Friday, November 11, 2011

US Army Being Sued by Victims and Families of Hasan's Shooting Spree at Ft. Hood, TX

83 seek $750 million from Army for Fort Hood shooting spree

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON – Eighty-three victims and family members in the worst-ever mass shooting at a U.S. military installation are seeking $750 million in compensation from the Army, alleging that willful negligence enabled psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Hasan to carry out a terrorist attack at Fort Hood Texas.

The administrative claims filed last week said the government had clear warnings that Hasan, who is scheduled to go on trial in March, posed a grave danger to the lives of soldiers and civilians.

The government bowed to political correctness and not only ignored the threat Hasan presented but actually promoted him to the rank of major five months before the massacre, according to the administrative claims against the Defense Department, the Justice Department and the FBI.

Thirteen soldiers and civilians were killed and more than two dozen soldiers and civilians were injured in the Nov. 5, 2009, shooting spree.

Fifty-four relatives of eight of the murdered soldiers have filed claims. One civilian police officer and nine of the injured soldiers have filed claims, along with 19 family members of those 10.

[Source: NATION section, of the Arizona Daily Star, Friday, November 11, 2011.]

Does their Suit have Merit?

According to Guy Rogers, Executive Director of ACT! for America, the official 9/11 Commission Report, Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, Authorized Edition, July 22, 2004, avoided political correctness. This report used the word Jihadist 32 times, Jihad 126 times, Muslim 145 times, and Islam 322 times.

Guy goes on to note that in a 2009 National Intelligence Strategy, manual, first put out by the BHO administration which defines what the threats are to the U.S.A. for our National Security public documents, these four words were omitted. Hence, since 2004, official documents of our government have been stripped of any reference to the real nature of the existential threat that our country faces today, and somehow calling it something else.

Guy also notes that in the U.S. Government’s final report regarding Hasan: Protecting the Forces, the words Violent Extremist, Enemy, al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood or Ikhwan, Jihad, Islam, Muslim, Hamas, Hezbollah, Caliph, or Sharia, have been omitted. However, the word religious was used 59 times suggesting that Hasan was religious in something. (To be fair, the words Violent Extremist and Islam were used once in a single footnote in the title of a cited reference.)

According to Guy’s report, Major Hasan gave a PowerPoint presentation to a group of doctors in 2007 at Walter Reed Army Hospital titled “The Koranic World View as it relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military,” in place of a normal medical presentation. This presentation was a red-flag warning to his superiors of Hasan’s intentions, but because of political correctness, it went unheeded. And, in addition to this, he had the acronym SoA (Soldier of Allah) printed on his military business cards, another red-flag that went unheeded. Finally, on November 5, 2009 at Ft. Hood, Texas, he committed the second-most horrific terrorist attack in the United States; an act that was totally preventable, had the red flags not been ignored.

[Source: Guy Rogers, ACT! for America: DVD video, The Doctrine of Abrogation, Open the Koran Day, October 2011.]

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Human Rights -- UN Declaration vs Cairo Declaration

Below is a comparison of some of the articles regarding individual rights between the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) compared with the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (1990). It's interesting to note that the UN Declaration gives rights to everyone everywhere (the Golden Rule for all people), while the Cairo document seems to give rights to a selected group of people in accordance with Sharia.

UN Universal Declaration of Human rights

Adopted General Assembly December 10, 1948

(…) the General Assembly proclaims This Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations (…)

Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam

Adopted August 5, 1990

(…) the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam which will serve as a general guidance for Member States in the field of human rights. Wishing to contribute to the efforts of mankind to assert human rights, to protect man from exploitation and persecution, and to affirm his freedom and right to a dignified life in accordance with the Islamic Shari'ah.

ARTICLE 1: (a) Life is a God-given gift and the right to life is guaranteed to every human being. It is the duty of individuals, societies and states to protect this right from any violation, and it is prohibited to take away life except for a Shari'ah prescribed reason. (c) The preservation of human life throughout the term of time willed by God is a duty prescribed by Shari'ah. (d) Safety from bodily harm is a guaranteed right. It is the duty of the state to safeguard it, and it is prohibited to breach it without a Sharia-prescribed reason.

ARTICLE 7: (b) Parents and those in such like capacity have the right to choose the type of education they desire for their children, provided they take into consideration the interest and future of the children in accordance with ethical values and the principles of the Shari'ah. (c) Both parents are entitled to certain rights from their children, and relatives are entitled to rights from their kin, in accordance with the tenets of the Shari'ah.

ARTICLE 12: Every man shall have the right, within the framework of Shari'ah, to free movement and to select his place of residence whether inside or outside his country and if persecuted, is entitled to seek asylum in another country. The country of refuge shall ensure his protection until he reaches safety, unless asylum is motivated by an act which Shari'ah regards as a crime.

ARTICLE 16: Everyone shall have the right to enjoy the fruits of his scientific, literary, artistic or technical production and the right to protect the moral and material interests stemming there-from, provided that such production is not contrary to the principles of Shari'ah.

ARTICLE 19: (d) There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shari'ah.

ARTICLE 22: (a) Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'ah. (b) Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari'ah.

ARTICLE 23: (b) Everyone shall have the right to participate, directly or indirectly in the administration of his country's public affairs. He shall also have the right to assume public office in accordance with the provisions of Shari'ah.

ARTICLE 24: All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah.

ARTICLE 25: The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.

Monday, October 18, 2010

Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant

Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant
CitizenWarrior, October 16, 2010

THE FOLLOWING article was written by Paul on Celestial Junk. I originally read it when someone posted it as a comment on the Citizen Warrior Facebook page. The reason I'm reprinting this is because one of the most common responses we get when we mention anything negative about Islam is, "But the majority of Muslims are peace-loving people." This seems like such a final, decisive, irrefutable, self-evident conclusion, it makes all your ranting about Islam completely pointless. Or so it seems to the person who says it.

But from now on, when someone counters your educational efforts with "most Muslims are peace-loving," school them with Paul's response. Here it is:

Just as a "committed" Christian is one who truly follows the Bible, so a "committed" or "devoted" Muslim is one who truly follows the Quran. And just as a "devoted" Christian is one who truly follows Jesus, so a "devoted" Muslim is one who truly follows Muhammad.

A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, he replied, "Very few people were true Nazis, but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."

We are told again and again that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Even if this unqualified assertion is true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of zealous Muslims rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

The fact is that the committed, devoted, zealous followers of Muhammad...the "true Muslims"...rule Islam at this moment in history. Some call them "fanatics" or "extremists." It is these zealous followers of the Quran who march. It is the fanatical, committed, zealous, literal followers of Muhammad who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the committed Muslims who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatical followers of the Quran who bomb, behead, murder, or honor-kill. It is the fanatical followers of Muhammad who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatical, committed Muslims who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatical Muslims, those who take the Quran and the teachings of Muhammad very seriously and literally, who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.

The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful Muslims, the "silent majority," (IF they are indeed in the majority), are cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.

And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery? Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving?"

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:

  • Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

  • Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like the aforementioned German aristocrat, they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

  • Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.

As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

[Original Source: Celestial Junk.]

Friday, October 1, 2010

The Muslim Brotherhood

1. Shariah places great importance on an “Information War,” a “Civilization Jihad” against the USA, featuring political and psychological warfare via an international group of Islamists known as the Muslim Brotherhood (MB or Ikhwan).

2. The MB uses non-violent, stealthy techniques to establish relations with, influence and, wherever possible, penetrate a government’s circles in executive and legislative branches at the federal, state and local levels; the law enforcement communities; intelligence agencies; the military; penal institutions; the media; think tanks and policy groups; academic institutions; non-Muslim religious communities; and other elites; all to destroy a country and then establish shariah.

3. The MB is the leader of the Islamic Movement throughout the world; and is by far the strongest and most organized.

4. The MB’s “Civilization-Jihadist Process” is primarily conducted by groups posing as peaceable, “moderate” and law-abiding Muslim community organizations; while, behind-the-scenes, its mission is sedition in the furtherance of shariah’s supremacist agenda.

5. The Ikhwan’s objective is a kind of grand jihad to eliminate and destroy our Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s (Allah's) religion is made victorious over all other religions.

6. They co-opt our leadership into believing a counterfactual understanding of Islam and the nature of the MB, and then coerce these leaders to enforce the MB narrative on their subordinates, with the end result being world-wide shariah, and the re-establishment of the global Islamic caliphate.

7. Nearly every major Muslim organization in the USA is actually controlled by the MB or a derivative organization.

8. Most Muslim-American groups of any prominence are factually hostile to the United States and its Constitution.

9. BH creed: “God (Allah) is our objective, the Koran is our law, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our way, and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations.” As evidenced from the Creed, the MB is the root of the majority of Islamic terrorist groups in the world today.

10. The Muslim Students Assn (MSN), is a front organization created by the Ikhwan with many college chapters throughout the USA; some serving as recruiting nodes for the MB and others for violent jihadist organizations. Initially, MSA chapters presented Islam in public as an acceptable alternative to other religions, never mentioning its revolutionary aspects. MSA members are becoming more aggressive in demands for accommodations and silencing all opposition.

11. The Muslim Brotherhood’s ‘ Phased Plan’

Phase One: Inject BH members into positions of leadership using discreet and secret methods.

Phase Two: Expand Islam’s image on the public scene, infiltrate Government, befriend religious institutions and senior scholars, gain public support and sympathy, and establish a shadow government (secret) within the Government.

Phase Three: Escalate conflict and confrontation with the rulers via mass media. Currently in progress.

Phase Four: Initiate open public confrontation with Government through political pressure. Begin aggressive implementation of Phase Three. Begin training in use of weapons in anticipation of zero-hour.

Phase Five: Seize power, establish the Islamic Nation under which all parties and Islamic groups are united.

12. The Implementation of Shariah by the Muslim Brotherhood. The Elbarasse archives* and close observation of the Brotherhood’s operations reveal the following as the most important of the techniques employed by the Ikhwan in America to achieve the seditious goals of its civilization jihad:

a. Expanding the Muslim presence by birth rate, immigration, and refusal to assimilate;

b. Occupying and expanding domination of physical spaces;

c. Ensuring the “Muslim Community” knows and follows MB doctrine;

d. Controlling the language we use in describing the enemy;

e. Ensuring we do not study their doctrine (shariah);

f. Co-opting key leadership;

g. Forcing compliance with shariah at local levels;

h. Fighting all counterterrorism efforts;

i. Subverting religious organizations;

j. Employing lawfare - the offensive use of lawsuits and threats of lawsuits;

k. Claiming victimization / demanding accommodations;

l. Condemning “slander” against Islam;

m. Subverting the U.S. education system, infiltrating and dominating U.S. Middle East studies programs;

m. Demanding the right to practice shariah in segregated Muslim enclaves;

o. Demanding recognition of shariah in non-Muslim spheres;

p. Confronting and denouncing Western society, laws, and traditions; and

q. Demanding that shariah replace Western law.

Note that many of the foregoing techniques entail, in one way or another, influencing and neutralizing the American Government at all levels.

*Elbarasse archives. In August of 2004, an alert Maryland Transportation Authority Police officer observed a woman wearing traditional Islamic garb videotaping the support structures of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge in Maryland, and conducted a traffic stop. The driver of the vehicle was identified as Ismail Elbarasse and detained on an outstanding material witness warrant issued in Chicago, Illinois in a Hamas case. The FBI’s Washington Field Office raided Elbarasse’s residence in Annandale, Virginia, and in the basement of his home, a hidden sub-basement was found. In the sub-basement, the FBI discovered the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America. The documents confirmed what investigators and counterterrorism experts had previously suspected and contended about the myriad Muslim-American groups in the United States – namely, that nearly all of them are controlled by the MB and, therefore, as shariah dictates, are hostile to this country, its Constitution and freedoms. The documents make clear their sole objectives are to implement Islamic Law in America in furtherance of re-establishing the global caliphate.

[Source: Shariah The Threat to America (Team B Report;

Friday, September 24, 2010

Collision between Islam and the West?

Paraphrasing Daniel Greenfield's article in Right Side News, "Mohammad's Ghost and the Incompatibility of Islam and the West," he notes that historically, Islam conquered infidels by the sword. He also notes that Muslims are currently sweeping across Europe to create what some call "Eurabia;" enabled by Saudi wealth, a non-normal high birth rate among Muslims, and a decaying Western world. As the fanatical determinism of the Muslim world collides with the secularized West, there seems to be only two ways for this clash to end -- will it be liberty and freedom, or subjugation and Sharia? We, by our words and deeds, will help determine which will stand and which will fall.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Waking up to Radical Islam

The following article addresses the issue of America being "asleep" when it comes to the dangers posed by radical Islam and creeping Sharia Law. The highlighting provided by the author.
The original article is posted in HumanEvents at:

Waking Up to Radical Islam

by Brigitte Gabriel (more by this author)

Posted 09/16/2010 ET

In spite of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s recent New York Times op-ed written to calm American concerns about the Ground Zero mosque, as the bright light of public scrutiny shines on this proposed mosque, Americans are discovering elements of radical Islam previously unknown to them.

The controversy has led countless Americans, puzzled and disturbed by the motivation and insensitivity of Imam Rauf and his backers, to begin evaluating the threat of radical Islam beyond the isolated context of terrorism.

Islam’s history has shown, for example, there is powerful symbolism in choosing where to construct mosques. Built on sites of military victories, mosques have traditionally symbolized the triumph and supremacy of Islam over all other religions and people: Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem was built on top of Solomon’s Temple; the Umayyad mosque in Damascus is over the church of St. John the Baptist; more than 2,000 mosques are on the footprints of Hindu Temples in India.

While America does not have a religious center per se, in the eyes of radical Islam our “religion” is capitalism and the destruction of the World Trade Center was like the sack of Constantinople.

Does Ground Zero mosque Imam Rauf view his proposed mosque through this lens? Honestly, we can’t know for sure.

But even if he doesn’t, there is no doubt that many in the Muslim world will regard the construction of a mosque at Ground Zero as a tribute to Islamic victory over “infidel” America. Islamist leaders worldwide will employ the symbolism of a mosque at Ground Zero as a recruiting tool to jihad, swelling their ranks and escalating the threat against America.

This debate is forcing the American people to take a long- overdue look at the harsh reality of a political ideology which is in its very nature antithetical to the fundamental values of liberty and justice as practiced in America and Western societies.

People are asking the kinds of questions I had to confront decades ago: What exactly is “sharia law?” Why is there such an increase in homegrown jihadists today than ten or even five years ago? Who are the “moderate” Muslims, and why aren’t they speaking out more aggressively against the “radicals?”

Rauf and his supporters certainly did not anticipate the degree and intensity of the blowback they are getting. On the contrary, he quietly greased the skids for this project, meeting behind the scenes with various elected officials and opinion leaders to get their blessing.

Unfortunately, those he met with failed to do the due diligence that would have exposed his real agenda. They accepted at face value his soothing platitudes of tolerance and interfaith dialogue, platitudes for which he has shown contempt in writings and statements in the Arabic world.

Imam Rauf repeats these platitudes in his lengthy New York Times op-ed, clearly hoping that Americans will believe him. But thanks to probing investigations done by investigative reporters, bloggers and watchdog organizations, a robust debate has surrounded the proposed mosque.

More Americans now know that Rauf, as recently as March, said in Arabic that he opposes interfaith dialogue. They know he is a vocal supporter of sharia law, that he says governments which do not employ sharia law are “unjust” and that he has refused to label Hamas a terrorist organization. They know he has refused to sign the “Freedom Pledge,” issued by Former Muslims United, which pledges to oppose retaliation and punishment toward Muslims who leave Islam. The more Americans learn, the more concerned they become.

As a Lebanese immigrant I am as proud to be an American as at any time since I arrived in this great nation. Grassroots America is rising up in opposition to this symbol of Islamist victory, ignoring the hectoring and name-calling of our politically-correct “elites.”

Undoubtedly there are different reasons for why 70% of Americans oppose the building of the mosque. But whether the motivation is concern for the 9/11 victims or concern about the advance of sharia law that Imam Rauf advocates, the American people are saying “enough is enough.”

That is the only language Islamists understand.

Terrorists are only one manifestation of radical Islam. As Americans look even closer they will come to realize that the same ideology that produces a terrorist also produces a seemingly moderate Muslim who is dedicated to the advancement and imposition of sharia law. They will learn that the Islamist in a suit and tie, who wants to replace the Constitution with sharia law, differs from the terrorist only in the means to the end, not the end itself.

Brigitte Gabriel is an international terrorism analyst and a two-time New York Times best-selling author of Because They Hate and They Must Be Stopped. She is the president of ACT for, the largest national security grassroots movement in the U.S.

Conflict Between Sharia and US State & Federal Laws

The following information has been paraphrased from an article on Sept 21, 2010 by William Kilpatrick called “The Road to Sharia. He notes that U.S. law already prohibits the free exercise of Islam because it encompasses a complete political, legal, and moral system called “Sharia law.” Devout Muslims believe these laws are divine commandments and must be complied with without question; full practice of Islam requires compliance with them. Problem is, many shariah laws violate state and federal laws.

1. Under shariah law a Muslim girl can be contracted for marriage at any age. The marriage can be consummated when she is eight or nine. The laws of the United States frown upon such arrangements.

2. Under Sharia a man may marry up to four wives (simultaneously). U.S. law prohibits the practice of polygamy.

3. Under Sharia law, a man can easily divorce his wife, but a woman cannot divorce her husband without his consent. U.S. divorce courts don’t see things in quite the same way.

4. Sharia law: Muslim women are forbidden from marrying a non-Muslim. U.S. law: In this, as in so many other respects, Islamic law is null and void. American citizens are free to marry outside their religion.

5. Sharia law: the testimony of a woman in court is worth half the value of a man’s testimony. U.S. law: “Tell it to the judge!”

6. Sharia law: Muslim men have permission to beat their wives for disobedience. U.S. law: In U.S. law this Sharia provision is referred to as “domestic abuse battery.”

7. Sharia law: adultery is punishable by lashing and stoning to death. U.S. law: “Let he who throws the first stone be prepared for life behind bars.”
8. Sharia law: homosexuality is punishable by death. U.S. law: “Abdul, meet your cellmate, Butch.”

9. Sharia law: thieves may be punished with amputation. U.S. law: the Eighth Amendment prohibits “cruel and unusual punishments.”

10. Sharia law: a Muslim who rejects Islam must be killed. U.S. law: under U.S. laws this form of Islamic justice is referred to as “first- degree murder.”

11. Sharia law: non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims under the law. U.S. law: “all men are created equal.”

12. Sharia law: Sharia law supersedes any system of man-made laws. U.S. law: Article VI. “This Constitution shall be…the supreme law of the land.”

Because of these and other conflicts, the free exercise of Islam is prohibited in America. To allow full practice Islam, the U.S. Constitution and Criminal Code would have to be re-written to make them Sharia compliant. Thus, to allow free exercise of religion for Muslims would necessitate the abrogation of constitutional rights for U.S. citizens—including the right to freedom of religion.