text. Von den Kollateralschäden der bei jeder nennenswerten Islamisierung unvermeidlichen frauenunterdrückenden innenstädtischen Sittenwächter, von den unausweichlichen gelegentlichen Apostatenmorden und von den Angriffen auf Wissenschaftler, Religionskritiker und Künstler steht in diesem Text nichts. Robert Redeker muss sich verstecken, Theo van Gogh wurde erstochen und Abdul Momin verbreitet via Internet koranische Köstlichkeiten.

So ist das eben mit „frommen” fundamentalistischen Texten. Abdul Momin hat den Text weltweit an viele Blogs und Homepages versendet. Es handelt sich also um eine theokratische Spam. Allahs Spam, sozusagen.

Im Ernst: Muslime werden mit solchen frommen Haltungen beziehungsweise Texten weitaus häufiger konfrontiert als wir. Die eigenen muslimischen Radikalen bereiten den eher gemäßigten Muslimen moralischen und sozialen Druck.

Auch gibt Radikalismus schlichten Gemütern Halt und Orientierung, ein weltweites Prinzip. Und ein bisschen unübersichtlich ist die Gegenwart ja, da findet der eine oder andere Mäusefänger seine verunsicherten Mäuslein.

Wir müssen also von den in einem demokratischen Gemeinwesen lebenden Muslimen die durchaus aufwändige Arbeit verlangen, sich von den theokratischen Meinungen eines Abdul Momin emanzipieren zu lernen. Das wird für sie schwierig werden, zumal sie Geistesfreiheit seit Jahrhunderten nicht gewohnt sind, dafür gerne den anderen die Schuld zuschieben: Den Armeniern, den Juden, den Atheisten, den Hindus. Sie werden, theaterbühnenreif, den sterbenden Schwan spielen und in uns Schuldgefühle zu erwecken trachten.

Zurzeit hat, weltweit, von zwei muslimischen Gläubigen der Radikalere einfach immer Recht. Wer als Muslim die Demokratie nicht als Teufelswerk bezeichnet, der ist einfach „noch nicht fromm genug“ – so zumindest die Logik der Scharia.

Fromme muslimische Sinnsprüche. Mit der Frage „Demokratie oder Kalifat“ beschreibt Egon Flaig treffend, worum es für uns in Europa geht.

Jacques Auvergne

A fatwa issued by the Fiqh Council November 30 pretends to condemn terrorism. Fortunately, the fatwa cherry picks the Qur’an so obviously that it is impossible to overlook.

Al-taqeyya is the practice of outright deception for the purpose of protecting or advancing the expansion of Islam. It is based on 3:28, 16:106 & a hadith quoted in this Tafsir. Kitman is deception by omission. Both techniques are employed in the fatwa condemning terrorism.

This post contains the full text of the fatwa along with linked citations of the ayat, ahadith & fiqh which prove its fraudulence. Please cross post and distribute this as widely as possible.

From the Press Release announcing the Fatwa:
[Emphasis added.]

Fiqh Council Chairman Muzammil Siddiqi, a former president of the Islamic Society of North America, presented the fatwa, saying that “since peace is the rule, not the exception, in our faith, it follows that any act of violence in humanity and injustice by any party against any party must be condemned as contrary to God’s teachings.”

Islam emphasizes a peaceful and just coexistence between Muslims and all other people, he said. “This position has been stated and reiterated in an earlier fatwa of the Fiqh Council of North America and by many Islamic scholars in various parts of the world.”

• “peace is the rule, not the exception, in our faith”
• “Islam emphasizes a peaceful and just coexistence between Muslims and all other people”

Are those statements objectively true? Not if the words retain their common meanings. What did Allah say?

8:39 And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.

9:29 Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

What did Muhammad say?

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.” Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, “O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?” He replied, “Whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have.”

What did Muhammad do?

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 285:

Narrated Abu Ishaq:

Once, while I was sitting beside Zaid bin Al-Arqam, he was asked, “How many Ghazwat did the Prophet undertake?” Zaid replied, “Nineteen.” They said, “In how many Ghazwat did you join him?” He replied, “Seventeen.” I asked, “Which of these was the first?” He replied, “Al-’Ashira or Al-’Ashiru.”

What does Islamic law say? Let us consult Al Misri’s Reliance of the Traveler.

The Reliance of the Traveller. Version 1.06 – By Ahmad Ibn Naqib Al-Misri
BOOK O: JUSTICE >> Chapter O-9.0: Jihad

O-9.8: The Objectives of Jihad
The caliph (o-25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o-11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,
“Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled” (Koran 9.29),

Allah said “fight them”, Muhammad said” I have been ordered to fight”; Islamic law says the “caliph makes war”. Fiqh Council Chairman Muzammil Siddiqi says that “Peace is the rule, not the exception”. Who is telling the truth? How did Afghanistan, North Africa. Eastern Europe and the Levant become Islamic?

The Fiqh Council of North America wishes to reaffirm Islam’s condemnation of terrorism and religious extremism.

Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives. There is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism. Targeting civilians’ life and property through suicide bombings or any other method of attack is haram - prohibited in Islam – and those who commit these barbaric acts are criminals, not “martyrs.”

The Qur’an, Islam’s revealed text, states: “Whoever kills a person, unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land, it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a person, it is as though he had saved all mankind.” (Qur’an, 5:32)

Prophet Muhammad said there is no excuse for committing unjust acts: “Do not be people without minds of your own, saying that if others treat you well you will treat them well, and that if they do wrong you will do wrong to them. Instead, accustom yourselves to do good if people do good and not to do wrong (even) if they do evil.” (Al-Tirmidhi)

God mandates moderation in faith and in all aspects of life when He states in the Qur’an: “We made you to be a community of the middle way, so that (with the example of your lives) you might bear witness to the truth before all mankind.” (Qur’an, 2:143)

In another verse, God explains our duties as human beings when he says: “Let there arise from among you a band of people who invite to righteousness, and enjoin good and forbid evil.” (Qur’an, 3:104)

Islam teaches us to act in a caring manner to all of God’s creation. The Prophet Muhammad, who is described in the Qur’an as “a mercy to the worlds” said: “All creation is the family of God, and the person most beloved by God (is the one) who is kind and caring toward His family.”

In the light of the teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah we clearly and strongly state:

1. All acts of terrorism targeting the civilians are Haram (forbidden) in Islam.
2. It is Haram for a Muslim to cooperate or associate with any individual or group that is involved in any act of terrorism or violence.
3. It is the duty of Muslims to cooperate with the law enforcement authorities to protect the lives of all civilians.

We issue this fatwa following the guidance of our scripture the Qur’an and the teachings of our Prophet Muhammad –peace be upon him. We urge all people to resolve all conflicts in just and peaceful manners. We have deep concern for the suffering and pain of millions of Muslims in different parts of the world. We deplore those who cause death and destruction to them. However, we urge Muslims to not lose their moral grounds. God’s help is with those who follow the right path.

We pray for the defeat of extremism, terrorism and injustice. We pray for the safety and security of our country United States and its people. We pray for the safety and security of all inhabitants of this globe. We pray that interfaith harmony and cooperation prevail both in United States and every where in the world.

---

• “Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives”
  

  2:190 And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors. 2:191 And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-al-Harâm (the sanctuary at Makkah), unless they (first) fight you there. But if they attack you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers. 2:193 And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allâh) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allâh (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zâlimûn (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)

• “There is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism”
  

  3:151 We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they joined others in worship with Allâh, for which He had sent no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong­doers). 8:12 (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.” Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 7, Number 331:
  Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
  The Prophet said, “I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me.
  1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month’s journey.[...] Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220:
  Narrated Abu Huraira:

  Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy),[...]

• “Targeting civilians’ life and property through suicide bombings or any other method of attack is haram”
  

  [...]And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah. [...] When they do that, their life and property are unlawful for us except what is due to them. [...]

• “Whoever kills a person, unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land, it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a person, it is as though he had saved all mankind.”
  

  5:33 The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter. Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir: [...]Wage war’ mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. [...] Mere disbelief is sufficient to incur the penalties specified in 5:33!!!

• “Let there arise from among you a band of people who invite to righteousness, and enjoin good and forbid evil.”
  

  3:110 You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma’rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh – and rebellious against Allâh’s Command). Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 80:

  Narrated Abu Huraira:

  The Verse:–”You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind.” means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.

I have reproduced relevant quotes from the press release and disproven them using ayat & ahadith, reinforced by Islamic law.

I have reproduced the entire fatwa, and disproved it point by point using relevant ayat & ahadith, each linked to source. Do not take my word for it; follow the links and read the context! Muslims can’t shed innocent blood but only Muslims are innocent! Review Bukhari 1.8.387; it reveals something important: our blood and property are only sacred to Muslims after we become Muslim! Abu Dawud 14.2635 confirms this: . [...] When they do that, their life and property are unlawful for us except what is due to them. [...] What was Muhammad ordered to do? Who was he commanded to do it to? What makes Muslims the best of peoples?

Note how they quote 5:32; why don’t they quote the next verse, which condemns us to multiple amputation or crucifixion for nothing more than disbelief? Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir: [...]Wage war’ mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. [...] Ibn Kathir spent his entire life studying the Qur’an, Hadith and Fiqh. He knew his subject and he laid it all out for you. Click that link and read the entire page.

The Fiqh Council tells us that terrorism is haram and peace is the rule, not the exception. That is not what Allah and his Messenger tell us, and it directly contradicts what the Messenger did. Forbidden to kill innocent life? 8:67 makes genocide a prerequisite for ransoming prisoners for profit.

It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allâh desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.

Take a long, hard look at how Muhammad enforced that ruling!

Abu Dawud Book 38, Number 4390:
Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:
I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

Know that you have been lied to by the Fiqh Council, President Bush, Secretary of State Rice and others. Wake up, rise up and raise Hell!!! Demand that Islam be recognized as a war machine, outlawed, and its adherents deported.

Islam:

• Not a religion.
• Not peaceful.
• Not truthful.
• Not tolerable!

From Delaware Online:

A congressman said Thursday that he will not retract a letter warning that unless immigration is tightened, “many more Muslims will be elected” and use the Quran to take the oath of office.

The warning is well deserved in light of the fact that the Koran allows Muslims to lie to non Muslims:

What neither Dennis Prager nor anyone else has addressed is the fact that the Qur’an is unsuitable for oath-taking in the United States because it allows Muslims to lie to unbelievers (3:28, 16:106). Whenever I have brought this up, people start talking about the Bible — but the difference is that the Bible doesn’t enjoin believers to lie to unbelievers, and problematic passages within it are not being acted upon around the world today in the way that problematic passages in the Qur’an are.

And here are more details about the Koran allowing Muslims to lie to non Muslims:

Here is the relevant section on 3:28 from the Qur’anic commentary of Ibn Kathir:

…”unless you indeed fear a danger from them” meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda’ said, “We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.” Al-Bukhari said that Al-Hasan said, “The Tuqyah is allowed until the Day of Resurrection.”

Below you’ll find footage of a Muslim proselytization event at a public library.  The footage shows how two Muslim chaplains practice the Islamically sanctioned deception techniques of takiyya and kitman on the audience: 

Taqiyya (mental reservation): the religiously-sanctioned doctrine, with its origins in Shi’a Islam but now practiced by non-Shi’a as well, of deliberate dissimulation about religious matters that may be undertaken to protect Islam, and the Believers.” An example of “Taqiyya” would be the insistence of a Muslim apologist that “of course” there is freedom of conscience in Islam, and then quoting that Qur’anic verse — “There shall be no compulsion in religion.” But the impression given will be false, for there has been no mention of the Muslim doctrine of abrogation, or naskh, whereby such an early verse as that about “no compulsion in religion” has been cancelled out by later, far more intolerant and malevolent verses.   

Kitman (concealment): “Kitman” is close to “taqiyya,” but rather than outright dissimulation, it consists in telling only a part of the truth, with “mental reservation” justifying the omission of the rest. One example may suffice. When a Muslim maintains that “jihad” really means “a spiritual struggle,” and fails to add that this definition is a recent one in Islam (little more than a century old), he misleads by holding back, and is practicing “kitman.” When he adduces, in support of this doubtful proposition, the hadith in which Muhammad, returning home from one of his many battles, is reported to have said (as known from a chain of transmitters, or isnad), that he had returned from “the Lesser Jihad to the Greater Jihad” and does not add what he also knows to be true, that this is a “weak” hadith, regarded by the most-respected muhaddithin as of doubtful authenticity, he is further practicing “kitman.”  

Here is additional context for the video.  The event had been advertised as a presentation about Islam followed by a Q&A session for non-Muslims.  This was a good opportunity to put into practice some of Fitzgerald’s tips about arming yourself with knowledge and asking pointed questions meant to shed clarity on the Islamic worldview. 

In light of this opportunity I decided to go to the event and ask the first three of the following questions (I had printed all 5 and pasted them to my video camera so I would not forget them in the heat of the moment):

• We hear from the MSM and Muslim apologists that Islam is “the RoP” yet around the world Muslims commit abominable acts such as sawing people’s heads of and murdering women and children in the name of Islam, why are moderate Muslims not more successful at refuting these terrorists on Islamic grounds?
• Why do Muslims revere Mohamed in light of his immoral acts described in the Koran and Hadiths, such as consummating his marriage with Aisha his 9 year old wife and ruling by the sword?  Why he is called in the Koran “uswa hasana” and in Islamic tradition “al-insan al-kamil“?
• How do we know you are not using the Islamically sanctioned deception techniques of takiyya (concealment) and kitman (mental reservation) on the audience?
• Why are so many people who leave Islam sentenced to death?
• Why do Muslims consider Christians and Jews second class citizens as defined by the term “dhimmi”?
• Why have Muslim leaders not issued a fatwa against bin Laden for the 9/11 terrorist attacks or his declaration of war on us? Can you [Muslim presenters] give me your word that you will ask them to issue one against Osama bin Laden?

Shortly after I arrived at the venue the moderator explained that each of the Muslim chaplains would give a 30-45 minute presentation after which there would be a Q&A period, but the questions for the Q&A period had to be submitted in advance in writing.   

Given the “politically incorrect” tone of my questions I was fairly certain (and later proven correct) that my questions would not be selected so I decided to verbally ask them after the second Muslim chaplain finished his presentation.  This is in fact what I did and shortly after I began asking my first question another person in the audience, who I refer to as the Samaritan, started to describe how he had personally suffered under Islam.  Unfortunately, the presenters would have none of it.   

Without giving the rest of the video away you should keep in mind the following before watching it:

• one of the presenters tries to intimidate the Samaritan and me into leaving the premises
• one of the presenters claimed, in a non-sequitur fashion, that the MSM is to blame for moderate Muslims not being able to refute Muslim terrorists on Islamic grounds.
• one of the presenters implies that it is hypocritical to draw attention to the role Islam plays in Muslim terrorist acts when we don’t attribute the Oklahoma City Federal building bombing to Christianity.  The presenter fails to see the lack of a parallel since the Oklahoma City Federal building bombing: 1) was not part of a world wide systematic strategy, 2) has no worldwide support system, 3) was not tacitly accepted by the West through lack of condemnation, 4) was roundly condemned by the Christian community
• I submitted 5 questions and even though the presenters gave me their word that they would answer them only 2 were selected
• my questions were not read in their entirety; references to specific Muslim terrorist abominable acts were omitted as well as having the phrase “consummating his marriage with Aisha his 9 year old wife” deceptively changed to “consummating his marriage with Aisha who was 9 years” thus falsely leaving an impression that Mohamed had been with Aisha for 9 years.
• one presenter not only establishes a moral equivalence between terrorists and the United States, but subtly implies that people including politicians in the
  United States are morally worse than the terrorists.
• one presenter implies that women get better treatment in Islamic countries than they do in the
  United States

I encourage others to do inform themselves.  The more light people shine on the Islamic world view the less effective the techniques of taqiyya and kitman will be. 

FYI: The handout I passed out consisted of an article on Jihadism and the Koran, a chart comparing Christian and Islamic doctrine, and a chart comparing Jesus and Mohamed.

Here, with the aptly titled posting “Kill Jews, But not Here”, is another example of takiyya and kitman, the religiously-sanctioned deception to protect or promote Islam:

As an indicator of how out-of-control the jihad incitement has gotten in the Middle East over the Lebanon War, the sheikhs of the Al-Azhar Mosque, considered among the world’s highest authorities on Sunni Islam, had to issue a special fatwa forbidding the random murder of Jews: Egypt’s Muslim authorities disown fatwas on killing Jews.

Jews in Egypt, anyway. Jews elsewhere, well, they don’t really specify.
…
They justify this counter-fatwa under Islamic law, by saying that Israelis who’ve been granted visas by Egypt are protected as dhimmis.

Tariqnelson responded to my post about urging Muslim leaders to issue fatwas against Osama bin Laden (OBL).  Given the length of my response I’m posting it on the front page.

The previous Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdul-Aziz Ibn Baz, who died before 9/11, and other scholars condemned him by name and condemned the Hamas suicide murders on civilians (Muslim and non-Muslim) and the spreading of chaos years before 9/11

I am looking for fatwas that leave no room for taqiyya or kitman.  Rather than take your word on it I would like to read the contents of their statements.  Can you send me links to them? 

Saudi Arabia has long been opposed to Bin Laden

Can you provide evidence that “Saudi hate literature being distributed from American mosques, and the Saudi madrasa-building in Asia has completely stopped (hat tip jihadwatch)?

And remember in Saudi Arabia, as in other places, passages in the Koran such as the notorious “Verse of the Sword” in sura 9:5 (“slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush”) is used for jihadi recruitment.

Not fans of the above people

By “people” you mean Wahhabis/Salafis, the Sunni fundamentalist Islamic movement that OBL adheres to.

but the point here is to illustrate that this was done BEFORE 9/11

I scanned the document for all OBL references and I did not see a fatwa issued against him.  Where is the unequivocal condemnation of OBL’s jihad? 

http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php

I did not see a single fatwa against OBL for the 9/11 terrorist attacks.  The closest I saw was a single instance by Spanish Muslim leaders for the Spanish terrorist attack, but not for the 9/11 attacks.  Furthermore and disappointingly they did not refute OBL’s interpretation of the Koran and Hadith.  As Robert Spencer points out “until there is a REFUTATION of their arguments, their arguments will continue to be effective. Your sources have not refuted them, but ignored them”.

By the way the top link at the link you provided was written by the terrorist front group CAIR so its credibility is in serious question.

http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=214

Your link does not provide evidence that a fatwa against OBL occurred.

I hate Bin Laden, Hamas, “Hizbullah” and other groups and their evil actions,

I applaud what you’ve said, but can you refute OBL’s arguments on Islamic grounds?

and other Muslims have stated as much (again, long before 9/11).

Are the other Muslims following mainstream Islamic interpretations?  What are these other Muslims doing to stop the worldwide abominable terrorist acts that are continuing to be justified on Islamic grounds?

While I feel that we as Muslims have not come out strongly enough against the likes of Hamas and “Hizbullah

Indeed, and what you’ve said is a breath of fresh air.  Unfortunately your feelings have not dissuaded the Muslim terrorists from continuing their jihad against the West.

UPDATE: 8/22/06 12:37am

Tariqnelson has responded in the comments section of this post.  What follows is my response to him.

First off, thanks for responding.

First it seems that you do not understand the meaning of ‘fatwa’. It seems (and correct me if I am wrong) that you think that ‘fatwa’ is a death decree.

I do know what fatwa means.  Here is a backgrounder for my readers.  Please keep in mind that vacuous fatwas which do not condemn the Islamic extremism ideology that has spawned Islamic terrorism do not count.

[josephnadir] it is absolutely shocking that American Muslim leaders have not yet issued one [fatwa] against the enemy.
[tariqnelson] There have been several anti-Bin Laden fatwas/statements issued since long BEFORE 9/11

It appears that you are conflating fatwas with mere statements of condemnation which do not carry the weight of a religious edict. 

What I’ve been looking for is a fatwa clearly and unequivocally condemning OBL for the 9/11 attacks, not a statement which does not carry the weight of an Islamic legal pronouncement.  I’m willing to settle for a fatwa against OBL’s jihad against America, so feel free to find an example of that as well.

They all condemned terror attacks

A condemnation does not carry the legal weight of a fatwa.  I did not find a fatwa in the link you provided. 

After 9/11, many have condemned the 9/11 attacks and other attacks, including the Mufti of Saudi Arabia, who not only condemned the 9/11 attacks, but also the London bombings and every other attack. Also see this

Where are the fatwas?  Recall condemnation ≠ fatwa

And likewise, for you to say that Muslims have not said anything condemning terrorism is a gross distortion

It looks like you are trying to build a straw man argument.  I never said what you claim I have said.

but if you are amongst those who think genocide should be commited
Of course I am not one of those people and I would never advocate any of the evil things you mentioned. 

I simply come from a perspective that while there are moderate Muslims I do not see the evidence to support that there is a moderate Islam.

You and I both know that we could similarly take verses of the Bible

First off, the sheer scale of the monstrous acts of barbarism committed in the name of Islam dwarfs that which is committed illogically in the name of Christianity.  Just look at all of the cases of Muslims committing acts of terrorism around the world and the support they receive in the Muslim community.  Look at the non-response the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which represent 56 Muslim states, gave when challenged to condemn all of those who kill or call upon others to kill in the name of God or religion:

— 

The next morning (Friday, 18 August), Pakistan’s Ambassador Masood Khan – speaking for the OIC countries – addressed the Sub-Commission. He did not refer to our appeal that the OIC condemn: “all those who kill or call upon others to kill in the name of God or religion,” as well as an “an unambiguous condemnation of those who are defaming Islam by their calls to kill in the name of Allah.” Rather, he spoke about “the Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) caricatures in a Danish paper last year,” and stated: “In the recent past, terrorist attacks, or even terrorist plots, have been used as a pretext to demonize Islam and Muslims… Muslims are being dehumanized as Jews were during the inter-war years in the last century. The spectre of Islamophobia is haunting Europe.” He also stated: “The OIC believes that the existing gaps in the international law – soft or hard – to combat defamation of religions and to promote respect for each others beliefs should be stepped up.” He concluded: “In the Islamic world, endeavours are being made to wage political and ideological struggles against the forces of obscurantism and extremism. Last year in Makkah, the OIC announced its 10-year programme for the promotion and protection of human rights. It will also elaborate [an] OIC Charter on Human Rights.” There can be little doubt that any such a Charter will be conditional on Shariah law (see the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam,  articles 24 and 25),  in total contradiction to the 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights.

—

and use it [verses of the Bible] out of context

There is a very important distinction to be made between interpreting verses in a logical way versus an illogical way.  There is no verse in the Bible which can taken in context logically be interpreted to commit anything remotely similar to the Muslim terrorist acts.  From all appearances, from the worldwide terrorist acts committed in the name of Islam to the lack of fatwas which condemn on Islamic grounds the ideology that has spawned Islamic terrorism, the Koran’s verse of the sword in context together with the Islamic jurisprudence are being logically interpreted.

Many from the Aryan Nation and “Christian Identity use the Bible to recruit as well.

Your implicit contention that racist groups using the Bible to recruit and Muslim terrorist using Islam to recruit are akin to each other is simply not true for multiple reasons:

• There is no logical Biblical interpretation for racism
• Racist organizations are universally condemned by the Christian community
• Aryan Nation and Christian Identity is a fringe group whose number of racist acts or membership numbers do not even begin to compare to either the number Muslim terrorist acts or the number of terrorist supporters 

I don’t expect you to answer for them

Thank you   I don’t expect you to answer for Muslim terrorists either, but I wish peaceful Muslims were more successful at challenging terrorists on Islamic grounds and preventing Muslims from becoming terrorists.

[josephnadir] I scanned the document for all OBL references and I did not see a fatwa issued against him.  Where is the unequivocal condemnation of OBL’s jihad?
[tariqnelson] Seems that you must have overlooked it. Here are a few

I have to ask because it seems you are now being deliberately misleading are you practicing taqiyya?

I was responding to this link which you provided as evidence of a fatwa against OBL and I still don’t see any fatwa.

The three new links you’ve provided have no fatwas whatsoever.

See above.

None of the links you’ve provided contain a fatwa.  Prove me wrong if you believe otherwise.  You definitely appear to be practicing taqiyya and if so it is not going to work. 

There was a blizzard of condemnations, fatwas and other statements against OBL and the 9/11 attacks.

I found a single instance here of a fatwa against OBL for the Spanish terrorist attack.  This is a far cry from your claim.

To say there was no comdemnation at all

I never said that.  Stop building a straw man.

Most refutations are done in the Arabic language (and yes I know Arabic) and there are many entire books written refuting the Khawarij (terrorist) methodology that OBL believes in.

Please don’t take it the wrong way, but I’m not going to take your word for it.  American Muslims and Muslims living in the West have a HUGE motivation to clean up their image and I would find it stunning that there are so few translations if there were so many arguments in existence.  In light of this what you say is hard to swallow. 

this is a translation of one small refutation of their arguments. This one was written before 9/11

You did not dispute my claim that the fatwa issued against OBL for the Spanish terrorist attack did not contain a refutation of OBL’s interpretation of the Koran or Hadith. 

In these two links I see no refutation of OBL’s interpretation either.

we soundly refute them on Islamic grounds

Really?  I’m very interested in these arguments.  Can you point me to them?

While people such as yourself talked about last week’s plot to bomb several airplanes, one thing lost in the entire affair is that it was a Muslim who helped unravel the plot.

That is wonderful.  It would be even better if other Muslims stopped issuing veiled threats in response to this Muslim terrorist plot.

Muslims are integral parts in stopping terrorist attacks from happening

I wholeheartedly agree.  Furthermore, I think Muslims arguing on Islamic grounds against OBL and the rest of those who support a jihad against the West would do much to combat Muslim terrorism.  In many respects the spiritual and ideological battle against these individuals is more important than the physical one.

If we declare all Muslims to be the enemy, then we will lose many allies in this fight against those that are truely evil.

I agree. 

Secondly, others are refuting the arguments of the terrorists on Islamic grounds. These things need to be spread amongst the Muslims

Again I wholeheartedly agree with you brother.

It would be a huge mistake to commit complete genocide against all the Muslims

Absolutely true.

The terrorists use people like her and her statements as fodder for recruitment

That may be true, but the moral culpability lies squarely on the Muslim terrorist, not the one who used words that they disliked.

If American goes to the genocide strategy that some are calling for

This is not a real concern.  No one in our government is advocating that.  Furthermore, I don’t believe it will ever happen. 

As many already know self-identified Muslim Naveed Afzal Haq went on a shooting spree at the Jewish Federation Building in Seattle after saying “I am a Muslim American, angry at Israel“.  The day after this terrorist act a number of religious leaders were interviewed to get their reaction.  Unfortunately, their comments demonstrated the ignorance and/or deception that continues to be so common when talking about Islam.

What follow are a few excerpts of the interview:

The Rev. Sanford Brown, executive director of the Church Council of Greater Seattle, called the shootings a “senseless and immoral action in which a sick individual targeted innocent people.”

It is not “senseless” from the Muslim terrorist’s/jihadist’s perspective.  They use the Koran to justify their abominable acts as Robert Spencer has pointed out in Frontpagemag:

jihadists themselves routinely invoke it [the Qur'an] as the justification for their acts of violence, and as a means to recruit other Muslims into their movement. Hundreds of photos are available online of jihad terrorists brandishing the Qur’an, often along with rifles or other weapons. And any cursory glance at the statements of jihadists shows them to be filled with Qur’an quotes and appeals to other Muslims that they represent “pure Islam.

Here is Hisham Farajallah’s, president of the Islamic Center of Washington, reaction:

I am sure faith has nothing to do with what happened – we don’t know that person. We don’t know what his motive is.

First off, Farajallah is ignoring that the Muslim terrorist stated his reasons during the attack so the motive very clear.  Secondly, he is being deceitful or is ignorant of Islamic justifications for jihad.  I think it is reasonable to assume the former given the Islamic justification for such tactics called takiyya and kitman.  Hence, I think Farajallah is not being forthright with the justification for jihad:

Nor are these jihadists misrepresenting, twisting, or hijacking what the Qur’an says. Indeed, they are fiercely literalistic, taking the book’s many martial verses at face value. There are over a hundred verses in the Qur’an that exhort believers to wage jihad against unbelievers. “O Prophet! Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell, an evil refuge indeed” (Sura 9:73). “Strive hard” in Arabic is jahidi, a verbal form of the noun jihad. This striving was to be on the battlefield: “When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield, strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly” (Qur’an 47:4). This is emphasized repeatedly: “O ye who believe! Fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him” (Qur’an 9:123).

This was Jeff Siddiqui’s, of American Muslims of Puget Sound, reaction to the terrorist act:

This is the very thing we’re trying to prevent being done to Muslims — and here’s a Muslim doing this to others. It just makes me sick.

Note that he has not said that they are trying to prevent this type of terrorist act from being done “by Muslims”, but has said that they are trying to prevent this type of terrorist from being done “to Muslims”.  Despite the preponderance of terrorist acts being committed in the name of Islam Siddiqui is implying that Muslims are under equivalent terrorist attacks by non-Muslims.  His implication is demonstrably false and unfortunately in these politically correct times no one calls him on it. 

Finally, this is what the Seattle branch of the terrorist front group CAIR had to say:

When one of us is attacked, none of us are safe … we refuse to see the violence in the Middle East spill over to our cities and neighborhoods.

Given CAIR’s ties to terrorists and the Islamic sanctioned use of deception one is justified in carefully parsing CAIR’s statement.  The use of the word “us” is vague enough to be interpreted as a veiled threat:

When a Muslim is attacked, none of us are safe … we refuse to see the violence in the Middle East spill over to our cities and neighborhoods.

In light of the foiled U.K. Muslim terrorist plot, the last thing Muslims should be doing is issuing veiled threats.  From Robert Spencer’s jihadwatch.com:

While the British government kowtows to them, Muslim leaders in the UK are still in complete self-righteous denial about how the ideology that leads to terror attacks incubates within their communities.

By the way I highly recommend reading Robert’s book “The Politically Incorrect Guide To Islam“.  It completely demolishes the falsehoods about Islam that continue to be peddled by the MSM and many politicians.  This book adds to the West’s ideological arsenal when fighting Muslim terrorists and their supporters.

EU Referendum has been doing a commendable job drawing world wide attention to the inconsistencies between the raw footage and the propagandistic narrative the MSM is propagating about the Qana incident.  In this post, EU Referendum points out another apparent inconsistency:

OK… let’s put is altogether. “White Tee-shirt” is part of the rescue party – frantically digging for survivors (they hope) and recovering the bodies. There is a frenetic air about the operation – eye witnesses say there was chaos and there is the ever-present fear that the building will collapse further.

But, after the Red Cross worker takes the body of the child, with “White Tee-shirt” present, and before it is given to “White Tee-shirt” to take it out of the building, it seems that our iconic figure may have changed into another tee-shirt. Has he changed into fresh attire, ready to make his “camera run”, whence he is photographed “screaming for help“? 

Here is one of the iconic images of the “White Tee-Shirt” guy (linked from Editorial Getty Images):

Take a close look at the logo.  It looks like a borderless (perhaps even counterfeit) version of the FILA logo seen here:

From all appearances the logo was not present on the shirt worn by “White Tee-Shirt” guy before he made the “camera run”.

UPDATE at 8/5/06 7:25:00 am:

EU Referendum (Richard North) has kindly responded to a private email I sent and he pointed me to his response (look for comment that begins: “If I’d asked the Telegraph to check this out”) to Shane Richmond’s blog entry. 

Shane has access to a higher resolution picture of the “White Tee-Shirt” guy and lays rest to the theory that “White Tee-Shirt” guy was using a different shirt (and incidentally corroborates my theory that the logo we see the guy wearing in the picture above is a FILA logo <grin>), but has failed to address EU Referendum’s substantive thesis:

that the photograph of Qana that you published on the front page of your paper was staged by Hesbollah to maximise the propaganda effect of the incident.

Of note, in EU Referendum’s latest post:

Make up your own mind. Is this a Hezbollah member, or a mere supporter? This is a Hezbollah stronghold, a town from which the IDF claim over 150 missiles have been fired. And our “White Tee-shirt” has a house full of Hezbollah material

I think EU Referendum’s thesis is correct, particularly in light of the Islamically sanctioned use of deception (i.e., kitman and taqiyya) in the Muslim world for over a thousand years:

“Taqiyya” is the religiously-sanctioned doctrine, with its origins in Shi’a Islam but now practiced by non-Shi’a as well, of deliberate dissimulation about religious matters that may be undertaken to protect Islam, and the Believers. A related term, of broader application, is “kitman,” which is defined as “mental reservation.” An example of “Taqiyya” would be the insistence of a Muslim apologist that “of course” there is freedom of conscience in Islam, and then quoting that Qur’anic verse — “There shall be no compulsion in religion.” But the impression given will be false, for there has been no mention of the Muslim doctrine of abrogation, or naskh, whereby such an early verse as that about “no compulsion in religion” has been cancelled out by later, far more intolerant and malevolent verses. In any case, history shows that within Islam there is, and always has been, “compulsion in religion” for Muslims, and for non-Muslims. The “compulsion” for Muslims comes from the treatment of apostasy as an act punishable by death.

“Kitman” is close to “taqiyya,” but rather than outright dissimulation, it consists in telling only a part of the truth, with “mental reservation” justifying the omission of the rest. One example may suffice. When a Muslim maintains that “jihad” really means “a spiritual struggle,” and fails to add that this definition is a recent one in Islam (little more than a century old), he misleads by holding back, and is practicing “kitman.” When he adduces, in support of this doubtful proposition, the hadith in which Muhammad, returning home from one of his many battles, is reported to have said (as known from a chain of transmitters, or isnad), that he had returned from “the Lesser Jihad to the Greater Jihad” and does not add what he also knows to be true, that this is a “weak” hadith, regarded by the most-respected muhaddithin as of doubtful authenticity, he is further practicing “kitman.”  (from http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1320513/posts)

Sub-title: hiding your true intentions.

Getting what you want by lying, deceiving others. Practiced by one and all. Chemical mimicry in sexually deceptive orchids is one way. Visual mimicry is also used by the same orchids. So, at pollination time, the flower of a certain paphiopedalum orchid looks and smells enticingly like a female bumblebee (in estrous?). And sure enough, along comes a horny male bumblebee, who gets himself ensnarled in the orchid’s velvet petals. It’s a little rough on him, but he finally crawls through and out the other side, having served the orchid’s purpose of pollination nicely, and off he goes in search of, hopefully, a receptive (live) bumblebee. But, one must assume that he falls for it at least once more, as that is when he passes the pollen packet to the next orchid.

Here he is, having a go at the orchid…

How the orchids figured this out is beyond me.

Another way to hide your true intentions in the insect world is is revealed by a closer look at the blister beetle, Meloe franciscanus. He’s a weasily little sneak with a plan. Hey, kids gotta eat, too. OK. Male Solitary bees are lured to larval aggregations of said beetle (ok, it smelled like a female bee!) and upon contact (pseudocopulation) the beetle larvae attach to the male bees. Ha! You’re it. The larvae then transfer to female bees during mating and subsequently are transported to the nests of their hosts, where one must assume, the beetle larvae have a meal of tasty bee larvae. Again, the bee world is duped. They are steady, but not too bright, I guess.

(Copied from some article)
“The aggressive chemical mimicry by the beetle larvae and their subsequent transport to their hosts’ nests by the hosts themselves provide an efficient solution to the problem of locating a critical but scarce resource (meat) in a harsh environment.” Aw.. There are many, many more examples of an organism’s hiding its true intent by deception. Fish do it, birds, animals do it.

In the U.S. it is against the law to relieve another of their goods or services by deception. The law, appropriately named, is “Theft By Deception”. Such a law keeps the honest man, honest. People who practice theft by deception are often fined, or incarcerated. Such is the basis of our common law.

But now we come to another application of the practice of hiding one’s intentions to gain profit or power in man’s world. Now, the muslims certainly didn’t invent this practice. I’m sure it’s as old as man himself, extending even back into the insect and animal world. But they’ve been at it for a long, long time – they even have names for the practice, have codified it in a little book they call the Qur’an. Hey, if the prophet did it, must be ok, right? And boy, he sure did it. His 10-year truce, back in the days of yore, was actually cut short – by 8 years. Just long enough for him to get his troops ready. Exactly like today. All’s fair in love and war. And baby, this is war. We better not forget that.

The practice of Taqiyya, or lying, and otherwise deceiving the unsuspecting is done for the purpose of acquiring power over him. Likewise, da’wah is a gentler method of reassuring, calming any doubts, and otherwise insinuating themselves and their power aspirations into our, the lowly infidel, lives.

Now we move furthur into murkier waters…

See what kevin, at Amboy Times says: http://amboytimes.blogspot.com/2006/06/holy-lie.html

Taqiyya and kitman: The role of Deception in Islamic terrorism Tradecraft. Persona. Deception. Disinformation. Cover: Western operational terms and techniques. But, Islamic terrorists have their own terms: taqiyya (pronounced tark-e-ya) : precautionary dissimulation or deception and keeping one’s convictions secret and a synonymous term, kitman: mental reservation and dissimulation or concealment of malevolent intentions…

Da’wah, the preferred method of CAIR when infiltrating, and deceiving school officials requires “befriending the infidels“, and reassuring them that their intentions are pure as the driven snow. Playing the multi-culti card, offering to share a meal with your family is a favored technique, because they know that “the way to an infidel’s heart is through his stomach” – guess they read that somewhere. Mealtimes at my house were a bitch. But, if those “soft” techniques prove inadequate, they can and will play hardball. Of course, the ACLU has got their back.

Which brings me to the last type of deception, practiced before the whole world, the UN. America had best dissolve any relationship with that high organization of misfits, perverts, and assorted maladroits. Oh, Kofi, let me say GOOD-BYE, asshole. And good riddance.

And while I’m saying good-bye, and this is not a deception…

See ya, Zarqawi.
……………………………………………………..

-DNA