I like Laura Ingraham. She is smart and knows her facts. She is in the same calibre as Diane West. Top drawer. Today, she nailed Bush to the stake, poured the fuel on and threw that match.
Laura Ingraham Takes The Gloves Off - QT mp3
I think Bush, in his typical, "I am god. I am right. I am the world globalist and humanist" pretentiousness, he called all of us, the ones who put him in office, evil, racist, nativist bigots; stupid because he claims we haven't 'read' his Comprehensive National Suicide Act (hat tip Lawrence Auster View from the Right). We're xenophobic nativists spewing 'empty rhetoric.'
This is an opportunity for the Presidential contenders. Newt has gone for it and kudos to him. Bush deserves to go down in flames. Better to destroy him than to destroy the Republican party.
Bush, you dishonor the Republican Party. Don't let the screendoor hit you in the ass on the way out.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
I like Laura Ingraham. She is smart and knows her facts. She is in the same calibre as Diane West. Top drawer. Today, she nailed Bush to the stake, poured the fuel on and threw that match.
Courtesy of frequent Malaysia Today commenter "FFT", I found this interesting piece on the characteristics of cults. Cults can and do share a number of unique characteristics, and below is a comprehensive list of them. I invite you to read this list and to determine how many of these apply to the 'Religion of Peace.'
List by Janja Lalich, Ph.D. & Michael D. Langone, Ph.D.
- The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
- Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
- Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
- The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).
- The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
- The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
- The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
- The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
- The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt iin order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.
- Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
- The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
- The group is preoccupied with making money.
- Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
- Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
- The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
"You can't at whim and fancy convert from one religion to another," Federal Court Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim said in delivering judgment in the case, which has stirred religious tensions in the mainly Muslim nation.Fighting a nine-year legal battle to become a Christian is 'whim and fancy'? What a f*cking Muzzie Melayu moron!
Halim said the civil court "...had no jurisdiction in the case and that it should be dealt with by the country's Islamic courts".
President Jorge Bush yesterday stabbed his last remaining ally, the core Conservatives of the Republican Party. He accused his own party of being wrong, of being bigots, being evil because they do not want to go along with his amnestty, 'destroy America' bill from hell. In the last three years, President Bush has annihilated the Republican party and now stands alone except for his Cabinet of sycophants and a now identified small band of RINOs. All the veneer is gone and before us stands a 'committed globalist' who hates America. He despises the Republican Party that made him President and spits in the faces of the voters who elected him.
We will fight him, and it is he who will be destroyed.
Bush hits foes of alien bill
By Jon Ward
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
May 30, 2007
President Bush yesterday rebuked members of his own political party for trying to "frighten people" into opposing his immigration bill, prompting a quick backlash from some Republicans.
"Those determined to find fault with this bill will always be able to look at a narrow slice of it and find something they don't like," Mr. Bush said, speaking at a training center for immigration enforcement officials in Glynco, Ga.
"If you want to kill the bill, if you don't want to do what's right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it, you can use it to frighten people. Or you can show leadership and solve this problem once and for all," Mr. Bush said.
The response to Republicans who say Mr. Bush wants amnesty for illegal aliens provoked the ire of conservative organizers and legislators alike.
"That's hurtful language," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican. "If the bill did what they promised it was going to do, I'd support it. I'm for comprehensive reform, but it has to serve the national interests, not political interest."
"I don't think it's courage to support this flawed bill. I think sometimes it takes a bit of courage to resist this kind of short-term reform, so we can create a system that can actually work," Mr. Sessions said.
Rep. Brian P. Bilbray, California Republican and chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus, took issue with Mr. Bush's assertion that critics are objecting to a "narrow slice" of the bill.
"Amnesty for 12-20 million illegal immigrants isn't a 'narrow slice' ... it's the whole darn pie," Mr. Bilbray said. "What part of illegal does the president not understand? The American people ... don't want another amnesty."
Paul Weyrich, founder of the conservative Free Congress Foundation, said that "there are legitimate reasons to oppose this legislation, and I don't think that it behooves the president to call people names or make accusations against them if they disagree with him."
"He is angering people beyond belief to the point that the Republican Party is going to split in two, thanks to him. If this bill passes, the Republicans will not recover from it," Mr. Weyrich said.
An aide to one Republican senator who is usually a close White House ally said that Mr. Bush had questioned the patriotism of lawmakers who are concerned about granting amnesty to illegal aliens.
"[It] not only stretches the bounds of credibility with conservative Republicans but in fact, it further erodes their confidence in this administration," said the aide, who asked that his name not be used. .....
Amnesty: Undermining America's Civilization
by Frosty Wooldridge (Human Events)
Senate Bill 1348, giving mass amnesty to as many as 20 million illegal aliens, proves a treacherous and outrageous act against our civilization by the U.S. Congress.
“Every aspect of the current immigration bill, and of the arguments made for it, has fraud written all over it,” said Dr. Thomas Sowell, African-American professor at Stanford University and writer for the San Gabriel Valley Tribune.
“What can we do with 12 million people already here illegally?” Sowell asked. “We can stop them from becoming 50 million, the way three million became 12 million from the previous amnesty in 1986.” How else, but by closing the border to more pouring in? But the Senate bill takes no serious measure to improve border security. Or to control the cost to the American taxpayer: you.
Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation said, “This bill will add 103 million people into the United States in 20 years and cost American taxpayers $2.3 trillion.”
Current demographic figures show the United States doubling its population from 300 million to 600 million via immigration. The ramifications of multiplying our current dilemmas double in every aspect of this civilization.
After the 20 million illegals become legalized, Z-visas add 400,000 workers annually forever.
S.B. 1348 presents amnesty for 636,000 deportee convicted criminal absconders ‘lost’ somewhere in America.
The amazing aspect of this bill reverses justice by enforcing amnesty for lawlessness while abdicating the rule of law. For example, over 15,000 MS-13 gang members become eligible for amnesty and eventual citizenship.
This amnesty undermines American citizens and legal immigrants from A to Z. It hijacks our electoral system by giving millions of illegal aliens the path to citizenship and thus to vote in our local and national elections. They will vote for everything “Mexico” and against anything “American.” This amnesty shoplifts America’s sovereignty out the door toward Third World momentum.
Illegal aliens become eligible for college tuition subsidies in the Dream Act. At the same time, your tax dollars fund lawyers for illegal aliens. “Every illegal alien working in the agricultural sector would have access to an immigration attorney to argue his case through the immigration courts and federal courts of appeals -- all at taxpayer expense,” said Dr. Mathew Spalding of the Heritage Foundation.
“These Z-visas are nearly as good as non-provisional Z-visas, giving the alien immediate lawful status, protection from deportation, authorization to work, and the ability to exit and enter the country,” said Kris Kobach, professor of law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Bush touts this as a temporary guest worker program. Yes, and he would like to sell you a used car from the “Hood.” But, what’s under the hood? Why after six years in office -- after refusing to enforce our immigration laws -- does he want to sell you a bogus ‘comprehensive immigration reform bill’?
John Boehner, former House Majority Leader, said, “I promised the President today that I wouldn’t say anything bad about...this piece of s**t bill.” Mark Twain said, “Suppose you were an idiot; and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.”
Conservative Rush Limbaugh screamed that the amnesty bill spells disaster for America. Ann Coulter echoed Limbaugh. Next up, Bush handmaiden Sean Hannity lamented that the amnesty bill proved a disaster for all Americans. Pat Buchanan, former U.S. presidential candidate, said, “This bill will be the death of America.”
Other more rational minds, columnist George Will, Congressman Newt Gingrich, Fred Thompson, Tom Tancredo, William F. Buckley and Ed Meese oppose S.B. 1348.
Who supports it? Senator Teddy Kennedy, a man who never stepped foot into America in his life and knows nothing of the cultural carnage he heaped on America with his 1965 Immigration Reform Act and 1986 amnesty. God help America if we allow this village idiot of a man to drive the final nail into the coffin of our civilization in 2007.
Nothing about S.B. 1348 benefits America. It proves treachery against citizenship, the U.S. Constitution, lawful behavior and responsible migration. It transforms all immigration into the USA into a free-for-all.
Congress injects a syringe into America’s aorta and when Bush signs it, he pumps this nation into a future of Balkanization, accelerating imported poverty, displacement of America’s middle class and certain loss of the American Dream.
This bill ensures the end of America’s most cohesive aspect; its English language. Emanuel Kant said, “The two great dividers are religion and language.”
"Under this bill, every immigrant is his own bubble of linguistic entitlement," says Jim Boulet Jr., executive director of English First. Thanks to President Bill Clinton's Executive Order 13166. As Sen. James Inhofe, R-OK, told the Senate, this is "an entitlement for a translator in any language you want other than English."
This bill proves Mark Twain’s lament when he said, “No man’s life, liberty or property is safe while the Congress is in session.” Hard to fathom paying U.S. senators to enact quality bills—but, instead, we receive drivel. Their actions illustrate the “good of the country” comes second to power, greed and money. Nothing in this bill benefits American citizens!
But who become the biggest fools of all? Who will bequeath to their children a whirlwind of consequences as they uttered not one word while they did nothing to stop their country being ripped out from under them?
The great American ‘Silent Majority’
If the “Silent Majority” sits idly by on this S.B 1348, neither the United States of America nor the “American Dream” will survive the sheer population numbers of adding 100 million people, let alone the Balkanization, conflicting languages, diseases, crime and poverty of this advancing “human Katrina.”
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
It has been a long time I've posted something on this blog. The reason for that is that I have been really busy with my studies and my life otherwise. Its because of that that I resign from this blog. I realize I can not keep my promise of posting regularly anymore. I still support all the ideas and beliefs expressed on this blog and I wish this blog (and all others like this one) more success in terms of readers--those who understand what this mission's all about--the threat that is Islam.
I have started my own blog, however, so I can post whenever I want. Avenging Apostate where I will be posting from now on but I need to wait until I get some things sorted out and then I will start posting regularly. Since I don't really know when I am going to be prepared and ready for that kind of thing, I thought it smart to resign from this blog and not take up anymore space on the sidebar.
I want to thank Anti-Jihadist for introducing me to the blogging world and giving me the opportunity to express myself on a level I never imagined before. I also would like to thank other team members at PI--John Sobieski, European Kafir, and Mark for being there for me whenever I needed their help and for sharing so much with all of us.
The last thing that I want to say here is that even though I am surrounded by darkness, hopelessness and despair, I still hope that one day the Western civilization comes out victorious amidst all this and I also hope that that happens very soon.
I had a great time here and I hope to return to the blogging world soon on my own blog Avenging Apostate. Have fun everyone, Adios!
The West is being Islamized before our very eyes! It is happening in such subtle ways that it is sometimes imperceptible to those who are not looking out for it. But much of the time, what is happening is plain to see. Each and every concession we make to Muslims is a further nail in the coffin of liberal democracy. Each time we consider granting Muslims a public holiday, each time we consider curtailing our own freedom of speech to appease them, we are assisting Muslims to further Islamize our home countries. Be sure of that.
Western governments should not be powerless to deal with this, but even so they seem to be: They lack the will and determination to stop the rot.
Political correctness, of course, has taken its toll on the West. So has the ridiculous concept of multiculturalism. Add to this a deep-seated guilt complex, a pervasive attitude of self-denigration, extreme tolerance, and an army of apologists for Islam, and we have a catastrophe in the making.
One of our greatest mistakes is to think of Islam as just another one of the world's great religions. We shouldn't. Islam is politics or it is nothing at all, but, of course, it is politics with a spiritual dimension, politics all wrapped up in a deity.
What is the nature of the politics of Islam? Well, that's an easy one to answer: It is little different from the politics of a totalitarian state, little different from the ideologies of Nazism or communism, different only in detail rather than style. Both Nazism and communism used the purge to try and 'cleanse' society of what it considered undesirable. Islam always does the same. Both of those tolerated only a single political party. Islam generally does the same, and certainly, where it doesn't, insists that all parties be Islamic ones. This, of course, gives the establishment the power to coerce the people. G. H. Sabine, in his book, A History of Political Theory, tells us this about Nazism and communism:
...the party was a self-constituted aristocracy which has the mission partly of leading, partly of instructing, and partly of coercing the bulk of mankind along the road that it must follow. Both were totalitarian in the sense that they obliterated the liberal distinction between areas of private judgment and of public control, and both turned the educational system into an agency of universal indoctrination. In their philosophy[,] both were utterly dogmatic, professing, the one in the name of the Aryan race and the other in the name of the proletariat, a higher insight capable of laying down rules for art, literature, science, and religion. Both induced a frame of mind akin to religious fanaticism. In strategy[,] both were reckless in their assertions, boundless in their claims, abusive toward their opponents, prone to regard any concession on their own part as a temporary expedient and on a rival's part as a sign of weakness. The social philosophies of both agreed in regarding society as in essence a system of forces, economic or racial, between which adjustment takes place by struggle and dominance rather than by mutual understanding and concession. Both therefore regarded politics as merely an expression of power.So much in Islam resembles those two despicable ideologies. The ruling party in Islamic countries coerces the people along the road that it must follow. This is particularly easy to observe in Iran today. Islam, too, tries to obliterate the liberal distinction between areas of private judgment and of public control. We see this in all Islamic countries. Similar to Nazism and communism, Islam also turns the educational system into an apparatus of the state for the purpose of universal indoctrination. One would be justified in using the term 'brainwashing'.
In addition, Islam also lays down rules for art (no depiction of the human form is allowed, for example), for literature (all is censored), for science (nothing discovered may contradict the Qur'an or Ahadith, or the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad), and certainly for religion (no religion is accepted of man except Islam). Where Jews and Christians live in Islamic countries, they are given protection in return for a high tax known as the jiziyah, but are given dhimmi status, which means, in effect, that they are subdued and given second class status.
Islam also induces a frame of mind akin to fanaticism. That this is so is self-explanatory. Islam is also reckless in its assertions, and boundless in its claims. Example: All the world belongs to Allah; therefore it is the duty of all Muslims to Islamize it. In Islam, too, adjustment takes place by struggle and dominance. Note the Jihad.
A remarkable similarity is this: Islam is also inclined to be abusive to its opponents (they are infidels and unclean), and is prone to regard any concession on its own part as a temporary expedient and on a rival's part as a sign of weakness. And Islam, too, regards politics as an expression of power. Oh, and we shouldn't forget that Islam is profoundly anti-Semitic!
Aren't the similarities just remarkable?
What is troubling is this: Islam is closing in on us. We have so many unassimilated Muslims living in Europe, and an ever-growing number living in the States, too. In fact, millions and millions of Muslims live in the West today. But the West has no strategy for dealing with the fall-out. We saw this recently in France when their cities burnt night after night. The mayhem Muslim immigrants caused there was enough to make anyone's hair stand on end. But what has France done about it? It has unveiled a series of measures to appease the Muslim immigrants, and has ignored the fact that this was an uprising caused in no small part by the Islamic community flexing its ever strengthening muscles. Now, however, we have some hope of change: after all, Nicholas Sarkozy has been elected Président de la Republique.
If we in the West wish to ensure the survival of our own civilization, wish to ensure that our children will be able to live as freely as we have been able to do till now, wish to ensure that people are free to choose their religion in the West, but just as free not to choose one, then we have a lot of thinking to do!
I would suggest that we start by asking one simple question: Should we regard Islam as a mere religion, or should we start to see it for what it truly is: a political ideology with megalomaniacal aspirations; a political ideology with a spiritual dimension which will stop at nothing until the West is no more, until the West has been brought into Dar ul Islam, or the 'House of Islam', until the West has been well and truly Islamized. To ignore this fact is tantamount to playing fast and loose with our children's future freedoms and security. In fact, it is negligent of their future well-being!
*All rights reserved
Monday, May 28, 2007
Rebecca Bynum joins the growing chorus for separation of the West from Islam.
Where Do We Go From Here?
by Rebecca Bynum (May 2007)
(hat tip: Lawrence Auster, View from the Right)
“Imagine an iron house without windows, absolutely indestructible, with many people fast asleep inside who will soon die of suffocation. But you know since they will die in their sleep, they will not feel the pain of death. Now if you cry aloud to waken a few of the lighter sleepers, making those unfortunate few suffer the agony of irrevocable death, do you think you are doing them a good turn? But if a few awake, you can't say there is no hope of destroying the iron house.” — Selected Short Stories of Lu Xun (taken from John Derbyshire’s article, The Iron House)
This is the situation we find ourselves in today. We attempt to awaken those still sleeping, or in a hypnotic state, about the dangers of Islam. But once they have awakened, then what? What are we to tell them? What guidance can we offer, what practical prescription, once they have fully understood the nature of the menace, the tenets of Islam and the likely acting upon those tenets, as both history and theory suggest?
Two of the most knowledgeable people in America today about the Islamic texts, and the doctrines derived from those texts, are Robert Spencer and Bill Warner. Both are very effective in disseminating an awareness of those texts. Yet neither one has formulated a political program of practical steps to combat it. To be fair, I believe they see themselves as “Cassandras at the gate,” warning the sleeping city, and that task alone is a gigantic one. They are not going to take on as well prescriptions for the ways and means of its defense. Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch is mainly pedagogical, and Spencer is always at his best when he answers those who make statements about Islam as apologists, showing how far from the texts they deviate. But the policy prescriptions come for the most part from his colleague (and NER Sr. Editor) Hugh Fitzgerald, in what is a useful and entirely satisfactory division of labor.
Last month, at his invitation, I attended Bill Warner’s one-day workshop with a group of American Hindus. Entitled “Building a Politics of Victory,” the most useful part was the morning devoted to analyzing the essence of Islam, reducing it to a few key ideas: a dual ethical system, which does not admit of the Golden Rule, and the principle of submission, submission of Believers to Allah, and of non-Muslims to Believers. While Warner made many very good points about Islam, and spoke about the need to develop what he calls “the mind of war,” he did not offer practical political steps to take, beyond that of educating more people, but threw open to the audience the possibility of their making suggestions as to strategy and tactics. In the afternoon, as Warner was discussing the mental state of a dhimmi (a non-Muslim under Islam) and the mental state even of those non-Muslims who, in their own countries, voluntarily assume the dutiful and subservient attitude toward Islam and Muslims that has rightly been called dhimmitude. As Warner compared this mental state to the psychology of an abused child, a frustrated attendee exclaimed, “Enough about this! What do we do?!” Warner’s answer was that more workshops needed to be held in order to awaken still more people.
While I agree the more people who are aware of the dangers of Islam, the better, there comes a time when practical political steps must be formulated and implemented. Sue Myrick, a Representative from North Carolina, has already formed a bi-partisan Anti-Jihad Caucus which will undoubtedly begin to propose legislation to combat jihad in all its forms including propaganda, influence buying and demographics as well as terrorism. The time has come, then, for those already properly informed, and therefore alarmed, to begin the work of thinking through the drafting of legislation. We have talked about the problem for a long time. Many citizens are aroused. Robert Spencer’s The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades alone spent 15 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list, which means it sold tens of thousands of copies. Conservative talk show hosts such as Glenn Beck at CNN and even some liberal ones, such as Joey Reynolds at WOR in New York have been doing their part to awaken their wide audiences. Now is the time for practical steps – steps to lessen the menace, not to end it (for it will last as long as Islam lasts) to be put forward.
Robert Spencer recommends, for example, the close screening of Muslims who are allowed into America, including those allowed into the military, or who are allowed to preach in our mosques and prisons, for jihadist sympathies. And now the United States is now doing just that. The Washington Times reports that while we will allow 25,000 Iraqi immigrants to come to America this year (18,000 more than first reported),
In order to prevent any terrorists and other dangerous Iraqis from coming to the United States, the Department of Homeland Security is conducting detailed interviews in several countries in the region, U.S. officials said.
They declined to discuss specific questions and techniques being used in the process, but said they are taking all necessary measures to screen applicants sufficiently.
Feel better now? Read Hugh Fitzgerald’s devastating “Ten Things To Think About When Thinking of Muslim Moderates” and see how long that feeling lasts.
Warner also advocates unity among non-Muslims in order to build resistance to Islamization, but without commonly agreed upon political goals, it is hard to see how such unity can either be created or maintained. How can we work together without something to work toward?
So, what should these goals be? Lawrence Auster has come up with a useful word in this context: separationism. And I think that by this point, most serious scholars on Islam agree (as I argued two years ago) that Islam must be contained and constrained – contained within the dar al-Islam and constrained as to the amount of damage the Islamic world is able inflict upon the non-Islamic world. And furthermore, that we must disengage from the Islamic world as much as possible; withdraw from Iraq and allow the natural fissures of Islam to widen, refrain from sending foreign aid (a form of jizyah) to Muslim countries, reduce the purchase of oil from OPEC, stop providing military equipment and other kinds of western technology to Muslim countries, and begin to limit Muslim access to the West, including access to our scientific training, and even to the kind of training, in our languages and cultures, that would enable a propagandist (see Tariq Ramadan) be merely more effective at his work. If as well members of the ruling classes in the Muslim states are permitted to take advantage of Western medicine rarely, and only if they collaborate in our efforts or yield to our demands (for example, the Al-Saud need to stop funding campaigns of Da’wa and building mosques and madrasas everywhere; a price they could be made to pay is having Western medicine cut off from their free access). It is important not to prop up Muslim peoples and states but force them to ask what it is about their countries that encourages despotism, economic backwardness, and mental paralysis. Only in this way, as Hugh Fitzgerald has pointed out many times, will Muslims begin to associate their numerous intellectual, social and political failures with Islam. Then, only then, will Muslims begin to comprehend the truth about their belligerent and benighted belief system, and seek their own solutions.
Non-Muslims cannot change or reform Islam – we can only deal with it in such a way as to protect our civilizations, the art, music, literature and way of life bequeathed to us by our forbearers. As we look to the east we observe a succession of civilizations that, in the lands conquered by Islam, succumbed to Islam: Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Zoroastrian and Jain. Civilizations whose music, art, literature and even, here and there, languages, were all damaged severely, or even extinguished, by Islam so that few traces of them remain and even those last remaining traces are being destroyed. The Bamiyan Buddha statues in Afghanistan were the last remaining evidence of a once noble civilization. Thousands upon thousands of Hindu temples, Christian churches, Jewish synagogues and other places of worship have been destroyed, along with the Buddhist statues and stupas and libraries, wherever the Dar al-Islam has spread. The incontestable historical fact is, as Bill Warner points out, that Islam is 100% effective in killing and replacing older and more advanced civilizations unless it is resisted and pushed back with sufficient force.
The cult or fashion of multiculturalism is the ideology of civilizational surrender.
We can begin by convincing Congress to implement the following minimal acts of self-defense:
Define Islam as the political ideology it is, so that it is no longer protected by “freedom of religion” and our laws against sedition come into effect.
Stop all Muslim immigration into America. This should be made a task separate from, and not to be confused with, other immigration initiatives.
Limit Muslim influence buying in Washington and academia.
Remove Muslim chaplains from our prisons and military.
Deport those Muslims, and their families, who are convicted of criminal activity, including but not limited to polygamy, activity that is prompted by or connected specifically to beliefs that are part of their mental makeup and cannot be shed as long as they are loyal to Islam and to the umma al-Islamiyya, and not to the laws of the Infidel nation-state.
Will the opposition be fierce? Of course it will. But we cannot move forward without some plan for political action.
........... (read the rest)
Usually, comments at our humble site tend to fall into two categories—those from our ‘neo-con’ friends (which are of course always welcome), and comments from those that, shall I say, fail to agree with PI’s overall philosophical worldview.
As for the comments from the other side, they tend to be from either unhinged lunatic ravings from committed Jihadists (with all the usual atrocious grammar and associated profanity), or the more insidious, patronizing kind of comments from leftists of one stripe or another.
But a comment left here by one “arieff arsh” today didn’t fall into any of the above categories. That alone made it interesting, and noteworthy. “Arieff” claims to be a Malay, living in Malaysia, but his English as written in his comment is very good. Suspiciously good, actually. Most Malays I know are barely capable of stringing English sentences together. Overall, I find that Malays stick to using their own language “Bahasa Melayu” as much as possible. That situation is not likely to change anytime soon, as there are very few qualified English teachers in Malaysia (foreign English teachers are decidedly NOT welcome in Malaysia). Really, it’s that bad.
Having voiced my doubts about ‘arieff’, I’m just going to assume that for purposes of my reply to this comment, this person is an actual Malay.
It's heartening to see someone living in Malaysia is able to voice his / her words against Islam with such freedom, amid all that "Malaysia-a-totally-fucked-up-country-that-tortures-and-marginalises-non Muslim" accusations pointed towards us. Yes, I'm a Malaysian and a Muslim after all. No, I'm not mad at you, nor that I would want to blow you up (duh, I don't want to put that bomb around my six-pack, just to end lives!)
Well, as my fellow Zionist (Eurokafir) pointed out in her comment, I’m not currently residing in the Islamic Melayu State. If I was, the friendly chaps from JAKIM or maybe Bukit Aman (the cops) might have tracked me down and slapped me into indefinite ISA-style detention by now for my so-called seditious acts of criticizing Islam. As indicated at the top of the PI sidebar, yours truly is now safely ensconced in an infidel land in Dar al Harb, where I am free to continue attacking the Evil that is Islam in relative safety.
But yes, arieff, you do summarize one of Pedestrian Infidel’s main points aptly, thusly: “Malaysia-a-totally-fucked-up-country-that-tortures-and-marginalises-nonMuslim”. Thank you, I could not have said it any better myself. And it’s all definitely true. You didn’t even go through the motions to try to downplay or deny it. What, you don’t like hearing it all the time? Just keep chanting “Malaysia Truly Asia” until it goes away, ok? Good lad.
You are who you are, and I respect that; and I respect your opinions too. I love to read your blog because it demonstrates hatred (or lack of it - if it goes by your definition). Or maybe, I just love it because I'm a Muslim, remember. Yeah, as it goes by your views, Islam could never be separated from violence, hatred,
prejudice etc; heck, maybe that's why I love to read your views.
Oh no sir, you are most correct. We do demonstrate hatred here, and I make absolutely no apologies for it. We hate and despise tyranny and totalitarianism, wherever it may be found. I loathe any law or ideology that calls for the death of apostates and the stoning of adulterers. I have utter contempt for any law that makes ‘religion’ as a category on a civilian ID card. I spit upon any system that forces so-called virtues on people with ‘morality police’ or any other Gestapo-style tactics.
Though I'm sad that I could never share your opinions and views, I urge you to never stop writing. You have the knowledge, and you craft it so nicely into words. I admire that (duh, maybe because I'm a Muslim, and we are always inferior and worst in all aspects of life, right, sir?).
I’ll keep writing, as long as I’m able. Count on it. And keep reading. God willing, you might even see the light someday (although I won’t be holding my breath).
And as for your remaining Muslim, well, that’s your choice. Remember, it’s not an accident that the Muslim nations, despite one trillion dollars of oil revenue in the past 50 years, are still among the most backward, primitive, and all-around dreadful places to live on the planet. Oh yeah, that’s all the fault of the infidels, silly me.
Hmmm, you're still reading this? Well, thanks; it means you care about your readers, Muslim or non-Muslim. Thank you though. And no, I am not - if you think
that this is the part that I am going to spray you with all the obscenities or vulgar words, or the part I will preach you about Islam bla bla bla. Nope, I'm sorry for that. Because I believe you and your pact have a broader knowledge on Islam from your readings, as compared to some Muslims themselves.
Thank you. We all do study Islam to one extent or another. More than the average bear, me thinks. Nice to know someone out there notices.
Among other things, I’m a humanist. So, I care for everybody. The death of anyone, even one of our enemies, is a tragedy. As long as a person is breathing and thinking, there is always hope (no matter how slim) that a person may see the errors of their ways and recant. Even a Muslim on their deathbed can still find truth and deny the Shahada.
What I decidedly do not care for are for belief systems that have caused so much pain, death, injustice and suffering over these many centuries (i.e. ISLAM).
My friends said I should visit your blog and see how anti-Muslim you are. Silly them. The only reason I would go to a blog is either the writer is my mom or the blog makes me think or laugh. The latter would apply to you then. Because you made me think of how bad our images towards people like you, and made me think how I could show you that Islam means love. Not that I'm good at it though. Silly me.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist (or a pre-med student for that matter) to figure out why Muslims have such a horrid image in the eyes of the kafir (i.e. most of the world). Just look at your morning newspaper (even the ones in KL that are sanitized by UMNO for your ‘protection’). Whether it’s Thailand, Iraq, ‘Palestine’, Kashmir, Beslan, Bali, Philippines, Lower Manhattan, London, Madrid, Morocco, India, Algeria, etc. it’s the same bloody refrain everywhere—Muslims against Muslims, or Muslims against the world. Repeating the usual lie that these endless atrocities are all somehow the fault of the kuffir doesn’t have the same pull as before, even amongst Muslims. I think that’s because, ultimately, people are suckers for the truth.
In the marketplace of ideas, Islam (which means ‘submission’ and NEVER ‘love’) loses out every time. Ever wonder why that is?
Anyway, I would still love you as a friend and as a fellow human, no matter how much you hate us Muslims, or no matter how much your opinions causing my fellow
My opinions are causing your Muslim friends what, exactly?
Um, wait a minute my devout Muslim ‘friend’, doesn’t your ideology specifically forbid befriending kufr? (except in situations where deception is useful or conversion is possible). Don’t take my word for it; that’s in the Koran.
Anyway, keep on writing, okay? I love to think and observe, so I would always flag this blog (for good reasons, of course). Peace. (Or lack of it, if that what you were expecting from me). Sorry for wasting your time with this piece of junk. God bless you and me.
I planned on it. And bring your friends by. They (and you) might even learn something.
And thanks for your comment. Not a waste of time at all, to be honest.
Shalom and have a great infidel day.
Sunday, May 27, 2007
The West is on a dangerous course. It has embarked on a dichotomous journey. It is on the road to self-destruction.
There are two mutually exclusive forces at play here: On the one hand, there are the liberals who are trying to be more open to other cultures, and who are trying to destroy the very institutions upon which the West has thrived for so long; and on the other, we have a frightfully conservative force at work in the form of Islam, whose adherents are trying to take us back to mediæval times, take us back to a bygone age.
The one side, the liberal side, for example, is trying to give gays rights, and destroy the institution of marriage; the other, the conservative, Islamic side, a growing force in our society, will try and undo all the liberal policies ever passed. Normal conservatives in the Western sense of the world will look like the screaming liberals of today in years to come, for their brand of conservatism is as nothing in comparison with the ultra conservative, ‘orthodox’ Islamic values that will be foisted upon our unsuspecting people when Islam grows ever more in strength here in the West.
We are on a road that leads to no good place. This journey is one which will end in tears.
It should be increasingly obvious to all thinking people that we have allowed a people to immigrate to the West who, by and large, have no intention of integrating into Western societies, and who wish to change the nature of Western societies into their own, pre-conceived notion of how a society should be – a society which conforms to the extremely strict codes of behaviour as set out in the Shari’ah.
Ask yourself how these two forces can be reconciled! Of course, they cannot be. The one is modern and forward-thinking; the other is 1400 years old, and belongs to the Dark Ages. Nobody, however intelligent, however resourceful, is going to be able to bring about such a reconciliation of such competing forces. And the longer this problem is allowed to fester, the more difficult it will become to solve.
Already we have seen demonstrators out in the streets in their droves demanding that anyone who insults Islam be beheaded! Already we have seen calls for the introduction of Shari’ah law here in the UK and in Europe. Already we know that the ultimate goal of Muslims in the United States is to introduce it there, too; and to replace the Constitution with an Islamic one. Omar M Ahmad, the then Chairman of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), stated the following as far back as 1988:
”Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Qur’an … should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.”
That says it all!
The French author, Michelle Houellebecq, in an interview given to the French literary magazine Lire, said the following: ”The dumbest religion, after all, is Islam. When you read the Koran, you’re shattered. The Bible at least is beautifully written because the Jews have a heck of a literary talent.”
Michelle Houellebecq might well have had it right about Islam; but aren’t we Westerners the dumbest people of all to allow these Muslim immigrants to come here to the West and live off the fat of the land and tell us that they are going to take us over, tell us that their religion is going to become dominant, tell us that Shari’ah law is going to be introduced at the earliest convenience?
I mean: How stupid and tolerant can we be?
Look, it’s really quite simple. Islam brooks no compromise: It is their way or no way. This is quite, quite clear now to all sensible, aware people. Clearly, these people have no appetite for assimilation, and they are not going to change.
What they want to do is to bring Islam to every corner of the world, and they are on a mission to achieve this. We have to decide whether we want to live their backward way, or whether we want to fight for our liberty and democracy, concepts anathema to Muslims all over the globe. We cannot have it all ways, we cannot, as they say, have our cake and eat it too.
Tough decisions are never easy to take. It takes a person of determination and resolve to take them. But when faced with this dilemma, it is only tough decisions that will do. Or are we going to slip and slide, through inaction, down the road to dhimmitude, or ultimate surrender to Islam. Are we going to submit to Allah, are we going to pay the jizyah, or the tax on infidels, or are we going to allow our fellow citizens to be killed. For those are so clearly the only three options once Islam takes hold.
Moreover, imagine what sort of society we shall be forced to live in. Adulteresses will be stoned to death, beheadings will take place in the public square, thieves will have their hands and feet cut off alternately, and homosexuals will be hanged in the street, or thrown off the local minaret! If you don’t believe me, take a trip to Saudi Arabia or Iran. In those countries, you will see just what happens to such people.
We have gone badly wrong. We have allowed into our societies people quite unwilling to assimilate. Interestingly, these backward people are convinced of their own superiority! Isn’t that an interesting phenomenon?
If we value our Judeo-Christian culture, if we value our freedoms, if we value our democracies, if we value our civilized way of life, if indeed we value our civilization, then we have but one option, for there truly is only one way to solve this intractable problem. We have to start thinking about the repatriation of these difficult people.
We start by repatriating the illegal, Muslim immigrants, and those who preach hatred and the destruction of our civilization. That will be a good start. We really do not have to put up with this nonsense any longer. Enough is enough!
The repatriation can take place in a humane manner; we don’t need to be cruel. We can even give these people money to resettle somewhere else. But believe me, repatriation is the only sensible option at this stage. We cannot afford to play fast and loose with our children’s future. We have a duty to our children to leave them our Western civilization as free and whole as we inherited it. To do anything else would be a dereliction of our duty.
Repatriation is not an option of the far right only. This is not a question of left and right politics anyway. This is a fight for the survival of the West. We must step up to the plate. We must behave with strength, resolve, and determination. Only when we do so will we silence these people. For make no mistake about it, Muslims understand one thing, and one thing only: Strength!
*All rights reserved
I found this fine article today that aptly summarizes the evil acts that the so-called 'moderate' state of Malaysia has been up to lately. You won't find this information on Fox News, or on the pages of the NY Times. And, of course, the useful idiots at the State Department would never condemn or even acknowledge the existence such Nazi-like tactics. Wouldn't be politically correct, dont cha see.
Malaysia prides itself on its policy of "Islam Hadhari", or "civilizational Islam" which claims to use Islam to develop culture in the nation, and which should be exported elsewhere. This policy of "moderate" Islam is nothing of the sort. Malaysia in many ways resembles a regime with little difference to Stalin's Soviet empire.
The responsibility for the undemocratic state of affairs in Malaysia is entirely down to the ruling UMNO party. Malaysia gained independence from the British on August 31, 1957. For all of the time since then, the country has been ruled continuously by UMNO (United Malays National Organization), in coalitions with other parties. UMNO advocates the racially divisive policy of "ketuanan Melayu" ("Malay Supremacy") a belief system in which Malays are regarded as the original defining populace of Malaysia, and should have special treatment and privileges. The party has used racial division to promote Malay Muslims above others, even though it is curently in an alliance with a Chinese party (MCA) and an Indian group (MIC).
At UMNO's 57th annual conference in November last year, some candidates threatened violence against non-Muslims. One of these, Education Minister Hishammudin Tun Hussein, even took out his keris, a ceremonial sword, and waved it in the air.
Please read the entire article here (HT Western Resistance).
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Friday, May 25, 2007
Kuala Lumpur - Malaysia's highest court will rule next week on whether a Muslim has the right to convert to another faith, lawyers said on Friday, in a test case that could shake society in the mainly Muslim country.
The Federal Court, the country's highest civil judicial authority, will announce on May 30 if it has decided to acknowledge the decision of Lina Joy to convert to Christianity and give up Islam, the faith she was born into.
"We're all awaiting with bated breath a case which has a great impact on the course that the country will take," Benjamin Dawson, Joy's lawyer, told Reuters.
Islam is Malaysia's official religion, so Muslims who decide to switch faiths pose a tricky legal question for the government of the multiracial, multi-religious nation.
Ethnic Malays, who make up just over half of Malaysia's 26 million people, are deemed Muslims from birth.
Constitutionally, freedom of religion is guaranteed. But in reality, conversion out of Islam falls within the ambit of sharia or Islamic courts. And sharia law prescribes fines or jail for those who renounce Islam, effectively ruling out the option.
Muslims who leave Islam end up in legal limbo, unable to register their new religious affiliations or legally marry non-Muslims. Many keep quiet about their choice or emigrate. Lina Joy, now in her early 40s, was born Azlina Jailani and brought up as a Muslim but at the age of 26 decided to become a Christian.
In 1999, the National Registration Department allowed her to change the name in her identity card to Lina Joy but the entry for her religion remained "Islam".
Until the entry is deleted, she cannot legally marry outside the Muslim faith. The legal wrangling began when she took the department to court over the anomaly.
But a ruling against Joy could also inflame opinion among non-Muslims, many already aggrieved over what they see as the gradual encroachment of Islamic law into civil society.
About 60 percent of Malaysians follow Islam, according to the 2000 census, with Buddhists making up another 19 percent.
Christians account for nine percent, Hindus six percent and Confucianism, Taoism and other Chinese religions two percent.
Well, unless the senior mullahs on the High Court get cold feet once again, it looks like they will finally announce their long-deferred ruling on Ms. Joy. And the smart money here isn't on Ms. Joy. The promises of 'religious freedom' as supposedly enshrined in the Malaysian Constitution will be shown for what they really are-- worthless.
Ms. Joy already has to live in hiding 'somewhere in Malaysia' due to numerous Bumi-Melayu-Islamofascist death threats. So, no matter what the High Court's ruling is, she will never be free to live openly as a Christian woman who is legally married to another Christian.
Ms. Joy, if I were you, I'd leave Malaysia right after the Melayu-owned court rules against you. Pronto and permanently.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
The Bush-McCain-Kennedy "Amnesty and Goodies for Illegal Alien Invaders" Bill Is 'A PIECE OF SHIT' - John Boehner
I agree, how about you?
"I promised the President today that I wouldn't say anything bad about... this piece of shit bill."
-- House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH)
Everybody I know has said the same thing. Jorge Bush is an incompetent boob. He refuses to believe Islam is a cult of evil. He is not a Republican but a liberal, a dhimmicrat. The sooner this turd and his turd bill are gone, the better for America.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Usually, our low traffic blog is low in comments as well. But sometimes, somebody with an 'alternate' point of view pops up to fire a salvo at our wicked 'neocon' ways. Someone calling herself "Julia 1984" did just that today on the post that immediately precedes this one. I strongly recommend you read that comment before going on any further. My reply will make much more sense if you do.
After I read her comment for the first time, I proceeded to reply, only to find that my reply was quickly outgrowing the comment box. Hence, my reply has been posted below:
As an admitted non Muslim and non Arab, how can you possibly be in a position to judge Pedestrian Infidel’s (PI’s) supposed ignorance of Islam? Have you read Mark Alexander's book, ‘The Dawning of a New Dark Age’? Guess what, it’s all about Islam. Mark also lived a number of years in a Muslim country, and we’re honored to have him on the PI blogger team. How about Avenging Apostate? He's a secret Christian, ex Muslim and an apostate living in the UAE with what amounts to a death sentence hanging over his head. Avenging is also on the PI contributor team. As for me, I lived in Malaysia (a majority-Muslim state) for two years and my significant other is also an apostate from Islam. So yeah, I think this all means we know a heck of a lot more about the so-called ‘Religion of Peace’ than most other people. And that includes you, Ms. Julia.
Have you perused our numerous posts at PI regarding the Quran and Hadith, and the unmistakable hatred that lies within? (HINT—check our sidebar.) Have you even read any of our work, or are your accusations of ‘ignorance’ more likely a knee-jerk reaction of some sort? How dare you call us ignorant of Islam! Obviously, you're the one that's ignorant of the Mohammedans and their violent ways.
And I have nothing against legal immigrants (at least the non-Muslim ones). However, I do have a ton of problems with ILLEGAL immigrants. Julia, I know you are living in Chavez's Bolivarian socialist paradise of Venezuela, and that you’re not well-versed in the tongue of ‘el Norte’, but what part of "illegal" do you not understand? Spare me your worn-out 19th century history talking points. America, a land of immigrants indeed, has a right to control who enters and does not enter its territory. This is the same right that every other sovereign state in the world claims as its own, including yours. If you’re Spanish-speaking and you want to come up north to pick fruit or maybe live with your cousin, that does NOT give you the right to cross an international boundary without permission and stay in el Norte indefinitely. If Hispanics want to escape whatever Spanish-speaking Third World craphole they happen to reside in, then that means they should go wait in line at the US Embassy for 20 years like everybody else.
So, do we want (in your words) a “Berlin Wall” on the southern border? My response? Not a bad idea! Especially when one considers the ceaseless flow of drugs and “migrant workers” from south to north. Hey, here’s a capital idea. Why don’t you Hispanics just stop exporting your narcotics and surplus workers up north, stop blaming the Gringos for everything, and start trying to sort out your own problems for a change?
You claim on your blog to be ‘non partisan’ in your politics, but you have plainly taken a number of leftist myths to heart. This includes, among other things, the ole’ “Cycle of Violence” claptrap that leftists love to apply to the Jihadist barbarians. If only we would stop fighting these Muslim savages, stop defending ourselves, then we could all just join arms and sing “Kum-bye-ya”, and world peace would finally be at hand! But no, it’s all America’s fault!
So Julia from Chavezstan, pardon me if I call your ‘ideas’ (I use the term loosely) for what they really are—a steaming pile of ill-conceived BS.
Anyways, thanks for visiting PI, and have a nice day.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
At what point is a country no longer a country? It is a question that needs to be asked. If you have no borders, no control of who comes and stays, are you still a country? a sovereign state? Todd Bensman has a fascinating article "Breaching America" about the 'special interest' alien smuggling network. I highly recommend it. It is a 5 part series, and series 1 through 3 start here. To read this is both alarming and depressing. We are being invaded, but Bush's international 'war on terror' folly is contributing to some of it. We have just got to be truthful. Islam is the problem and separation from Islam is the imperative, not engagement with Islam and that 'light unto the Muslims' derangement syndrome that deeply afflicts Bush and this administration.
Please give this a read. It shows that jihadists are not our only enemies, but many of the governments of Latin America and known enemies like Mexico, Cuba and Venezuela and new enemies like Guaremala.
If we don't put an end to this illegal immigration, America is destroyed.
Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration.
Certain people are angry that the US might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely.
Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests.
Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave.
But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors. I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house).
According to the protesters:
*You are required to let me stay in your house
*You are required to add me to your family's insurance plan
*You are required to educate my kids
*You are required to provide other benefits to me & to my family (my husband will do all of your yard work because he is also hard-working and honest, except for that breaking in part).
If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my RIGHT to be there. It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm a hard-working and honest, person, except for well, you know, I did break into your house.
And what a deal it is for me!!! I get to live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of cold, uncaring, selfish, prejudiced, and bigoted behavior.
Oh yeah, I DEMAND that you to learn MY LANGUAGE!!! so you can communicate with me.
Why can't people see how ridiculous this is?! Only in America.
If you agree with this, pass it on (in English). Share it if you see the value of it. If not, blow it off.........along with your future Social Security benefits, and a lot of other things.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Today, we identified the traitors to America. What is more interesting who just couldn't seem to make it and vote.
Senators that did not cast a vote
Not Voting - also known as 'chickenshit politicians'
Supporters of ALIPAC,
We regret that the vote for Cloture has passed with 69 Yea votes from the Senators. They voted this way even though the 20 offices we polled reported angry Americans calling against S. 1348 by 3 to 1 against! A source in Senator Richard Burr's office in North Carolina told us their office was keeping a tally an on one sheet alone there were 200 calls against, 7 calls in favor of S. 1348.
Sellout Senators like Richard Burr and others are in for some hard lessons in the near future.
The good news is that Senator Reid has retreated on the Fast Track and has now asked for two weeks to discuss and change this bill including the week after Memorial Day weekend.
Since this bill contains so many unpopular provisions, this will hurt the effort supporting this Amnesty Bill as more information reaches the public.
Also, this bill faces another Cloture vote before it can be voted on and passed so that gives us another chance to pick up 9 votes!
Sellout Pro Amnesty Senators that Voted against a majority of Americans by voting Yea on Cloture Round 1 for S. 1348 in Alphabetical Order.
Stevens (R-AK) **
The Senators that voted against Cloture and Against Amnesty in S. 1348
** 2008 Senate Candidates
(in Bold) 2008 Presidential Candidates
An update to the breastfeeding fatwa issued recently by one of Egypt's Muslim 'scholars'.
A professor at Egypt's Islamic Al-Azhar university on Monday retracted a controversial religious edict which states that a woman can only be left alone with a strange man if she breastfeeds him.
Ezzat Attia, president of the university's Hadith department which studies traditions based on the (so-called) Prophet Mohammed's words and deeds, withdrew his fatwa and apologised for any inconvenience he caused, in a statement distributed by Al-Azhar, Sunni Islam's main seat of learning.
Attia's edict, which sparked an uproar in the media, stated that a woman can only be alone with a man to whom she is not related, such as an office colleague, if she nurses him "directly from her breast" at least five times.
In his retraction, Attia said the fatwa had been a result of his personal analysis of Islamic texts and was in fact "a bad interpretation of a particular case" during the time of (so-called) Prophet Mohammed.
According to Mabruk Attia, a professor of theology at Al-Azhar, the (so-called) Prophet had advised a woman to nurse her adult adopted son, to become his wet nurse, following an Islamic ban on adoption.
The woman gave the man her milk from a bowl, and not directly from her breast, Mabruk Attia said.
The fatwa sparked a furore in Egyptian and Arab religious circles and in the press.
"If the country's top cleric himself had made the same statements, he would not be considered respectable," Malika Yussef, a professor of theology at Al-Azhar told the weekly Al-Karama paper. She said even debating the issue was "insane."
"When you walk into a government building, you should not be shocked to find a 50-year-old civil servant suckling his colleague," the independent daily Al-Dustur said ironically after the fatwa was issued.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Are you an unemployed Malaysian? Are you looking for a job that befits mighty Allah? Well, good news, pilgrim! (Or should I say "haji"?) Malaysia's force of Thugs for Allah is hiring now!
Terengganu to recruit auxiliary moral police
KEMAMAN: The state religious department is planning to recruit auxiliary enforcement officers to carry out moral policing to check social ills and the rising number of khalwat (close proximity) cases.
Oh my holy Allah, a veritable crime wave of kissing and handholding! Something must be done! Personally, I blame MTV.
The current thugs-for-Allah are overworked? A shame, a shame!
Terengganu Islam Hadhari and Welfare Committee chairman Datuk Rosol Wahid said the part-time enforcement officers could serve as back up for regular personnel.
“These part-time officers can be assigned for specific tasks when their services are required,” he said yesterday.
Rosol said the state government faced a shortage of syariah enforcement staff and was looking at several measures to overcome the problem.
“For now, we hope members of the public are patient when they cannot contact enforcement officers.
“Many of the officers are bogged down by a heavy workload,” he added.
Rosol said the state government was already looking at increasing the number of full-time officers in every district.
I hear Malaysia has a lot of unemployed college grads who majored in such useless majors like "Islamic Studies". Looks like they've got the perfect job opportunity.
Saturday, May 19, 2007
Friday, May 18, 2007
Great News! Egypt Rules Muslims Get To Suck The Tits of Muslim Babes. The Bad News: Still Need To Kill the Infidels!
If you are really into boobs, you gotta like this...if you're Muslim. But what if she's a hag with saggers? What if there is hair around the nipples? Can I become addicted and need suckling 5 times a day? So many questions for such an important, oh so important topic. Do I get to bite or just nibble? Still sounds like a winner to most Muslim guys.
From Al-Arabiyya (Egypt Al-Ashar) via JihadWatch: Al-Azhar fatwa on adult suckling
Here's an unusual Sharia Alert, and an interesing insight into the much-ballyhooed high moral standards of Islam, from the most respected institution in the world of Sunni Islam, Cairo's Al-Azhar University. According to an Arabic article in Al-Arabiyya (thanks to Ibrahim and War On Hate), the Egyptian Parliament is now discussing a fatwa from an Al-Azhar cleric that aims to circumvent the prohibition on a male and a female who are not married to each other from working together in private. All she has to do, you see, is suckle him. Then he becomes her foster child, and they can be together without a chaperone.
This bizarre ruling is based, of course, on Muhammad's words.
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hadhaifa, lived with him and his family in their house. She (i. e. the daughter of Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Salim has attained (purbety) [sic] as men attain, and he understands what they understand, and he enters our house freely, I, however, perceive that something (rankles) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa, whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said to her: Suckle him and you would become unlawful for him, and (the rankling) which Abu Hudhaifa feels in his heart will disappear. She returned and said: So I suckled him, and what (was there) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa disappeared. (Sahih Muslim 3425)
Muhammad tells the daughter of Suhail to suckle Salim. This will make her unlawful to him, that is, he won't be able to marry her because he will be her foster child. Thus it will be lawful for him to be in the house with her, and Abu Hudhaifa will no longer be angry.
There are related ahadith here.
War On Hate has kindly provided this translation of a portion of Al-Arabiyya piece, which notes the controversy over this matter. (War On Hate says that it’s unclear if Dr Atiyya is being directly quoted or paraphrased.) It also registers concern that this topic not be publicized, for obvious reasons.
The Book Removing the Suspicions
He [Dr. Atiyya, the head of the Hadith Department in Al-Azhar’s Usool El-Din Faculty] added that: They [people who ran a campaign starting three weeks ago against the faculty for this fatwa] attacked a book that was written by Dr. Abdul Muhdi Abdul Qader Abdul Hadi, a Hadith teacher in the Faculty of Usool Al-Deen. The book was titled “Removing the Suspicions from the Sunna of the Prophet”. They said that he is teaching it to his third-year students, and that the book shows proof that the topic of adult suckling is a Sahih [sound, or reliable] Hadith, but that it did not explain these matters properly -- it covered that topic briefly by bringing up the suspicion and responding to it....I brought a sample of the hadiths that they were objecting to, including this hadith in detail so people can understand it. We then said, in short, that scholarly studies should not be brought up in the media outlets, because these outlets only give the final conclusion. This makes it difficult for the general public to understand this concept. Hence, a concept like adult suckling needs to be explained in a large public lecture.
Dr. Izzat Atiyya continued: After we refuted their objection with the solid evidence of the adult suckling hadith, they brought their suspicions with regards to infant suckling. They said that it forbids marriage, however it does not permit being alone with her (khalwah). This is despite the existence of a passage as well on this: When someone entered upon Aisha but she prevented him. So the prophet said, “He is your uncle, so let him enter upon you” And when we said that, they accused Al-Azhar University of lying.
[They are apparently referring to this hadith.]
He said that the book of Dr Abdul Mahdi Abdul Qader, which they are attacking, is a study he had conducted at an early stage of his scholarly life. When he now personally teaches some of the suspicions and responds to them, he does not just blindly quote the book. Rather, he prepares for it, and he presents it to his students in a scholarly, simplified manner so they can completely understand its meaning. He asks them to correct some matters that he sees as needing a correction or explanation.
He elaborated: The book served us well, as well as its writer. We have shown that what they are denying is a fundamental from the Sunnah. However, until now there is no independent subject in the scholarly curriculum in the Hadith Department called “Refuting the Suspicions,” which is the title of the book. Nevertheless, we decided that this topic be taught in the next academic year. And until now, we select hadiths that have suspicions, and we explain and respond to them, and the adult suckling hadith was not among those hadiths.
Pedestrian Infidel's primary focus is the jihad. But there is another jihad against America, led by Jorge Bush, and that is to destroy this country through immigration.
I urge you to call your Senators and denounce this new amnesty plan.
Call the Senate Switch Board EVERYDAY at
Ask to speak to your Senators. They will switch you to their office. Tell them you are opposed to any amnesty by any other name. Tell them you are opposed to increased immigration and want to end family chain migration (which Muslims are using expertly to flood our nation.)
It is a sad day that so many Republicans are not really Republicans at all, but really liberals. Tell your Senator if he wants your vote when he is up for re-election, to vote against this immigration amnesty bill.
More Info at Michele Malkin's Website - -
It's here: The Bush-Kennedy amnesty
Report: Potential cost = $2.5 trillion
Updated with GOP reax
By Michelle Malkin · May 17, 2007 01:40 PM
From: Roy Beck, President, NumbersUSA
Date: Thursday 17MAY07 11:30 p.m EDT
Further information for your protests on Friday
1. You may find our press release helpful in your protests by phone, fax, radio call-in and Senate office visits on Friday.
You can read it below or on our website at:
2. For a view of the kind of philosophy that is driving this massive increase in foreign workers and in rewarding the illegal behavior of hundreds of thousands of outlaw employers and millions of illegal aliens, take a look at this video of Sen. Graham (R-S.C.) when accepting his recent award from the National Council of La Raza.
America does not belong to Americans, apparently. America is just an idea. National community means very little to the promoters of amnesty. If people took risks to come here illegally, they should be rewarded for their initiative, according to Sen. Kennedy (D-Mass.) today.
Perhaps most importantly from the Graham video is that providing amnesty is saying NO to the bigots of this country who oppose amnesty.
NUMBERSUSA PRESS RELEASE TODAY
NumbersUSA Condemns Senate-White House Immigration Agreement
Instant Amnesty for Lawbreakers, Heartache for American Workers
WASHINGTON, DC – NumbersUSA decried the immigration deal announced by the Senate today. The proposal would allow virtually all illegal aliens currently in the United States to remain and work in this country. In addition, it would raise legal importation of foreign workers over its already peak historical level. Over the next 13 years alone, it would increase the current number of foreign-born green card holders from about 25 million (who arrived over 75 years) to around 50 million.
“The Senate negotiators would have us believe we can solve illegal immigration by rewarding it, and that we can deal with the American people’s sense of being overwhelmed by a 20-year flood of accelerated immigration by increasing the numbers still further,” said NumbersUSA Executive Director Roy Beck. “These Senators have sold out the American public and the rule of law by agreeing to craft such a disastrous bill that gives illegal aliens exactly what they broke the law to obtain – permission to live and work in the United States. Several of these negotiators ran for re-election on platforms promising not to legalize immigration lawbreakers or have promised constituents for months that they would never be part of this kind of amnesty. Their betrayal of trust was made official when they stood at the press conference this afternoon announcing the amnesty.”
The proposal will bring about another flood of illegal immigration as it has the same basic elements of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act: enhanced enforcement, legal immigration increases, guestworkers, and amnesties. Amnesty is the pardoning immigration lawbreakers and rewarding them with the objective of their crimes, be it jobs or green cards. Even if they are required to pay fines or back taxes, learn English and civics, or even ”go to the back of the line” for their green cards, if the end result is legal permission to work or stay for any period of time in the United States, it is amnesty.
“In 1986 Senator Kennedy said, ‘This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this.’ If Senator Kennedy lied to us then, how can we trust him now?” said Beck. “Attrition through enforcement is the only fair and feasible way to deal with the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens currently in the United States. This proposal guarantees only that the problem of illegal immigration will only grow exponentially as it did after the 1986 amnesty.”
Thursday, May 17, 2007
If there were more people like the man in this video, then I would feel much better and safer. Unfortunately he seems to be minority though, but I want to be optimistic and am hoping that his good example will have many followers.
Please enjoy the video: http://www.jerusalemonline.com/specials12.asp
Never in the history of the world has so much been earned by so few; and never in the history of the world has there been so much corruption.
Nowadays, we hear about corruption at the top all the time; indeed, almost on a daily basis, we hear some new titbit about the goings on of this CEO or that, or this politician or that. Political appointments are handed out based on nepotism and cronyism. Fat salaries are paid to people who have little experience, and sometimes even little understanding, of the positions to which they have been appointed.
We hear about this sort of thing all the time: one day it’s the slush fund that BAE is alleged to have set up, the next, it’s the enormous salary raise awarded to one’s fancy woman, yet another, we hear about the extraordinarily extravagant lifestyle of the gay head of Head of British Petroleum (BP), Lord John Browne, the socialist peer, who, it has been alleged, ran that oil company as though it had been his private enterprise, and who financed an extravagant gay lifestyle beyond any normal person’s wildest dreams: private jets to take the gay couple to the place or country of their whim and choosing; three-thousand-pound bottles of claret for lunches; trips to the Salzburg festivals; and so on and so forth. All, of course, on company expenses. Lord John Browne took the term ’gay lifestyle’ and gave it its full meaning! Pity he didn’t think of giving the term its full meaning out of his own pocket. Indeed, so gay was his lifestyle that his gay French-Canadian lover, Jeff Chevalier, couldn’t keep up with Lord Browne and is said to have had to go into therapy!
The evidence coming to light about the goings on at the World Bank apropos of the shenanigans of Paul Wolfowitz paints a depressing picture of corruption at the very top, in places one would hope would be corruption-free. Fat salary increases to one’s bed partner should surely be left to one's colleagues to decide; further, where such vested interests lie, they should be handed out by those other people on the basis of merit, and merit alone.
Then we have all those millions which are said to have been laundered in Switzerland to pay members of the royal family of Saudi Arabia in return for contracts and extensions of contracts pertaining to the Al-Yamamah contract which Mrs Thatcher initiated many years ago. It was a very large contract even then; now it is colossal. Funny that the name of the contract - Al-Yamamah- has such a whiter than white name; for in Arabic, the name means ‘the dove’. Doves, as we all know, have such a pure, often white, connotation. There seems to be little white and pure about the goings on behind the scenes between BAE and the Saudi government. Anyone would think that those already fabulously wealthy Saudi princes needed even more money!
The funny thing is that there are hundreds and hundreds (maybe even thousands and thousands) of ex-employees of BAE who have been treated shabbily. BAE is famous for its bad treatment of any employee who happens to fall foul of their autocratic management style. How many innocent ex-employees of BAE have had their careers washed up because of BAE, I wonder? How many lives has BAE destroyed? How many sacrificial lambs have there been since the inception of this so-called Al-Yamamah contract? One can only hazard a guess.
Then we have the Bush-Saudi connection. The relationship between these two parties seems most unhealthy to me and to many I know. Bush keeps harping on about terrorism and the need to win the war against it. Have you noticed, though, that he avoids calling that same terrorism by its proper name: Islamic terrorism? One can only wonder why.
The sad thing about the ‘war on terror’ is that Bush is all for beating it on the one hand, but on the other is allowing the Saudis to pump untold millions, nay billions, into the US to finance the propagation of Wahhabi Islam, known to be the most pernicious brand of Islam around. On this score, Bush speaks with bifurcated tongue. So Islam-friendly have his policies been over the time he has been in office that Islam has grown in the States like never before. Doesn’t the president realise that Islam is out to destroy the US constitution? Does he not realise that Islam and democracy are totally and utterly incompatible? Does he not realise that Islam is as much a political system as it is a religious one? Can Mr Bush really be that naïve? Or is there something else going on behind the scenes which we, the ordinary people, just don’t get to hear about?
Then we have the vast inequalities of wealth created here in the United Kingdom by no less than a so-called socialist government under Tony Blair’s watch. It has recently been reported that the top echelons of society have seen their riches increase threefold in the past decade! And they call that socialism! That’s ‘Champagne socialism’ if ever I saw it.
Now don’t get me wrong, I am no friend of socialism. Socialism is one of the worst forms of government ever dreamed up by any political thinkers. But nor am I in favour of a form of unbridled capitalism which treats people unfairly. It cannot be right for foreigners to be allowed to come to this country and not be taxed on their earnings from abroad, when ordinary people, you the voters, have to be taxed on any small amount of money you might be able to earn from that self-same source.
In London, there are many who have to slave away for a full week for as little as £400, and often less, whereas there are the fat cats who earn upwards of £46,000 in that very same week!
If the corruption I have referred to is allowed to continue, then we should not be surprised if one of these days the people will turn on the people who govern them. Nor should we be surprised if the pendulum will swing in the favour of socialism in the years to come. Even the very best of parties come to an end, sometime. Our politicians should be aware that people’s tolerance is not infinite. It used to be said that poverty was the breeding ground of communism. In those days, they were speaking of absolute poverty, of course. But I should like to add that relative poverty could also one day become the breeding ground of communism. We should all be aware that this is a distinct possibility. Fairness still counts for something. No sensible person wants to live in a political system that treats the rich differently from the poor. Any country that legislates so much in favour of the rich at the expense of the poor is heading for political turmoil. Those odious systems of government – socialism and communism – are not dead; they are simply lying dormant. And in some countries, most notably in Venezuela, we can see extreme socialism beginning to raise its ugly head even as I write this.
Capitalism is by far the best political system around; though it is far from perfect. The greatest weakness in capitalism is that it plays to man’s greedy nature. In years gone by, this wasn’t such a problem, since in years gone by, the influence of the Church and Christianity were far greater: they acted as a counterbalance to man’s greed, and checked people’s lack of principle, thereby keeping corruption, nepotism, and cronyism in check. Alas, in today’s increasingly secular world, there are few such checks and balances. The Western capitalist world has become a ‘free for all’: you take what you can, when you can.
Corruption, nepotism, cronyism, unbridled greed – these are the sad realities of life in the twenty-first century.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Now isn't this a good laugh. The prime minister of Pakistan-administered Kashmir Sardar Attique Ahmad Khan (abrreviated as SAAK, pronounced sack as in 'sack of shit') says the OIC should have a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. What about NATO? How about my cousin? Oh and SAAK also wants to create an "OIC Town" in Kashmir. Is that like funkytown or hymietown? I wonder why? in Kashmir of all places. Hell, let's move the UN there and leave! That would be a FUNkytown alright. Hate to see you go, but don't let the screendoor hit you in the ass on the way out. You know, those Muslims. They just can't give it up. They actually think they are special. You would almost think they worship a pedophile nutcase and believe they are superior because they prostate themselves daily and blow farts of love at each other out of their asses. Who'd thunk it?
Islamabad, 16 May (AKI/DAWN) - The prime minister of Pakistan-administered Kashmir Sardar Attique Ahmad Khan has said that the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) - the association of 56 Islamic states promoting Muslim solidarity in economic, social, and political affairs - should be made a permanent member of the UN security council. Speaking at a news briefing in the Pakistani capital Islamabad, he said the Islamic countries had a right to have an effective role in the UN security council.
He said the government in Pakistan-administered Kashmir was considering a proposal to establish an "OIC Town" in the region, to create awareness of the role Muslim countries are playing in the rehabilitation of the areas in the region that were hit by the October 2005 earthquake.
He said he had presented a proposal for setting up an office of the Islamic Development Bank in the Pakistan Kashmir, during his meeting with the president of the Bank in Saudi Arabia.
He acknowledged the role of the OIC on the disputed region of Kashmir and said the organisation had been supporting Pakistan’s viewpoint. He welcomed the meeting of OIC foreign ministers in Islamabad at a very crucial phase in history.
Among a spate of issues confronting the Muslim Ummah (Global Muslim community) in particular and the world in general, the dispute of Jammu and Kashmir between India and Pakistan constituted a core issue.
He said the dispute arose out of the fact that the people of Kashmir had not been given the opportunity to decide their future as promised to them by the UN.
He said that the just cause of Kashmiris deserved support of all world organizations believing in the supremacy of human values and rights. The OIC has been supportive of this just struggle.
He pointed out that in the Contact Group on Kashmir meeting of OIC foreign ministers at the UN headquarters last year, lent moral, political and diplomatic support to the Kashmir cause by upholding the 10-point proposals, including termination of repression, release of detenues, withdrawal of the Indian army from towns, the end to human rights violations and expanding intra Kashmir contacts, trade and tourism.
The appointment of Ezzat Kame Mufti as special envoy of the OIC secretary general on Kashmir was a another step in this direction.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
I have always thought Wolfowitz is a sleazy, incompetent advisor to Bush, one of many. You may recall he said that Iraq would be a piece of cake and only cost about $20 billion. He also said that the oil revenues from Iraq would take care of reconstruction. For all that, he got promoted to the World Bank. There he got caught screwing a Muslim and sweetening her paycheck. Now, this jerk is about to be bitchslapped to the ground. Sweet.
Wolfowitz 'threatened bank staff after leak'
By Alex Spillius
Last Updated: 2:30am BST 16/05/2007
Paul Wolfowitz, the embattled World Bank chief, launched into a threatening tirade against members of his staff when news of his controversial pay and promotion package for his girlfriend began to leak out, it emerged yesterday.
The World Bank board will discuss and decide Paul Wolfowitz's fate by the end of the week
The revelation was one of the more damning elements of a report by a special investigative panel, which concluded that the scandal "had a dramatic, negative effect on the reputation and credibility" of the bank.
Xavier Coll, a former vice-president for human resources, told bank interviewers that Mr Wolfowitz accused him of leaking details of the deal he engineered for Shaha Riza.
"And he also stated very clearly that if these people f*** with me or Shaha, I have enough on them to f*** them too. Those were the words," Mr Coll said.
This only proves the point made by Lawrence Auster, Hugh Fitzgerald and many others who HAVE a brain. Separation from Islam works. You see, Muslims have got to kill. Mo says so. So if they can't get to infidels, they kill each other. Stop Muslim immigration to the West. Cut off the jizya. Spike the conspiracies and let them have it! They really do need to step it up. I won't be happy until the daily count is at least 500.
At least 10 killed in Hamas-Fatah fighting
Tue May 15, 2007 1:19PM BST
By Nidal al-Mughrabi
GAZA (Reuters) - At least 10 Palestinians were killed on Tuesday -- eight in one incident -- in the deadliest fighting between Hamas and Fatah since the rivals formed a unity government to end bloodshed threatening to spill into civil war.
For many Palestinians, the violence was particularly disturbing, coming on the "Nakba", an annual day of national reflection over shared suffering in the conflict with Israel.
In an attack near Karni Crossing, Gaza's main commercial lifeline with Israel, Hamas gunmen killed eight members of Mahmoud Abbas's Presidential Guard, a Fatah spokesman said.
The Fatah-affiliated guardsmen were en route to help comrades under assault by Hamas at a training base near the crossing when Israeli forces across the frontier opened fire at them, the spokesman, Tawfiq Abu Khoussa, said.
"Some of the vehicles overturned and some of the men were wounded. The forces retreated but they were ambushed by Hamas gunmen, who finished them off," he said.
"They were killed in cold blood," Abu Khoussa said, putting the number of dead at eight.
Hamas's armed wing denied the allegation, blaming their deaths on Israel and accusing Fatah of killing one of its commanders earlier.
An Israeli military spokeswoman said Israeli forces shot at two gunmen who approached the border fence, hitting one of them...... [BLAME THE JEWS! of course]