I started reading the first sura of the Koran, which is just plain prayer from a believer, which later I found out to be of pagan origin incorporated in the Koran as 'Allah's' words. Even the Koran distinguishes it in early Meccan suras from the rest of the Koran by calling it '7 oft-repeated verses'. It was good – I had no problem with that sura but after that when the second sura, called 'the cow', started. My mind was boggled by the 'hocus-pocus' I read in it. There was no point for any verse in it. It was like a mason trying to build a house but all the bricks were spread all around and he said 'ah! It is done'. But anyway, I moved on.
Then, for yet another time, I was shocked – when I came across a verse in the same sura. It called women their husband's 'tilth' – I was taught that Islam placed women at the same level with men but this verse was saying something very inappropriate. The verse literally called women 'things' – property of their husbands whom the husbands were allowed to use the way 'they' pleased. Later on I found out why the verse was revealed and I was even more shocked – 'Allah' took the pains of telling the Moslems on which sexual position was alright for them to have sex in – what great guidance. I wonder why they created the Kamasutra when we have the Koran.
I read on – I came across a lot of shocking things – Sura 4 made women into animals – Sura 5 made heaven into a brothel, a place just for men where they could find women as many as they wanted turned solely into prostitutes bought by the things they did on earth. Frankly it wasn't the Islam I was taught in my school and mosques. Maybe if I had stayed in Saudi Arabia longer I would have come across that teaching and would have accepted it too. But Pakistan was too shy to discuss all that. Mullahs discouraged reading translated Korans and told us that it was even better to read it, if we didn't understand it, because blind faith brings a person closer to 'Allah'.
Then I don't know how – I started finding a soft spot in my heart for Jews and Christians. I was 16 now and I had read many many verses in the Koran that demonize and curse Jews and Christians. Almost every page in the Koran cursed them and most every Moslem conversation ends with the phrase 'Death to Israel'. Even the Friday sermon in the mosque contained, 'May Allah kill the Jews and Christians and give their wives, children and possessions to us.' And everyone said 'Amen' out loud. It was too much hatred for the Jews for me because now, unlike any other time in my life before, I was thinking and not walking in faith blindly.
I read the Koran completely, more than once, and I didn't find it spiritual at all. In fact I found it to be a tyrannical-political system – created for the sole reason of getting power and subjugating others.
I began to read my downloaded Bible. I found the Old Testament plain history so wasn't really impressed with that. It sounded just like the Koran, the only difference was that it seemed to have been written by someone with some writing sense and plus it was going somewhere. I read the New Testament and the love I found in it, especially in John 17, surprised me. The Gospel was all about loving others, and sacrificing yourself for others. It was nothing like the Islamic notion of sacrifice, killing others and then dying if an arrow penetrated your flesh accidentally and then calling it martyrdom. Christianity, I found, had the concept called martyrdom, but it was a totally different idea than the Islamic one. In it – you were not supposed to kick the other person's butt to get him to kill you and then attain the status of martyrdom but if someone attacked you – you were to not resist him but let him and sacrifice your life for God. This was a new concept for me.
John 3.16, where it says, 'God so loved the world…' and the likes were new to me too. This is because, in Islam, 'Allah's' love is purely his favor, he stops favoring the person, that's his hatred. 'Allah' was a senseless being but this God I found in the Bible was a 'person', not a human, but a being who had sense. He wasn't a machine asking its creation to be like robots, but He was a being who created humans in His own image as friends, as His children.
Click here to read the Conclusion
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
I started reading the first sura of the Koran, which is just plain prayer from a believer, which later I found out to be of pagan origin incorporated in the Koran as 'Allah's' words. Even the Koran distinguishes it in early Meccan suras from the rest of the Koran by calling it '7 oft-repeated verses'. It was good – I had no problem with that sura but after that when the second sura, called 'the cow', started. My mind was boggled by the 'hocus-pocus' I read in it. There was no point for any verse in it. It was like a mason trying to build a house but all the bricks were spread all around and he said 'ah! It is done'. But anyway, I moved on.
Monday, January 30, 2006
CAIR, a terrorist front group for jihad in America, shows their true colors as they fight to let terrorist Nadeem Hassan (more here) of Jamaat al Tablighi back into the US. Everytime a suspected Muslim terrorist here on a greencard goes outside the US, block their reentry. Smart. We need to do a lot more of this.
CAIR: Hypocrite’s in Defense of Islamic Terrorism?
The East Valley Tribune ran a story about Dr. Nadeem Hassan, who was denied re-entry to the United States following his visit to Saudi Arabia for the Hajj. (Dr. Hassan is/was a green card holder.)
CAIR joined other Islamic groups in denouncing the exclusion of Hassan, joining in the claim that Hassan’s possible link to Jamaat al Tablighi, a group with suspected Islamic terrorist-supporting membership, was not grounds for exclusion. Apparently, CAIR views the Jamaat al Tablighi as a “Muslim missionary group”.
For a good look at just what the Jamaat al Tablighi is and what it stands for, we refer to the respected Middle East Forum/Quarterly for a review. From the Quarterly, we find this conclusion:
“The estimated 15,000 Tablighi missionaries reportedly active in the United States present a serious national security problem. At best, they and their proxy groups form a powerful proselytizing movement that preaches extremism and disdain for religious tolerance, democracy, and separation of church and state. At worst, they represent an Islamist fifth column that aids and abets terrorism. Contrary to their benign treatment by scholars and academics, Tablighi Jamaat has more to do with political sedition than with religion.”ACAIR finds it interesting that CAIR, with its vast financial resources and access to numerous sources in both North America and the Middle East cannot simply lift up the phone, call the Saudi Embassy and ask for information on the Tablighi Jamaat. Of course, the Saudi Embassy would say it was simply a “missionary group”, but as any American knows, any endorsement by the Saudis is an immediate red flag.
When I turned 15, for some unknown reason – before taking any major step – I wanted to read the Koran. I opened a copy of the Koran, translated into a language I could read, and started reading it with true understanding for the first time. I read the Koran till Sura 7.157 and stopped dead in my tracks, because this is the Sura that says that Mohammed was mentioned in the Bible. I was like, 'woah! This is my chance to convert all of the Christians.’ Moslems think that the Bible just contains the Gospel, because Moslems never read it.
I emailed my dad and asked if it was alright to download a Bible and told him the reason why I wanted to download it. I said it was because I wanted to find where it prophesied about Mohammed and then convert the Christians. His reply was rather strange for me at the time. He said 'Download the Bible for that, it is allowed, but conversion to Christianity isn't.' I didn't get at the moment why he said that but later I did. Anyway, I downloaded the King James Version of the Bible because I had read on the internet that it was the most popular one. But, like all other Moslems, I used to believe that every 'version' of the Bible differs from the others in everything – from the content within to the number of chapters to every minute detail.
I read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. To my amazement, I didn't find a single word about Mohammed in the Bible. I was shocked, of course. It made me so sad that I couldn't say a word about it – to myself or others. In this sadness, one day, I was sitting on the steps of my house. I don't know why or how – I broke all Islamic rules of praying and 'talked' with 'Allah' directly. I prayed in a whisper, ‘Allah please never leave me alone!' I don't know why I said that but right then I heard something I have not forgotten since. Someone, out of the blue, answered, 'I won't.' Shocked, I looked up and around – I didn't see anyone. I knew someone had answered me because I wasn't sleeping.
I was all awake, thinking. Then I wondered what a Moslem is never suppose to think about at all--I thought maybe 'Allah' had answered me. It was this thought that started the doubts in my mind about Islam.
After having this revelation of my own, I started asking questions about my faith for the first time. My first question of course was, if Mohammed said he was the last prophet and there won't come any after him and the only way 'Allah' would talk to humans was through the Koran, then why did 'Allah' take so much pain in answering one of his slaves (me) directly? If Mohammed was right in what he said, then why did this happen to me? I realized that what I had just done was called 'doubt' and doubting what Mohammed said was equal to doubting what 'Allah' says, because the Koran places the words of Mohammed as equal to that of 'Allah's'. Doubting Islam is a crime which gets a Moslem out of the circle of Islam and gives him the status of an apostate. The punishment for an apostate in Islam is, of course, death.
I started reading the Koran where I had left off, realizing I was no more a Moslem. I read the Koran critically and not as a believer -- I wasn't taking sides anymore. I knew I had to reach the right decision. If Islam was right then I knew how to get back into Islam – it only took a second, I just had to repeat that 'La-ilaha-illallah-o-mohammed-ur-rasulallah' and I was back into Islam a Moslem. But if Islam wasn't the right path – I had decided I wouldn't follow something that was corrupted no matter what the consequences I had to face afterwards.
Click here to read Part Five
Malaysia's Prime Minister has officially responded to the election of the terrorists in Palestine. Of course, the world 'terrorist' never ever is used, not even once, in this official press release. In fact, the PM's entire statement displays an astonishing disconnect from reality. Read it all, but be forewarned, we are jumping deep into the rabbit hole here. So, to assist you, the reader, I have helpfully inserted clarifications in brackets at the end of each paragraph:
Accept Palestinian Election Results, Says Abdullah
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 27 (Bernama) -- The international community should duly accept the outcome of the elections in Palestine and respect the choice of its people, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said today. [by 'accept', he of course means the infidels should keeping ponying up all that jizya to the 'Palestinian Authority' to the tune of $865 million a year. Yeah, great idea!]
The Prime Minister said the elections were conducted in the true spirit of democracy and the results reflected the wishes of the Palestinian people. [the 'Palestinians' have spoken, and they have voted for war and their endorsement of the destruction of Israel, just like it's written here in the Hamas charter. Yup, I'd say they've spoken all right.]
He said Malaysia welcomed the successful organisation of the recent elections in Palestine in which the people of Palestine had the opportunity to express their will through a peaceful democratic process. [a 'peaceful democratic process' for Palestine means no gun battles or riots until after the voting is over.]
"I congratulate President Mahmoud Abbas for his leadership in this regard," he said in a statement, here. [Abbas' 'leadership ability'?!? I wouldn't entrust Abbas with leading the local PTA, let alone a chunk of real estate in the Middle East that masquerades as a nation-state.]
He congratulated Hamas for its success in the elections and expressed confidence that the organisation would find it possible to accommodate other political parties in the political process and work towards establishing a government of national reconciliation in Palestine. [We all know what the Hamas idea of 'accomodation' is. All those young, agitated, thin-skinned Muslims with guns, the Hamas rank-and-file, they're actually very peaceful, just as long as you do exactly what they say.]
The future of Palestine, in particular its stability, progress and prosperity, would depend on the unity among all Palestinians and their commitment to finding peaceful solutions to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, he said. [If those pesky Jews would just surrender peacefully, and willingly submit to the gentle rule of the Caliphate-to-be, that would take care of this whole thing so quickly, don't you know? We all know what Muslims mean when they say 'peaceful solutions'--do it our way or else.]
In this matter, the people of Palestine deserved the full support of all peace-loving peoples throughout the world, he said. [Peace-loving peoples = Muslims and the dhimmis who love them]
Malaysia, Abdullah said, called on all parties especially those directly involved in the West Asia peace process to work hand in hand to seek a lasting solution and establish a permanent peace in the region. [permanent peace = elimination of Israel]
In this regard, the process of negotiations in the context of the Roadmap for Peace in West Asia should be reinvigorated, he said. [you know which Roadmap we're talking about, right? It's the Roadmap that shows what the quickest way is for the 'martyrs' of Hamas to get to Haifa or Tel Aviv.]
He said Malaysia strongly believed that the objective of achieving an enduring peace in West Asia could only be achieved through the process of dialogue and negotiations which were carried out in good faith. [of course, all terrorist groups are strong believers in negotiations with their enemies that they have vowed to liquidate. Because the international community says so, that's why!]
Malaysia, he said, wished the new leaders in Palestine great success in their noble mission. [Hamas is on a noble mission to wage war, murder every Jew they can get their hands on, implement ethnic cleansing and commit wholesale genocide. Noble mission, my ass!]
Sunday, January 29, 2006
What can you do to help support Free Speech from the terror of the Mohammedans? The Mohammedans have chosen to boycott Danish products. So far, it is primarily dairy products, especially Arla. Here are some of their brands to look for:
-White Clover Dairy, a Wisconsin company so buy that brand. It comes under White Clover and Holland Farm
-Rosenborg - Blue cheeses
-Denmarks Finest - Havarti )this stuff is delicious, not just for that special cocktail party!)
-Lurpak - Butter
-Dofino - Havarti (produced in Wisconsin
A Deeper Look has a much more comprehensive list.
It is important that we stand up to the Mohammedans. Buy Danish! Screw the Mohammedans! Don't be a Dhimmi!
Ali Sina at faithfreedome.org weighs in on the Palestinian vote. My feelings are similar. I saw Bush's 'light unto the Mohamedans' project described today as a 'catastrophic success.' I think that is a great soundbite and pretty much sums up the results. I wish it could have worked, but it didn't. It is time for Bush and Condi to throw out all these Muslim apologists and dhimmwitted Islamic experts and get some people in there who really understand Islam. No more 'religion of peace' deception. Is it time to start believing your lying eyes.
The Palestinians Have Spoken
This election, more than anything else, tells us who the Palestinians are and where they stand in regards to terrorism.
Bush presses for democracy in Islamic countries as if democracy is panacea. Democracy is however a double edge sword. Democracy without responsibility can lead to tyranny. There is nothing more dangerous than putting the power in the hands of a people who are not responsible.
In countries where people are Islamists, democracy cannot take root. Before we can promote democracy, the Islamic ethos must be replaced with the rule of law, respect for the rights of the minorities and the separation of religion from government. In other worlds these countries must be deislamized.
Bush may have all the good intentions in the world but he does not understand the idiosyncrasy of Muslims. His efforts of trying to impose democracy in Islamic countries are not going to work and in fact they will backfire causing more damage than good. You can’t build too high without a foundation. The foundation for democracy in Islamic countries simply does not exist. The America 's fiasco in Somali should have been enough to make them see that democracy can't be imposed on people who do not want it. The democracies in Afghanistan and in Iraq will fall, as soon as America pulls its troops out of these countries.
Yes, democracy is what the Islamic countries need most. But before democracy can take root, Islam must be weeded out.
I was a believer and of course one who walks blindly in his faith – wasn't my fault – I was trained to be so. No questions could be asked that I or others felt were in any way offensive to or doubtful of Islam. I couldn't ask if what was written in the Koran was right or wrong – I had no right to ask and in the same way I couldn't ask why a young kid had to stay hungry the whole day if he didn't want to. Maybe I didn't want to either because I had never done so before and neither my parents had trained me so; my teachers being all Moslems were no different either. I had no freedom at all and no say in the matter – not just me but all Moslems. I knew I had to do it because Allah had ordered it.
After this time, all my excuses of being young were ignored. I was a 'man' now – one who could get married and have children (Islam thinks a 10-12 year old boy is a man and an 8-10 year old girl is a woman). But thank God my parents were smart enough to not get me a girl at that time (I am still unmarried and very happy with that status). Although I was taught to say 'Bismallah-ar-rahman-ar-raheem' (it means 'in the name of Allah, most gracious, most merciful) before everything that I started since I was 4 years old but now I was told to say it out loud too so that other people could hear it and be impressed of the beauty of Islam. I didn't know the phrase's meaning at the time but I said it happily. Before every meal – whenever my siblings didn't appear to be repeating the phrase – I said it out loud, 'Bismallah…' was my cry and everyone after me repeated it. Each time I did it, I got a pat on my back from my parents for being a 'true Moslem'. I was being a pious 'man' by considering myself a real slave to Allah. If I wanted to be a true Moslem – I had to think of myself as a slave of Allah and whatever he said – I had to bow my head and follow it. I wasn't sad at doing all this – I was happy.
My upbringing in a very devout Moslem family trained me so well, that when I was some 13 years old, I came to my father and said, 'Dad, one day I want to fight for Palestinians against the Israelis and kill all the Jews.' My father smiled and said, 'Great son, those Jews should all be killed – I will not object if you chose the path of Jihad because it is the best thing to do.' After some days, in our neighborhood, a young man, some 23 years old, had died in Kashmir, he was there to fight the Indians. They called it Jihad (they still do) and when he died they titled him a 'martyr'. I went to the house of that person with my father and his parents were celebrating. They were distributing sweets and saying, 'our son is in paradise!' My dad and I congratulated the parents of that young man too. The scene was like someone was getting married there. I came back – and this day I was more willing to go to Israel to fight (we didn't call it Israel; we called it 'occupied Palestine').
Everyday, I would dream of killing some Jews and going to paradise. It was not about the virgins at the time, I must admit, I learned about the virgin stuff later. Rather, it was all about being close to Mohammed, who is praised more in Islam than Allah.
Now all I had to do was wait till I was 15 because, for some reason, the Jihadi groups in Pakistan that sent jihadi recruits to Palestine and Kashmir didn't take kids younger than 15. Even my mother didn't object to me going to Palestine, even though she loved me (and still does) a lot. I was certain I would go there eventually. I knew I would kill someone and then get killed, I wanted to get killed, I wanted to follow Mohammed in everything he taught and did. One of the prayers Mohammed is said to have taught is, 'Allah, give me the status of a martyr' and a martyr was a one who fought other people for Allah's sake and died.
Days passed by and during this time my father went to Dubai to establish his business there. I discussed almost everything with my dad and now he was gone. I was left alone and it made me very sad. But I tried to handle it as best I could.
Click here to read Part Four
Saturday, January 28, 2006
Professor of Lying Joseph Ellis, a Mount Holyoke history professor who got caught lying bigtime about his mythical Vietname service, doesn't think 9/11 was a major event in history. In today's NYT, Finding a Place for 9/11 in American History, he writes:
Whether or not we can regard Sept. 11 as history, I would like to raise two historical questions about the terrorist attacks of that horrific day. My goal is not to offer definitive answers but rather to invite a serious debate about whether Sept. 11 deserves the historical significance it has achieved.
My first question: where does Sept. 11 rank in the grand sweep of American history as a threat to national security? By my calculations it does not make the top tier of the list, which requires the threat to pose a serious challenge to the survival of the American republic
Here is my version of the top tier: the War for Independence, where defeat meant no United States of America; the War of 1812, when the national capital was burned to the ground; the Civil War, which threatened the survival of the Union; World War II, which represented a totalitarian threat to democracy and capitalism; the cold war, most specifically the Cuban missile crisis of 1962, which made nuclear annihilation a distinct possibility.
Sept. 11 does not rise to that level of threat because, while it places lives and lifestyles at risk, it does not threaten the survival of the American republic, even though the terrorists would like us to believe so.
You can continue to read his drivel here. Notice he never mentions Mohamedans or jihad? Oh, that threat. But it is nowhere near the threat of Hitler and we have way, way overreacted: '.. It is completely understandable that those who lost loved ones on that date will carry emotional scars for the remainder of their lives. But it defies reason and experience to make Sept. 11 the defining influence on our foreign and domestic policy. History suggests that we have faced greater challenges and triumphed, and that overreaction is a greater danger than complacency.' Oh no, we have refused to be dhimmis! Is that what you want, Ellis. Us to submit to these 7th century clowns and their death cult?
Why are historians so ignorant of Islam's history? 9/11 was the 'big bang' to Americans, even though many seem to have that day fade in their mind.
He seems to miss the point. 9/11 was the milestone event when the West turned to look at a very old enemy in its face. The last time the West was threatened with collapse by the jihad was at the Gates of Vienna, 1683. Even so, five years later, our leaders struggle to understand that Islam is, at its core, a mandate to destroy all infidels then, and only then, will the world, a Muslim world, be at peace.
Prior to 9/11, the Mohamedans had only nicked the west, but 9/11 was a major wound. It didn't destroy America as Ellis seems to need, a cataclysmic event. He mixes events with wars and makes an unfair comparison. You can't compare the event of 9/11 to the Revolutionary War, 1812 War, Civil War, or WWII. Now you can compare the 'war on jihad' to these wars. Are we not in a struggle of survival with the Mohamedans? Yes we are. Oh, I know our leaders want to remain in denial. But ignorance too?
Ellis is like a John Esposito, a supreme Dhimwit lying to the Infidels, but he doesn't get as much money and praise from the Mohamedans as Esposito. Try harder Ellis. I am sure they will come to love you as they do all useful idiots. If Ellis would like to learn more about Islam, which I doubt, I recommend Andrew Bostom's book Legacy of Jihad. But I know he never would, Bostom is not a professor of history, and everyone knows you need to be an official professor of history or religion to be legitimate. Right? Right!
More on that Liar Ellis from Mount Holyoke ">from the President of Mount Holyoke's Desk. Apparently he is still there. You just can't get rid of these tenured professors I guess.:
First, as President of the College, I strongly rebuke Professor Ellis for his lie about his military experience in his course entitled "The Vietnam War and American Culture" as well as with colleagues and others. Perpetuated over many years, his lie about himself clearly violates the ethics of our profession and the integrity we expect of all members of our community. Even though his fabrication appears to have been an aside in an otherwise responsible, intellectually challenging course that immersed students in a crucial chapter of U.S. history, it was a particularly egregious failing in a teacher of history. Misleading students is wrong and nothing can excuse it. Professor Ellis illegitimately appropriated an authority that was not his and abused his students' trust. His misrepresentation damaged collegial relations within the College and hurt the Mount Holyoke community and others outside it.
Second, Professor Ellis will be suspended for one year without pay. In addition, he has agreed to step down from his endowed chair until such time as the Trustees may wish to reinstate it. The year away should give him and the College time for reflection and repair. This sanction is consistent with our honor code for students and its emphasis on education, reflection, and ultimately restoration to an honorable place in our community. Professor Ellis has accepted the College's censure and sanctions. He has apologized to me personally and has expanded his earlier public apology. His statement will be posted, along with this letter, on the Mount Holyoke Web site.
There's plenty more, just google.
You know, the NYT has truly become the mad aunt in the attic. Makes a lot of racket and makes no sense.
I turned seven and then it was time for me to start praying the Moslem way. Standing up, bending forward, then standing up again and prostrating then sitting down and repeating the whole process was what I was taught to do. I didn't understand the concept but I did it because Allah said so. By the age of 10 I was fully trained in Islam and had to regularly attend the Friday prayers, and I was supposed to offer the rest of the prayers, i.e. five times everyday too. I tried that but could never do it because, after all, I was a mere child.
When I went to the mosque – the cleric there talked in Arabic. I didn't understand Arabic because I lived in a company compound where there weren't any Arabs, just Pakistanis, Indians and some westerners. My dad used to explain the cleric's speech to me afterwards so I would understand and be a more devout Moslem. Most often said was something like 'death to Israel' – my father of course explained that the Jews had conquered 'our' land, and we hated them for that and all the Jews were to be killed. Hitler was highly praised in Saudi Arabia too (I think he still is – don't know for sure, I have been out of Saudi for about 10 years now). I was taught to hate the Jews too and love what Palestinians were doing (this was serious stuff in 1995 too). I was taught that the Jihad was the best way to heaven. And no, Moslems don’t mean jihad as 'an inner struggle with one's own desires'. Jihad means Holy War, which the Koran mandates for all Moslems so that they 'kill all non-Moslems'. I was told that the Jews were to be killed because they had committed wrong doings against the prophet Mohammed and so the Christians too because of the Crusades.
Oh and as is perceived in the west, no – Islam doesn't distinguish between men, women and children. Anyone born out of Islam is a non-Moslem and, therefore, can be killed. Only if the non-Moslems surrender to Islamic supremacy, they are given two options, which are 'Embrace Islam' or 'Die'. Sometimes a third option is granted to the infidels, which is 'Pay Jizya Tax' which is not like income tax at all but is a punitive tax of ‘protection’ applied only on non-Moslems living under Islamic rule. Along with that, non Moslems are rendered as 2nd class citizens, forbidden from owning property, and subjected to many other humiliations (see my earlier post on The Pact of Omar for more on these humiliating status for infidels, also called Dhimmitude). If the unbeliever embraces Islam, only then are they are forgiven. Also, if the infidels refuse to convert to Islam, then Moslems are allowed by their religion to take the infidel wives and children as their own.
Fortunately for me – I only spent 10 years in Saudi Arabia – the state where the sword is often used to sever the heads of people guilty of the 'crime' of thinking anything contrary to Islamic ideas. After that, we moved to Pakistan and lived in a conservative Islamic town near Islamabad. Pakistan, being my parents' homeland and a Moslem country, was (said my parents) the best country for me and my siblings to spend our teenage years in.
The same religious education begun in Saudi Arabia continued in Pakistan – the same training, with Friday prayers, but another thing was added – the Ramadan, a one month period of daytime fasting that is required for all Moslems. Now I was old enough to stay hungry the whole day and eat like crazy in the evening. I was only 10 years old – usually Ramadan process for a Moslem starts at age 12, but my parents judged me ready a full two years early. I wasn't told why people stayed hungry all day at the time, but when I turned 12 my parents sat me down and explained the 'value' of Ramadan. They said that it trains Moslems to be more patient and it is a good deed which helps a Moslem get to paradise. Of course, hearing this made me happy – because I had this urge in me to be a perfect Moslem. I took every word about Ramadan my parents told me to heart.
Click here to read Part Three
Friday, January 27, 2006
The following post is my testimony on how I converted out of the death-cult of Islam into Christianity. It was a very long journey which I undertook just to find the truth and I am happy that finally I did. I wanted to share this testimony publicly because I want people to know what Islam’s true colors are and to show what it's like being born in a Moslem family in Saudi Arabia. I feel I have a duty to do so too. I want to show how the horrors of Islam change people’s lives, break relationships and destroy homes—these are the experiences that might not be fully understood in the west. I hope my testimony helps save lives both spiritually and physically and in the meantime I hope I don’t get caught in Islam’s deadly embrace. You will know why I say that once you read this.
My journey from my birth in Islam to the one out of it is kind of strange and very long. It didn't all happen in one day – I didn't see a special light or anything to show me the way out of Islam. It took me almost four years of research and study to conclude I was on the wrong path. But the sad thing about it was that this path was so dear to me that I couldn't just shun it and start a new life. It was about changing everything I had lived for. Let me take you on a journey with me here through my life – I hope you do learn something – something that is very important for you to learn because if you ignore this – you put yourself in the same danger I am in right now.
This story starts with my birth in a Saudi hospital in Riyadh (Saudi Arabia's capital). I was born in late summer, 1985. The youngest of my father's children – completing his family – he was very happy upon my arrival into the world, and so was my mother. Right when I was born, my parents recited the Moslem 'call to prayer' (this is an Islamic practice) – 'Allah is great...there is no god beside Allah and Mohammed is his apostle...' – and from that moment on I was a Moslem. I was supposed to be brought up as a Moslem – my parents were to teach me all the Moslem values and when of the right age – I was supposed to live my life according to them. My parents of course took the challenge because it was their religious duty. I was named – according to the Islamic custom – on the 7th day of my life.
Since I don't remember almost anything about my infancy (of course no normal human ever does) – I am going to start with my car accident which I remember like it was yesterday. It was in September – I had recently started school. I ran out to get in the car that morning; I jumped in the car but it started moving and I fell down – it ran over my right leg – it was broken. My dad rushed me to a hospital nearby and got a cast on my leg, and I came home. I was treated very well at the hospital but my mother wasn't satisfied. She called Pakistan (her native country, my dad's too and I hold its passport) and asked for some weird medicine with some Koranic verses written on it. She fed me that medicine day and night – after 3 months I was healed and she and my father attributed it to Allah's miracle and I was told to thank God for it every second of my life too because 'Allah' saved me. From that day on – I remember thinking everyday that nothing happens if Allah doesn't want it happening and so whatever I did – I said 'insha'Allah' (if Allah wills it) and this – I believed – made the thing to happen. I was taught that I was nothing but that Allah was doing everything. I was just another tool he was using – I was his slave and I had to submit myself to Allah's will. Being a Moslem – there is no question that I did all that.
Thursday, January 26, 2006
The rump "Palestinian state" has, with a healthy amount of US taxpayer dollars, managed to run the semblance of an election today. And the winner of today's electoral contest?
A group of mass murderers named Hamas.
It can't get any more official than that. "Palestine" is now a official terrorist state, joining the infamous ranks of Syria, Iran, and North Korea. While the losing party "Fatah" at least gave lip service to the "peace process" to the west, Hamas makes its intentions obvious enough that even the most dim witted observer can figure out where they stand.
Israel, says Hamas, is to be destroyed. By any means necessary. The suicide bombings, mortar and rocket attacks, and whatever else the Muslims can pull off, are going to continue. And this is without a doubt the will of the "Palestinian" people--Hamas now has its blood-soaked mandate. I don't think the gurus at State quite had this outcome in mind with their 'pro-democracy' party line.
Of course, Hamas has a lot of friends in Damascus and Tehran (officially) and most everywhere else in Dar al Islam (unofficially). Iran, its coffers flush from ever increasing oil prices, just wrote Hizbollah (Hamas' big brother) a check for a cool $100 million this year alone. And that kind of money can buy a lot of suicide bomb belts.
Mohammed would undoubtedly be pleased with Hamas and their backers.
Israel has its own elections in March. So unless Sharon makes a miraculous recovery, Hamas' victory is very likely to propel Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu back into the Prime Minister's office. Netanyahu, the hawk of Israeli politics, has made his opinion on Iran's nuclear weapons program quite clear. Israeli Defense Minister Mofaz said it best in a recent speech: "If the United Nations and the international community fail to act, Israel will do so." Israel can be trusted to do as they say.
The coming war has taken a step closer.
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Nick Griffin is blogging from England as his hatespeech trial edges toward the summation. It is so ridiculous, but this is the new oppressive state of England where Political Correctness vows to snuff out those politically incorrect citizens. I used to respect England but when you realize that citizens in England are afraid to criticize the Mohammedans because they may be arrested, it is not the England I respected.
Check out Nick's blog before England tries to shut it down. Since it is on Google, that should be interesting.
Free Speech On Trial
It was Thomas Jefferson (the then American ambassador to France) actually who, in 1785, first spoke out against paying the Jizya tax to these war-mongering sub humans, but no one listened to him (after all, he was in France). In 1800, Jefferson was elected to the presidency and then he finally had his chance to deal with the situation properly. The pasha of Tripoli—thinking Jefferson was just another impotent infidel—haughtily asked Mr. Jefferson to pay him $225,000 in Jizya, but Jefferson refused. As a result:
“…in May of 1801, the pasha declared war on the United States, not through any formal written documents, but by cutting down the flagstaff in front of the U.S. Consulate. Morocco, Algiers, and Tunis soon followed their ally.”
This was the start of Islam’s first war against America, in what would later also become known as the ‘Barbary Wars’. But Jefferson wasn’t some chicken scared to death, and the bully of Tripoli’s posturing wasn’t going to sway him. Hence, President Jefferson:
“…sent a group of frigates to defend American interests in the Mediterranean, and informed Congress…they did authorize the President to instruct the commanders of armed vessels of the United States to seize all vessels and goods of the Bay of Tripoli and also to cause to be done all such other acts of precaution or hostility as the state of war will justify."
Realizing that the infidels were not about to promptly pay the jizya, Tripoli lost its allies (except Morocco) when they saw the American show of force. These guys kept fighting till 1805 but that’s when even the Moslems of Tripoli realized that they had to sign a hudna (truce) with the infidel Americans. Hence, the pasha of Tripoli signed a treaty—article two of which goes like this…
"The Bashaw of Tripoli shall deliver up to the American Squadron now off Tripoli, all the Americans in his possession; and all the Subjects of the Bashaw of Tripoli now in the power of the United States of America shall be delivered up to him; and as the number of Americans in possession of the Bashaw of Tripoli amounts to Three Hundred Persons, more or less; and the number of Tripolino Subjects in the power of the Americans to about, One Hundred more or less; The Bashaw of Tripoli shall receive from the United States of America, the sum of Sixty Thousand Dollars, as a payment for the difference between the Prisoners herein mentioned." (Bashaw = Pasha)
So, Americans ended up paying again even though they won the war, you know why? Because Allah still demands the Jizya tax in one way or another. They forgot to exterminate the barbarians (big mistake).
Two years after the treaty was signed, the Islamic looting of the kuffirs started again. The Americans paid Jizya for awhile, but war soon broke out once more. In 1815 the US Congress authorized the deployment of naval power against the barbarian pirates. Americans used the barbarian tactics against them and took hundreds of prisoners. Moslems, helpless (maybe because the flight of 5000 angels got delayed), lost the war again and had to pay an amount of $10,000 in damages to the Americans.
Another treaty was signed again of course, but this time, America’s victory was decisive. No longer did they have to pay the Jizya tax. Allah’s power was subdued. Soon after that the superpower Brits and equally powerful French got all brave and began attacking the sources and bases of the Moslem pirates directly. It’s another old European trick--they look for the Americans to take action, criticize them, and then proceed to do the same thing in a very bad manner.
Source: 'Barbary Wars'.
Notice that America didn’t demand any reparations or whatever in return after it won the war. America, having safeguarded its shipping interests in the area, went home. This historical event sends us a very clear message; Americans are peaceful, and Moslems were, are, and always will be sub human barbarians.
So to answer the very famous leftist question, ‘don’t you know that it was the Americans that made these peace-loving Moslems hijack their religion of peace?’ No, it was the Moslems who attacked the Americans first, way back in the 18th century. Moslems committed barbaric atrocities and made the peace-loving Americans take action against them. Who attacked who first? America is not the aggressor--it is the other way around. Leftists, you got it wrong—you had it wrong all along.
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
Is Islam’s beef with America all about oil? Is it because of American support of Israel? Is it because America is an imperialist nation trying to invade and control every country? We can’t miss hearing these sorts of arguments in the media constantly these days. Be it the Moslems, the Europeans, or the leftists in the United States itself – you will hear arguments that assert these very viewpoints, with nary an argument against it.
Rarely if ever does the mainstream media entertain any notions contrary to this basic talking point--‘We, the west – especially the United States – are the bad guys and the rest – especially the Moslems – are good’. And the conclusion that we are supposed to draw from all this? It’s usually something along the lines of ‘It is America that has made these nice, peace-loving, self-sacrificing Moslems hijack their religion of peace which is known as Islam.’
But is this the truth? Are Islam and Moslems the good guys and everyone else bad? Have we really been playing the Great Satan all along?
Many seem to have forgotten this but there was a time when America was an infant. It didn’t need oil (no internal combustion engines in that bygone era), there was no Israel, and America didn’t possess overwhelming military power. The newborn country had just won its independence from the then reigning world power Britain and was trying to stand up on its own feet. But even then it had an enemy—an enemy that wasn’t attacked by America first, that America didn’t have any serious dealings with—an enemy that still looms large to this day.
You guessed it right, Islam attacks us now—and it attacked us back then too. Not because America had asked for oil or backed Israel, but because it was a duty on the Moslems of that time (as it is now) to subdue the non Moslems and demand from them the Jizya tax. And strangely enough, they managed to do so for some time.
Once America won its independence in 1783, word of this far-away event eventually reached the Islamic city state of Tripoli (now in Libya) and its barbarian (Moslem) allies of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. These Moslems quickly decided to impose the Jizya tax on all American ships, ‘ordering’ the new nation to pay the Moslems the ‘Jizya’ tax, or else its ships in the Mediterranean will be looted and plundered. Anyone who has read up on Mohammed and Islam knows this is exactly what the ‘prophet’ did to the Koreish tribe—the only difference being, Mohammed did it on land and the North Africa Mohammedans did it at sea.
The Islamic pirates of the Barbary Coast had not issued empty threats. They actually took two American ships hostage in 1785 and demanded that the US Government pay (for the time) the extraordinary sum of US $60,000, or else they’d slaughter the crew (does any of this sound familiar?) Americans—following the European convention of that time—of course paid the Moslem pirates the ransom money, and they got the ships and crews back. Europeans who considered themselves big powers were well used to paying the ‘Jizya’ tax to their devout Moslem neighbors.
These ‘peace-loving’ Moslems lost little time in extracting top dollar from this new infidel government calling itself the United States. That’s why the American government at the time allotted a certain amount of money to pay for the Jizya tax every year which, sometimes—even in those days, hit the $1 million mark annually.
“Payments in ransom and tribute to the (Moslem) privateering states amounted to 20 percent of United States government annual revenues in 1800.”When the ambassador of Tripoli to Britain was asked by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams in a meeting in London regarding the reason for applying such a tax on a nation that had never wronged Tripoli (or any other Moslem state) in anyway the following answer was received:
“That it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as risoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
All of this sounds drearily familiar to anyone that watches TV or reads a newspaper in 2006, but very few people know that America had the same problem with the Moslems some 200 yrs earlier. And then, just as now, we had Europeans who would pay any ransom and give ‘respect’ to any bully or thug that threatened to look cross-eyed at them. Whether its 1806 or 2006, the ‘nuanced’ and ‘sophisticated’ Europeans seem incapable of understanding that sometimes brute force is the only option—and against an implacable enemy like Islam, it’s the ONLY option. (To be continued)
Source: Barbary Wars
With the Mohammadens still in such a tizzy fit with the artwork of the Danes--five months after the cartoons were first published--we thought it was high time that Pedestrian Infidel jumped on the bandwagon. I think the one above is my personal favorite.
Check out all of 'Mohammed the Cartoon Hero' pieces here (hat tip: Felis).
Monday, January 23, 2006
The Saudis are upset about the cartoons too. They keep on thinking this is something horrible and the world should be outraged. Wrong. They just don't get it. I can't wait for the UN to pass some ridiculous statement (the US will abstain I hope) criticizing the world making fun of Mo. The Useless Nations that we pay for will condemn the West for making fun of Mo and the cult that came out of his ass and has plagued the world for 1400 years. Who'd thunk it?
Kingdom Blasts Sacrilegious Cartoons
P.K. Abdul Ghafour, Arab News
JEDDAH, 24 January 2006 — Saudi Arabia yesterday denounced European newspapers that published cartoons denigrating the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and said such spiteful actions would spread hatred and animosity among people of different faiths.
“The Council of Ministers expressed the Kingdom’s condemnation of what is published by certain European newspapers defiling the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh),” the Saudi Press Agency said. The Cabinet was referring to the caricatures published by some Danish and Norwegian dailies.
The Cabinet meeting, chaired by the Regent Prince Sultan at Yamamah Palace in Riyadh, expressed anguish and surprise at the inadequate reaction from governments and people in those countries against such vilifications, despite their economic, political and cultural relations with the Islamic world.
In a similar statement, the Shoura Council also condemned the attacks of Danish and Norwegian newspapers on the Prophet and said such publications would unleash communal hatred. [Unlike the Mohammedans?]
“The acrimonious cartoons on the Prophet hurt the feelings of Muslims across the world and gave false information about a great personality, who was selected by God to become His last messenger,” the statement said.
The 150-member Shoura Council urged the Western world to read the history of the Prophet and learn about his noble qualities, morals and ideals. It said the Prophet opposed extremism and corruption. [They just don't quit! What do you call a person who believes his own lies? A Muslim]
“Those who publish such cartoons do not know the consequences; they will spread hatred and division and create animosity between communities and religions,” the Shoura said. [Oooh, scareee]
The statement rejected publication of such obnoxious cartoons in the name of freedom of expression. “All constitutions and laws in the world call for the respect of Prophets and divine religions,” it added. [No they don't. Let's see you sell that lie to the West.]
Shoura Council Chairman Dr. Saleh Bin-Humaid urged intellectuals and peace-loving people of the world to stop such vilifications against the Prophet of Islam and punish its perpetrators.
The Shoura urged the Danish and Norwegian parliaments to stand against the anti-Islam campaigns in their countries.
The 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference, the European Commission and many international Islamic organizations have condemned the printing of the provocative cartoons.
(Note this little piece at the end about the welfare state for the lazy built on oil money. SRs are about 3.75 to one US $, or about a quarter for each SR)
Referring to the Royal Decree increasing the maximum social security allocations to families, the Cabinet said a single-member family will get SR9,400 annually, while a family with two members will get SR12,500, three members SR15,600, four members SR18,700, five members SR21,800 (about 6 thousand US $), six members SR24,900 and seven members SR28,000. The new allocations will be effective from Jan. 31, 2006. ...
I've touched on the coming war with Iran in a previous post. Having mulled over the matter, I'm ready to venture forth into this topic again. And I hope you have a strong stomach for what you are about to read, because it's not pretty.
Here's what a superb post over at Winds of Change had to say, in part, about the coming war:
I personally believe that we're very likely to see at least 10 million dead in the Middle East within the next two decades, with an upper limit near 100 million. I do not believe pre-emptive action will be taken against Iran. I do, however, believe the extremist mullahs in Iran mean exactly what they say. They are steeped in an ideology that believes suicide/murder to be the holiest and most moral act possible. They have been diligent in laying strategic plans for an offensive Islamic War against Israel, America and the West. Plans backed by 25 years of action, and stated no less clearly than Mein Kampf. I believe that Ahmedinajad's talk of 12th Imam end-times and halos around his head at the UN aren't the ravings of an isolated nut, simply an unusually public (and unusually noticed) expression of beliefs that are close to mainstream within their ruling class.
War is inevitable at this point, period. That's the simple and terrifying truth. And it could be as bloody as World War Two, which killed around 100 million. I am inclined to agree with the above casualty estimate, which puts the mind numbing number of 100 million dead at its upper limit. Armageddon indeed.
It is merely a question of when, how, and on whose terms the war will commence between Iran, and its stated enemies, namely the US, Israel and the west. Diplomacy is useless, and always was -- all the words and proposals and UN press conferences is going to be nothing but smoke and mirrors. Even sanctions, if it makes it through the UNSC, is going to (at best) only slow down the mullahs in Teheran. Only force will stop the mullahs from getting Allah's bomb.
And, like Winds of Change has said above, I cannot see anyone with both the will and capability to stop Iran's nuclear weapons program. Israel lacks the capability and the US lacks the will. No one has both. There isn't enough time to subvert the unpopular mullahs. Even airstrikes would only slow down the program, not stop it. Invasion is the only remedy that will stop Allah's bomb, and that could only be done by the US, if it fully mobilized and had the political will to do something this audacious. But the US doesn't possess the political will to act, I am becoming increasingly convinced.
So, sometime this year, or next year at the latest, Iran will possess the Bomb. It may even already have it now. What then?
Well, it gets worse.
Once Iran has the Bomb, other less than savory, unstable regimes in the Middle East will want it too. Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt could all quickly find the rationale to have their own nuclear weapons development programs up and run within a year or two after Iran becomes nuclear armed. With a huge spike in WMD proliferation right around the corner, and terrorist supporting states gaining these WMDs, the odds of Islamic terror getting the bomb is going to be around 99% in the short to midterm. No matter what happens to Iran, such technology will be set loose upon the world, especially among its more unstable violent terrorist circles, and the technology cannot be called back. A world with nuclear terrorism is much much closer now that ever before.
And this is all assuming that Iran won't use Allah's bomb to unilaterally launch its long planned war against its hated enemies, the 'Great Satan' (the US) and the 'Little Satan' (Israel). Would Israel launch its own nuclear weapons pre-emptively, or would they not launch until Iran's MIRVs were inbound? If Israel cannot, for whatever reason, pull off a nuclear counterstrike, the US, with its huge nuclear forces with thousands of warheads, certainly would. Longstanding US policy states that a WMD attack on any US ally will be grounds for 'response in kind' upon the aggressor. Iran could wipe out Tel Aviv, or perhaps London or New York with a terrorist-delivered bomb. But tracing back such attacks, to its source of manufacture, is a straightforward forensic procedure, and the finger would quickly point back to Teheran. Any of these horrific scenarios would result in Iran's utter destruction under a deluge of American nuclear missiles -- WMD replied to 'in kind'.
Is Iran's leadership rational? Do they know what is likely to happen if they launch a nuclear war? Do the Iranian people fully comprehend the suicidal Atomic Adventure that their government is now engaged in?
The destruction of one or two nation states in a nuclear exchange is not the only horror in this increasingly unavoidable doomsday scenario. Nuclear armed terrorists, worldwide sustained economic recession, collapse of the hugely expensive Iraq project, permanent new intrusive security measures in every facet of our lives worldwide, anarchy, disease, starvation and nuclear fallout for millions of survivors in the war zones, huge influxes of refugees, and on and on. This is just the tip of the iceberg.
The sword will be drawn, and dark days are ahead. Pray for a miracle.
Sunday, January 22, 2006
All Things Beautiful has a post today about France's appeasement. Alexandra has gotten creative with Photoshop and updated this classic painting. It's pretty creative so I am posting here for posterity. Visit All Things Beautiful for the entire story.
Treating the issue of Iran's alleged nuclear ambition as a hot potato, the European trio of Britain, Germany and France, has decided to pass it on to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and thence to the United Nations' Security Council.
"Our talks with Iran have reached a dead end," says Germany's new foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
The truth, however, is the trio's talks with Iran, which lasted three years, started at a dead-end. And the Europeans knew that those talks would get nowhere.
The talks began when Iran admitted that it had been lying to the IAEA and violating the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) for 18 years but promised not to do so again.
Pakistan and the Muslim world are still reverberating from last week's 'decapitation strike' on Al Qaeda in Pakistan's lawless tribal hinterlands. The CIA's robotic air force was apparently the weapon of choice here--something that sounds to me like a plot device straight out of some military science fiction novel. Welcome to war in the 21st century, folks.
One might think, with the alleged Religion of Peace being as it supposedly is, Muslims would be happy with the removal of some of the terrorist henchmen that supposedly defame their peaceful religion. Well, we can't have any approval of anything the evil Americans do, especially in Dar al Islam, can we?
Pakistan tells U.S. not to repeat attackRemember, friends, good ole' President Pervez (AKA 'Perv') is an indispensible ally of ours in the "War on Terror", remember that? It's Foggy Bottom's (and the White House) party line. Well, Perv can go to hell....if we spot another high value target in his miserable country, we sure as hell aint gonna ask anyone in Islamabad for permission first. And the masses of Muslims in his country are, of course, are always quick to get 'outraged' at anything the infidels do. I care little about the hair-trigger sensibilities of the Muslim street.
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) — Pakistan's president told a senior American official Saturday the United States must not repeat airstrikes like the one that apparently was aimed at al-Qaeda but killed civilians in a remote village, as officials sought to soothe public outrage over the attack.
The strike, which hit three homes in the mountainous Bajur tribal region, is believed to have killed at least four of al-Zawahri's close associates and at least 13 civilians, including women and children.
Bush famously said, more than four years ago, right after 9-11, that "we will draw no distinction between the terrorists and those who harbor them." So, the death of the civilians in this strike, while regrettable, means the death of civilians who were clearly, directly involved in sheltering same said terrorists. It's a bummer but we don't have anything to be sorry about--we are at war.
Here's a breakdown on the Al-Qaeda terrorist leaders that are believed to have been killed in the attack on 13 January in Damadola, Pakistan:
- Abu Khabab al-Masri (WMD committee head)
- Abd Rahman al-Masri al-Maghribi (al-Zawahiri’s son-in-law, al-Qaeda commander)
- Abu Ubeidah al-Masri (Kunar operations chief)
- Marwan al-Suri (Waziristan operations chief)
- Khalid Habib (southeastern Afghanistan commander)
- Abdul Hadi al-Iraqi (southwestern Afghanistan commander)
This is an impressive tally of enemy operatives and leaders to be eliminated in one operation. All was accomplished in one strike on a supposed 'dinner party' that was (we were assured by our Pakistani 'friends') packed with no one but innocent civilians. Too bad the spooks missed Al Qaeda's number two (Zawahiri's survival of this event has not yet been confirmed), but congrats to our beleagured CIA for obtaining and then acting promptly on some grade-A intel. Well done!
The war continues.
We've decided to go with a new look here at PI. Although we've only been around since August 2005, we're getting a lot of new eyeballs on the site nowadays, so we thought a fresh look was in order. The site remodel kept me busy the past couple of days, but everything should be up to speed now. Hope you like it!
We look forward to continuing our mission here at PI for as long as it takes. Y'all come on back now, ya hear?
Friday, January 20, 2006
We've seen this before in Australia, Pakistan and Indonesia at trial for terrorists. Now it's England's turn. The logic of course is that the Koran is the perfect word, God's words unaltered ever, and if he says kill the infidels, pillage and burn their lands, it can't be wrong, therefore Hamza cannot be wrong. 'I am just following Islam.' is the defense. Now all those TaqiyyaMasters, who have been busy spinning their web of lies that Islam is peaceful and only defensive in wars, will have to burn the midnight oil. Do the infidels even care in England?
'Offensive' remarks taken straight from Koran, defence says
By Sean O’Neill,BBC
COPIES of the Koran were handed to the jurors in the Abu Hamza trial yesterday as his defence argued that some of the cleric’s “offensive” statements were drawn directly from Islam’s holy book.
Edward Fitzgerald, QC, for the defence, said that Abu Hamza’s interpretation of the Koran was that it imposed an obligation on Muslims to do jihad and fight in the defence of their religion. He said that the Crown case against the former imam of Finsbury Park Mosque was “simplistic in the extreme”.
He added: “It is said he was preaching murder, but he was actually preaching from the Koran itself.” [You cannot make this stuff up!]
Mr Fitzgerald cited two verses of the book that Abu Hamza would rely on, among many others, as theological justification for the words that had led to him being charged. They were Chapter 2, verse 216 and Chapter 9, verse 111. He said that all the great monotheistic religions had scriptures that contained “the language of blood and retribution”.
Abu Hamza’s remarks, which the prosecution alleges amount to an attempt to stir up racial hatred against the Jewish people, were, Mr Fitzgerald said, a reference to the Hadith — sayings of the Prophet Muhammad — in which fighting between Jews and Muslims is predicted.
The Hadith says that the trees will call out to the Muslims “there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him”.
The defence counsel said this was “a highly unusual case” because unlike most prosecutions for incitement to murder it did not involve someone telling a specific person to kill an identifiable individual. [That's true, it's a call to kill ALL nonbelievers. More like Hiler.]
He added: “Mr Hamza has said things that most people will find deeply offensive and hateful. But he is not on trial for describing England as a toilet. There is no crime of simply being offensive.” [But Nick Griffin of the BNP is on trial for being offensive by saying Islam is a evil wicked religion.]
By Johan Zawawi
Centerpiece of Malaysia's 'moderate Muslim' image is the concept of 'Islam Hadhari', which means 'Civilizational Islam'. Malaysia's Prime Minister always trots out this idea in speeches to appreciative and uncritical foreign audiences. The sheer contradiction in terms of this name notwithstanding--there is nothing civilised about Sharia or Islam, but never mind about that for now--just how 'moderate' is Islam in Malaysia nowadays?
First, here are Islam Hadhari's main points, as spelled out by the concept's inventor, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia's first Prime Minister, in 1957:
- Faith and piety in Allah
- Just and trustworthy government
- Freedom and independence to the people
- Mastery of knowledge
- Balanced and comprehensive economic development
- Good quality of life for all
- Protection of the rights of minority groups and women
- Cultural and moral integrity
- Protection of the environment
- A strong defence policy
OK, let's go down the list, point by point.
Point One--Faith and piety in Allah. Well, we all know what Islam's idea of 'piety' is ... keep the kuffar down! Islamic piety means never having to say you're sorry, especially to the infidels.
Point two--Just and trustworthy government. Now who could disagree with this? Of course, Malaysia's Official State Religion (as specified in its Constitution) is Islam, meaning that the entire national government has an official tilt towards Islam, in budgetary priorities, policy, etc. This bias, under Malaysian law, is perfectly legal. Is this 'just'? And just how trustworthy can a government be, when it has massive, systemic problems like corruption, a near-total lack of transparency, and rampant cronyism at its highest levels?
Point three--Freedom and Independence of the people. As this Malaysian High Court case clearly demonstrates, 'freedom' in Malaysia doesn't include the freedom to choose your own religion. Put another way, freedom only works if you want to become a Muslim, and then freedom ends at that point. What if you're 'born' as Muslim? No religious freedom for you either, of course. Other kinds of freedom, such as the freedom to criticize one's own government, freedom of assembly, and freedom of expression, are sharply curtailed under Malaysia's repressive Internal Security Act.
Point four--Mastery of Knowledge. As this lengthy list of censored books in Malaysia shows, there's plenty of knowledge out there in the world that your Muslim and UMNO overlords would rather you not know about nor master. In Malaysia, bad old-fashioned ignorance is preferred.
Point five--Balanced and comprehensive economic development. Sounds great! However, in Malaysia, Malays and other so-called 'Bumiputra' (meaning "sons of the soil") are legally first among equals, and are favoured over non-Malays in all sorts of official ways (lower interest rates on housing loans, easier access to student loans, preferential hiring for government jobs, and more government assistance in general). This is all legal and sanctioned under longstanding Malaysian government policy, as well as the infamous Article 153 in the Malaysian Constitution. Is this balanced?
Point six--Good quality of life for all. Absolutely wonderful...but see point five for the important catch.
Point seven--Protection of....women's rights. The Quran, Mohammed's own teachings, and 14 centuries of Islam make it very clear, that women are not the equals of men. No amount of posturing, or spin, and certainly nothing some Malaysian PM says, is going to change that. And then there's Malaysia's own misogynist 'Islamic Family Law Bill', which makes divorce easier for Muslim men and life in general a lot tougher on Muslim women, which would have certainly pleased Mohammed.
Point eight--Cultural and moral integrity. This point sounds, to me, suspiciously like codewords for keeping Sharia and the Muslim religious police around forever, with the non-Muslim taxpayers stuck footing a healthy chunk of the bill. Malaysia's Religious Police periodically proclaim their intent to continue their mission of moral policing, and 'saving' the nation from evils like handholding, kissing in public, khalwat, etc. Monumental injustices like lifestyle police will never, ever go away, as long as Islam exists in this country.
Point nine--Protection of the environment. Looking around Malaysia, I see clearcutting of its jungle at a breakneck pace, crappy water and air quality, and ineffectual and spotty enforcement of its own environmental laws. When there's money to be made and kickbacks to be received, who cares a wit about the 'environment'? Certainly not some bureaucrats in Putrajaya.
Point ten--A strong defense policy. The Malaysian military and its budget will always be looked after...after all, who makes up the vast majority of military personnel? Malays, and hence Muslims, of course.
Fourteen centuries of trying to 'moderate' Islam have been an abject failure, and so Islam Hadhari has failed just like all the rest. Islam is so ingrained with violence, aggression and intolerance, that any attempt to 'moderate' or purge these elements from the ideology will render Islam unislamic--an unimaginable crime in the eyes of Mohammedans everywhere.
Islam Hadhari is not only an empty promise in the land of its birth, it is also a cheap fraud perpetrated upon the unsuspecting 'infidel' world.
Thursday, January 19, 2006
Now what do the Democrats do? OK, first they fought against renewal of the Patriot Act and succeeded, with the help of a few RINOs. Then, they attacked the NSA for eavesdropping on Islamic terrorists in America. They want to protect the Islamic terrorists from eavesdropping, isn't that what they are saying. No, they just want to make it MORE difficult for our government to eavesdrop. Now today Osama says we're coming at you soon, in your homes, America. I've got an ideal for the Democrats. Sign on to the ACLU and CAIR lawsuit to stop the NSA eavesdropping. It's a surefire vote-getter.
First up in Congress is guess what? The Patriot Act for renewal again. Pull up a chair, stick a Democrat on your stick, and poke it in the fire. It's roaring. Ummmmmm..roasted Democrats. Delicious! Once that fire has died down, then we can roast DemocratWeiners over the immigration reform legislation, a surefire barnburner.
It's going to be an interesting Spring in Washington. I wish the Democrats would reverse the position and try to understand the danger we are in, but they are so obsessed with hating Bush, they would rather perish than agree with me and many other conservatives who are understanding more and more the Islamic threat to our civilization.
Cartoon from the Dr. Fun Site - great site to enjoy a few laughs.
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
I know even now, many (leftists, anti-war types, etc) are going to be saying that I am lying about this whole conversation I talked about in part one. Or they would say that just a small minority of Moslems want to bring back an Islamic Caliphate, or the Ottoman Empire actually gave everybody equal rights, or Mohammed and his companions really did preach peace, and hence the Shariah does too. And if they don’t say all this , then they would certainly say that Mr. Brit is just another Zionist agent sent by the CIA to destroy the reputation of Islam, the religion of peace (yeah right!!!!).
So then, let me present to you an actual list of conditions that the non Moslems were forced to agree to when they lived under the rule of the actual Islamic Caliphate. The caliph that forced these humiliating conditions upon the non-Muslims was none other than Omar, a companion of Mohammed himself. It was called the ‘Caliph Omar’s Pact for ‘Dhimmis’.
The conditions I am about to present were dictated by our dear caliph Omar and were applied on all his non Moslem subjects. First imposed on the Christians, it was later applied on others like the Jews and the pagans too. Before this, the infidels were just killed on sight, so I suppose Omar thought he was being magnanimous with this pact of his. These conditions were in force despite the fact that the non Moslems were paying a special tax called the Jizya tax for their protection. Kind of like a modern-day Mafia scam, or maybe exactly like the Mafia.
This is the ‘equality’ of Islam, if you think this is heaven, you are free to join it.
Articles of the Pact of Omar:
1. We (dhimmis) shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood:
· new monasteries,
· or monks' cells,
2. nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins
3. or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims
4. We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy,
5. nor hide him from the Muslims. We shall not teach the Quran to our children
6. We shall not manifest our religion publicly
7. nor convert anyone to it
8. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it
9. We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and
10. we shall rise from our seats if they wish to sit
11. We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the headgear, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair
12. We shall not speak as they do
13. nor shall we adopt their honorific names
14. We shall not mount on saddles
15. nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our persons
16. We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals
17. We shall not sell fermented drinks
18. We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims
19. We shall only use clappers in our churches very softly
20. We shall not raise our voices in our church services or in the presence of Muslims
21. nor shall we raise our voices when following our dead
22. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets
23. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims
24. We shall not take slave who have been allotted to the Muslims
25. We shall not build houses over-topping the houses of the Muslims
Recently Moslems and leftists have started to question or outright deny the historical existence of this pact (sort of like Moslems denying the Holocaust, which is all the rage nowadays). But the odd thing is – these conditions were actually applied on not only the subjects of the caliph Omar, but also during the reign of later caliphs. You can read about this pact in detail at Pact of Omar. But be forewarned, this source also contains the following sentence as a nod to the leftist/Moslem moonbats:
‘Modern scholars have questioned the authenticity of this agreement…’
Omar’s Pact is the sort of ‘peace’ our enemies mean. Peace for Islam, peace for themselves, and oppression and humiliation for countless others. If Islam conquers the world, long gone will be any system that gives everyone equal status because we’re all equally humans. Mr. Brit’s Caliphate will render infidels as no better than a toy made of plastic – just because we don’t believe in the barbarity that Islam teaches.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Today I met a Moslem from Britain here in Dubai, a man I will refer to here as “Mr. Brit”. He seemed like a very nice human being, he talked and joked around like a very normal person – like you and I might. We went to the food court, had our lunch and sat there for a while talking. He told us that he didn’t pray, didn’t fast and didn’t even read the Koran regularly – in other words he was a liberal Moslem who didn’t take religion seriously at all. So far so good, right?
Then without any warning, this dude started talking about the idea of caliphate. “Mr. Brit” said not only would he like for the Islamic world to combine together as one nation, one country, but he also supported Iran getting its hands on nukes. I wasn’t paying much attention before this but when he said this, I started listening to this dude very intently, and I asked him some direct questions.
My first question was how was this caliphate going to benefit the rest of the world? Mr. Brit said that the caliphate would give ‘all human beings’ equal rights--he kept saying that. We had Hindus with us who were listening to all that he was saying too. So I just asked him what he meant by ‘equal rights’, and he answered that the Koran and Hadiths say that all Moslems are brothers and they should live in harmony.
A second before that, he said ‘all human beings’ were getting equal rights and now it was all about Moslems. He then kept saying ‘in a caliphate Moslems will all be equal, Arabs, non Arabs and everybody else will live as Moslems and there will be no war.’ He addressed and asked the Hindu guys to join in ‘the cause’ and make it happen because this will give everybody equal rights. Then Mr. Brit told them to look back in history for proof, he said in the Ottoman Empire everybody had rights, equal rights but what equal rights did the Ottoman Turks give? He, of course, never said specifically. He just alleged that all were equal Moslems as brothers and sisters, with no difference between Arabs and non–Arabs (oh so that’s equality according to him) and he went on talking about this gibberish.
During this conversation, except for asking two or three questions I was observing this dude very carefully because he was ‘a liberal Moslem’. Leftists love to come up with people claiming that and say ‘whoa, these guys are good guys because they are Moslems, so we should just blame the west for everything.’ According to Mr. Brit, the only ‘humans’ in this world were Moslems because whenever he talked about people getting equal rights he ended up saying Moslems will get equal rights in a caliphate. He never talked about non Muslims having ‘equal rights’ in the caliphate.
This so-called liberal Moslem’s world view, is it really any different than the world view of a hardcore devout Moslem? Where the hell is the difference then? Why call them ‘liberal Moslems’ in the first place when they believe in the same crap the devout Moslems believe in, which is subjugating the world under Islamic rule and power.
And what's even more saddening is that those Hindu dudes were saying ‘Wow!’ when they heard the words ‘equal rights’ and one of them even said ‘I am all for a caliphate’ when he didn’t even know what the caliphate even meant, hell, he couldn’t even pronounce the word. They didn’t know what they were talking about, this reminded me of the leftists in the west – majority of the western people that is – who don’t know what Islam is. How many times do we have to tell them that liberal Islam and devout Islam is all the same. There is no difference between them. (To be continued…).
That didn't take long did it? The ACLU and CAIR teaming up to destroy America, who woulda thunk it? (hat tip: Patrick at Clarity and Resolve)
ACLU Sues to Stop Illegal Spying on Americans, Saying President Is Not Above the Law (1/17/2006)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Prominent Journalists, Nonprofit Groups, Terrorism Experts and Community Advocates Join First Lawsuit to Challenge New NSA Spying Program
NEW YORK – Saying that the Bush administration’s illegal spying on Americans must end, the American Civil Liberties Union today filed a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against the National Security Agency seeking to stop a secret electronic surveillance program that has been in place since shortly after September 11, 2001.
“President Bush may believe he can authorize spying on Americans without judicial or Congressional approval, but this program is illegal and we intend to put a stop to it,” said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. “The current surveillance of Americans is a chilling assertion of presidential power that has not been seen since the days of Richard Nixon.”
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a group of prominent journalists, scholars, attorneys, and national nonprofit organizations (including the ACLU) who frequently communicate by phone and e-mail with people in the Middle East. Because of the nature of their calls and e-mails, they believe their communications are being intercepted by the NSA under the spying program. The program is disrupting their ability to talk with sources, locate witnesses, conduct scholarship, and engage in advocacy. The program, which was first disclosed by The New York Times on December 16, has sparked national and international furor and has been condemned by lawmakers across the political spectrum.
In addition to the ACLU, the plaintiffs in today’s case are:
Authors and journalists James Bamford, Christopher Hitchens and Tara McKelvey
Afghanistan scholar Barnett Rubin of New York University’s Center on International Cooperation and democracy scholar Larry Diamond, a fellow at the Hoover Institution
Nonprofit advocacy groups NACDL, Greenpeace, and Council on American Islamic Relations, who joined the lawsuit on behalf of their staff and membership
"The prohibition against government eavesdropping on American citizens is well-established and crystal clear,” said ACLU Associate Legal Director Ann Beeson, who is lead counsel in ACLU v. NSA. “President Bush's claim that he is not bound by the law is simply astounding. Our democratic system depends on the rule of law, and not even the president can issue illegal orders that violate Constitutional principles.”
According to news reports, President Bush signed an order in 2002 allowing the NSA to monitor the telephone and e-mail communications of "hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States" with persons abroad, without a court order as the law requires. Under the program, the NSA is also engaging in wholesale datamining by sifting through millions of calls and e-mails of ordinary Americans.
Journalist James Bamford, a plaintiff and one of the world’s leading experts on U.S. intelligence and the National Security Agency, said that “the spying program removes a necessary firewall that would prevent the kind of government abuse seen during the Watergate scandal.” Bamford was threatened with prosecution in the 1970s as he prepared to disclose unclassified details about illegal NSA spying on Americans in his book, The Puzzle Palace.
In the legal complaint filed, the ACLU said the spying program violates Americans’ rights to free speech and privacy under the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution.
The ACLU also charged that the program violates the Constitution because President Bush exceeded his authority under separation of powers principles. Congress has enacted two statutes, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and Title III of the federal criminal code, which are “the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance. . . and the interception of domestic wire, oral, and electronic communications may be conducted.”
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Michigan, seeks a court order declaring that the NSA spying is illegal and ordering its immediate and permanent halt. Attorneys in the case are Beeson, Jameel Jaffer, and Melissa Goodman of the national ACLU Foundation, and Michael Steinberg of the ACLU of Michigan.The lawsuit names as defendants the NSA and Lieutenant General Keith B. Alexander, the current the Director of the NSA.
For more information on the lawsuit, including the legal complaint, fact sheets on the case law and on the NSA spying program, and links to statements from the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, please go to www.aclu.org/nsaspying
Monday, January 16, 2006
How out of touch is Al Gore with the American public? Or is this some 'grand plan' by the Democratic Party to take an extreme liberal position? Either way, it's a loser. Of course, when we get attacked, which we will, it will all be egg on Al Gore's and the Democratic Party's faces. Something about the West coast, and especially San Francisco. It turns conservatives liberal, and liberals into leftist extremists of the most repulsive kind. Bush has plenty of flaws and I criticize him a lot, but this guy was the OTHER choice. Nuff said.
Gore Is Sharply Critical of Bush Policy on Surveillance
By VIKAS BAJAJ
Published: January 16, 2006
Former Vice President Al Gore said today that recent revelations that the Bush administration monitored domestic telephone conversations without obtaining warrants "virtually compels the conclusion that the president of the United States has been breaking the law repeatedly and persistently."
Mr. Gore called on the attorney general to appoint a special counsel to investigate the matter and recommended that Congress hold "comprehensive - not just superficial - hearings." He also said telecommunications companies that provided access to their networks to the government should stop doing so. [Is he asking companies to defy the government's antiterrorism inquiry? Is that it, Al]
"It is this same disrespect for America's Constitution which has now brought our republic to the brink of a dangerous breach in the fabric of the Constitution," Mr. Gore said. "And the disrespect embodied in these apparent mass violations of the law is part of a larger pattern of seeming indifference to the Constitution that is deeply troubling to millions of Americans in both political parties." [Woh, slow down Al. Take a darvon.]
I live in Malaysia, a country that sells itself, loudly and repeatedly, to the outside world as a "Moderate Muslim" state.
Don't believe Malaysia's lies. Islamic-style apartheid is firmly entrenched here--Malaysia is actually two societies, one Muslim and one non-Muslim, separate and decidedly unequal. It is never talked about, officially, or in the state-sponsored and censored media--it is never acknowledged, but it does exist nonetheless. Islamic supremacy in Malaysia is enshrined in the Constitution of Malaysia, which formally establishes Islam as the official state-supported religion of the country, Sharia courts are legally beyond the reach of the civil courts, and on and on. Islamic fascism is slowly yet surely seeping into every aspect of Malaysia's society and national life. Think of it as the evil twin of America's melting pot.
This description of the situation in Malaysia rather sums up well the state of Islamic Supremacy in so-called 'Moderate' Malaysia:
Malaysia has received world-wide recognition as a modern and progressive Muslim state, including from the West. Former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Muhammad in the World Economic Forum in New York (2004), declared, “Malaysia is a modern, secular and progressive Islamic state - not despite but because of Islam”. Yet, the minority non-Muslims citizens (mostly Chinese and Indians) in Malaysia have faced a situation of apartheid designed by the state over the decades.Spot-on analysis, I'd say. Of course, you won't find anything like this in any slick Tourist Malaysia brochures, and you certainly won't find such insightful commentary in the press. And of course, whatever Doctor Moonbat says, you can bet your next paycheck that he's lying through his teeth--'progressive Islam' my ass!
Non-Muslims are barred from Government educational institutions, jobs and business ventures through discriminatory. Yet, thse minority Chinese and Indian non-Muslims (35%) are the life-line of Malaysian economy despite the severe discrimination by they face. It is the Muslims who get all Government-funded local and overseas education whilst the non-Muslims have to settle for local private schools, Universities or overseas education supported from their own pockets.
In the religious front, non-Muslims cannot preach and seek converts from amongst the Muslims whilst the Muslims have created elaborate programs for converting the non-Muslims to Islam. Even then, without the contribution of the hard-working non-Muslims (non-Bhumiputras) population, Malaysia will be like any other impoverished and anachronistic Third World country – not a modern and wealthy state which Malaysia and Muslims worldwide always keep boasting about.
Mohammed would be so proud of his Malaysian Mohammedans. The cult he left behind is a state-of-the-art system of oppression and thought control. Like water, it seeps through and around any restrictions supposedly proof against it, of which Malaysia is a perfect example. And remember, this massive Malaysian injustice is supposed to be 'moderate and progressive'. What sort of hell on earth do you think a more 'strident' form of Islam might be like?
Sunday, January 15, 2006
Two years ago today, on January 15th, 2004, my life changed forever. I walked into the church, an empty church, somewhere in Pakistan. There wasn’t anyone else there--for the sake of my safety and of the Christians who were helping me—because such activity in a Muslim state risks the life and limb of everyone involved. It is never to be taken lightly! I walked in along with the evangelist who had brought me to this place. A place I had never seen and had never experienced the aura of before.
I knew what was going to happen was going to stay with me forever – I knew that after this there was no turning back. I was going to leave behind everything that I had ever lived for and take on something better…far better than anything that I had experienced in my life. It felt great but I was afraid because it was a step that I knew could put me and these nice people with me in grave danger. But it had to happen – no matter what the price paid afterward - because it was the right thing to do.
I was going to get baptized…baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Those were names I could never take at my home in front of my folks, or anyone else in my entire family. I was going to embrace something my parents had always told me was false and corrupted and hated by Allah. It was the right path I knew, but, sadly I knew full well my family wouldn’t understand (and they still don’t). I knew that from today onwards I was going to live a double life, because anything other than that meant death. When I got baptized, it felt great – it gave me courage beyond measure. The experience was so intense, I can’t even write it down in words, but I remember it like it was yesterday.
After my baptism was over, I thought I had to do something about Islam, no matter what – in my life and around the world. I blamed Islam (I still do) for so many of the evils that plague our world today. I knew someone had to fight Islam, and I decided I would start to do so, even if no one else was doing it, and even if I wasn’t quite sure how to.
But, thank God, there were people who knew the truth and who wanted to spread the truth, same as me. Today, thankfully, I have joined with them. Telling the truth about Islam is what I am doing here, because I don’t want anybody to experience what I went through and still go through (all the details are in my testimony which will be posted here very soon). I hope that wise people join with us and deal with this problem of Islam once and for all, in a way so decisive that no one in the future ever dares to even think about destroying the world the way Mohammed did and Moslems do to this day.
Saturday, January 14, 2006
I think you have all seen by now Moslems screaming on the TV (numerous times) and in the mosques (maybe) about how western society is corrupt because they give gays their rights and some of them even allow the gays to get married. This may make the gays pleased but it pisses off the Mohammedans something fierce!
But what Moslems don’t tell you about is what goes on in their countries. To them, western society is ‘crumbling’ but if you look at it, Islamic society has already crumbled.
Today I came across this piece that well illustrates the incredible state of decay in Dar-al-Islam. It made the hair on the back of my neck stand and later made me laugh too because – let’s admit it – no matter how disgusting it is, it turns out to be funny if you have the taste for this sort of humor. It’s about a poor Afghan soldier who didn’t have enough money to get married:
‘… in many parts of Afghanistan men must pay at least $3000 to the parents of their prospective bride, making marriage difficult for many…’
So this person must have thought, ‘if I can’t get a woman, I’ll do something different.’ Well this ‘something different’ was showing the donkey his real nature. He somehow found a poor donkey and an abandoned house and started doing what he wanted to do. But just when he thought he had found a suitable wife for him, a boy saw him doing naughty stuff in the open.
The soldier… was detained for several days last week after a young boy spotted him with the animal in an abandoned house in the south-eastern town of Gardez (Afghanistan)’.
Too bad dude, that’s why many prefer being alone in the toilet to take care of business like choking the chicken, so they aren’t seen. What’s even worse about this little humorous tale (as if that were possible) is being caught by a boy in the act – kids tend to ask a lot of awkward questions at times like this! You can read the whole story here Afghan and the poor donkey – it sounds like a movie title. Well that’s because its no less than a movie, is it? OK, maybe a porn movie then.
This whole sordid episode might sound disgusting and very gross because, of course, it is all that. But what's stranger is that this practice, although not openly accepted, is pretty common in Peshawar, Pakistan and other areas in Pakistan. I know because I used to live in Pakistan myself (but of course I have never done anything as perverse as what the Afghan did). Not that you will see a donkey (or a goat) and a dude on every street corner, but I can assure you that many do practice you-know-what on the poor animals before they get married. Practicing for their big occasion, of course!
One more thing--bisexuality is very common in Peshawar and of course the areas around it. It is accepted as well as common to have a wife and a boy as your sexual partners there (separately of course, they don’t do threesomes).
Actually it is not this Afghan soldier’s fault for what he did – Islam discourages masturbation – but it’s not that big on condemning bestiality. Maybe it is this that encourages these poor Moslems in these parts of the world to put the burden off them and on the donkeys or other animals. So, like I wrote about the sacrifice of animals here on the blog recently, maybe Mohammed the typical Moslem in Pakistan has sex with the animal on Monday and then sacrifices it on Tuesday to cleanse his sins to Allah! Well, that makes it all ok then!
Remember, Islam is pure and only western culture is corrupt and dirty. So the Moslems keep repeating over and over. It doesn’t take much effort or time to show what a lie this is.
Hey, this stuff is sick, but you don’t get to read about it everyday now, do you?