A Window of Opportunity Regarding Islamist Doctrine

A public discussion of mainstream Islam has finally opened in mainstream America because of something as simple as a proposed mosque near Ground Zero in NYC. Oddly enough, the proposed mosque has had an unfavorable effect upon Islamist doctrine by non-Muslims; After 9/11, only about 9% of the US population had an unfavorable view of Islamist doctrine.

Now, because of the proposed mosque, up to 45% of non-Muslims have an unfavorable view of this doctrine. The question is: what is there to like about an Islamist doctrine that advocates the subjugation of all non-Muslims, pay heavy poll tax, or accept death? Since the proposed mosque near Ground Zero, many non-Muslims are learning about such Islamist doctrine; it has become an acceptable topic of discussion in newspapers, radio, and TV.

The big question is: do the Muslims who are planning this mosque share the same hateful ideology as the highjackers on 9/11? Do they believe in the same jihadist objectives and methods, or are they lying to us using the principle of taqiyya? Now that the “veil” has been lifted; there are numerous books that non-Muslims can read on political Islam, jihad, sharia, and dhimmitude that highlight the characteristics of Islamist doctrine. Once the “facts” are known, you can begin to form an honest opinion about that doctrine.

What are the Important Elements of Radical Islam Fundamentalist (Islamic) Ideology?

Below are some important elements of radical Islamic fundamentalist (Islamic) ideology.
These are useful to help us infidels (non-believers) understand some of the reasons that
we are having problems with some of our Islamic friends today. This information has
been adapted from "CitizenWarrior.com"

============================================================

Posted: 20 Aug 2010 11:17 PM PDT

1. There is only one God, and Mohammad is His prophet.

2. Islam is a better religion than any other religion.

3. Islam has a better government and system of law than any other.

4. Anybody who is not a Muslim is worth less than a Muslim, deserves less respect, and under Islamic law, should be treated as a second-class citizen with fewer rights and a heavy tax burden.

5. Every Muslim should strive to make the whole world and everyone in it follow Islamic law. This is the prime directive.

6. Striving for this prime directive is the most important thing a Muslim can do. It is his (or her) most important religious duty. It is the most important expression of his religious faith.

7. He should strive to accomplish the prime directive with his time, his money, his speech and writing, and with weapons if necessary.

8. If he is in a place where Muslims don't have dominant political power, he can and should deceive non-Muslims if it helps Muslims accomplish the prime directive.

9. Any efforts by non-Muslims to inhibit the spread of Islam should be considered an attack on Islam.

10. Whenever Islam is attacked, it is a Muslim's holy duty to defend Islam by any means necessary.

11. A Muslim should never stop striving for the domination of Islam until it has been achieved.

If you don't already know this about Islam, you have some learning to do. Start with the Quran (and make sure the Quran you use has been unscrambled). Then take the pledge and read the Quran. [Source: CitizenWarrior.com]

Islam Means the End of Religious Freedom

Below is a powerful article that argues that when religious freedom and tolerance accommodates Islam and Sharia law, Islam will end up eradicating that freedom and replacing it with intolerance like that found in Mecca. Mecca once had religious freedom, it doesn't now. The same can be said for other cities and governments that have embraced Islam and Sharia law. Sharia and freedom are incompatible. One cannot exist with the other.

========================================================================

Islam Means the End of Religious Freedom
by Daniel Greenfield, August 14, 2010

At an Iftar dinner in the White House, Barack Hussein Obama proclaimed that he supports the building of the Ground Zero mosque as part of his "unshakable commitment to religious freedom". Which of course sounds very noble and good, until you ask a single question, Where is the religious freedom in the Muslim world?

Obama has made the case for Islam in America, on the grounds that America's religious diversity promotes the religious freedom of all. Islam no less than any other belief system. Yet if introducing Islam into America promotes religious freedom, then why is there no religious freedom in the Muslim world? Why are churches firebombed in Malaysia because Christians presumed to use the word Allah? Why are non-Muslims forbidden to enter the city of Mecca, from which Jews and Christians were ethnically cleansed by Mohammed? Why are Coptic Christians being oppressed and humiliated by the Egyptian government? Why are Muslims murdering Buddhist teachers in Thailand? There are a thousand examples, all of which add up to a single conclusion-- Muslims demand religious freedom, yet are not willing to give it to others.

This has ominous implications for the prospects of religious freedom in America. Nor is this a theoretical issue. Jews are fleeing European cities in record numbers because of Muslim persecution. The recent case of Malmo, highlights the fact that Islam actually threatens religious diversity. Simply to protect themselves, Malmo's 650 Jews were forced to spend half a million Kronor a year. The situation is much the same across Europe, as Jewish institutions are forced to become fortresses. What the Nazis did not succeed in accomplishing in Europe, the rise of Islam seems to be doing.

Nor are Christians safe, they are simply in the majority for now. But Christians and other religions were once in the majority in the Middle East. Until they were massacred and repressed by the tidal wave of Islam. Today the religions that were once a majority, whether it is Jews in Israel, Christians in Byzantium or Zoroastrians in Persia, have become oppressed minorities. Some may take comfort in the notion that "It can't happen here." But the fate of Europe's Jews, shows that it can happen here. And that it is happening here.

Religious freedom requires that the religions which enjoy it, agree to tolerate each other. If they do not, instead of religious freedom, there is a religious war.

Looking at the religious map of the world today, Islam has grown in non-Muslim countries, while non-Muslims continue to dwindle in Muslim countries. And even the number of non-Muslim religious believers in non-Muslim countries dwindles, when Muslims are introduced into the equation. If Islam were a fish in a fish tank, it's clear that it would be a piranha. If you put it into the fish tank, very soon you have a lot of Islamic piranhas and only a handful of other fish that survive, only because the piranhas need to keep some of them alive in order to feed on them. If you don't like that picture, take an honest look at the Muslim world, with its dominant Muslim caste and inferior non-Muslims living in the cracks of their walls, and draw a better one.

The question is do we want to import this into the United States? Because history and current events show that there is no better way to insure the end of religious freedom in the United States, than to introduce Islam into the picture. Over and over again, the rise of Islam has meant the eradication of religious freedom. And those who fail to learn from that past, will be doomed to repeat it.

Obama attempted to position his remarks as being against religious intolerance, but yet he spoke in defense of religious intolerance. Because what greater act of religious intolerance could there than building a mosque in a place where Muslims had previously murdered 3000 Americans? Nor are such actions unique on the part of Muslims, who have routinely hijacked other people's sacred areas and structures to make a statement about Islamic supremacism. If Islam were truly as tolerant as Obama claims, its adherents would not attempt to build a massive mosque complex that they do not actually need in this place.

And what of the Iftar dinner itself which Obama spoke at. The Iftar dinner is the nightly break in the fast of Ramadan. And what is Ramadan? It commemorates the revelation of the first verses of the Koran to Mohammed. And those first verses of the Koran conclude with, "Guide us the straight way, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians)." That same verses appears in the daily prayers of Muslims.

Seen in that light, Ramadan marks the beginning of Islam's intolerance for other religions, as embodied in its scriptures. When Muslims schools teach pupils that Jews are apes and Christians are pigs, they are relying on the wellspring of hate already in the Koran. A non-Muslim country holding an event to mark any aspect of Ramadan is as mad as sheep celebrating their own slaughter.

Let's look at how some of the participants in Obama's Iftar dinner embody that famous Islamic tolerance. There is Hassan Jaber, Executive Director of ACCESS. "ACCESS paid for commercial driving lessons and attempts at hazardous material hauling certificates for two men convicted as part of the Detroit Al-Qaeda sleeper cell. Testimony at their trial revealed that the men planned to bomb the MGM Grand Casino and a host of other prominent US sites." (Debbie Schlussel). Access has funded a conference at which Sami Al Arian, of Islamic Jihad, spoke. There's also Ingrid Mattson, who is against any reform of Islam and places loyalty to Islam before America. There's MPAC's Salam Al Marayat, who has defended Hezbollah who has been described as having "disturbing sympathies for Islamic terrorists". Dalia Mogahed, an apologist for Sharia law and the subjugation of women. And those are only some of the names in attendance.

Finally let's turn to Obama's own enthusiasm for religious freedom. That enthusiasm was markedly absent when Caplin and Drysdalelawyers were intimidating conservative. churches. They even intimidated Jewish non-profit groups who wanted Palin to speak at an Anti-Ahmadinejad rally, by threatening their tax exempt status. Mortimer Caplin was a major supporter of Obama, and part of Obama for America. But Obama was not upset when his supporters were silencing the religious freedom of Christians and Jews.Which suggests that his "Unshakable Commitment to Religious Freedom" is actually rather shaky indeed. And appears to be reserved for Muslims. Which would reaffirm what Obama himself said in his own book; "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction".

His endorsement of the Ground Zero mosque is another case of Obama standing "with the Muslims" and against Americans of all other faiths, who want the freedom to practice their religion in peace without harassment, persecution and violence from the followers of Islam, who believe that all other religions are invalid, and that all forms of government and law that are not governed by the Koran, have no right to exist.

Religious Freedom must be defended, from all those who would take it away. The history of Islam is the history of genocide, oppression and ethnic cleansing practiced by Muslims against non-Muslims. Islam is the death blow to religious diversity and freedom. And nowhere better is that seen than Mecca, a city that was once a mecca for different religions, which is now barred to all but Muslims. Mecca is the Muslim ideal. And it exemplifies what they hope to accomplish.

Meanwhile, Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais, the Imam of the Grand Mosque of Mecca, has praised terrorism saying "Allahu Akbar! These are signs of victory: Jihad has remained the only wining card and the light of hope in the hands of those sincere people among the Ummah". He has called Jews "scum of the earth" and "rats of the world", Christians, " cross-worshipers" and filled with "rotten ideas and poisonous culture" and had similarly charming things to say of Hindus. This is how the world looks from Mecca, the heart of Islam. And this is why Islam and religious freedom are incompatible.

Obama concluded his remarks by saying: "And we can only achieve “liberty and justice for all” if we live by that one rule at the heart of every great religion, including Islam — that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us." But that is not the rule at the heart of Islam. [NOTE: Instead of the Golden Rule, the Koran says: "Mohammed is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (48:29); AND " Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve." (8.55) AND "The unbelievers are your inveterate enemy." (4:101).] And this is not the first time that he has tried to sell that particular lie. But Islam never equates Muslims with non-Muslims, as Obama pretends it does. Its offer of brotherhood is only open to fellow Muslims. Its tolerance is only for fellow Muslims. And that is at the heart of the problem. And it is why the rise of Islam means the end of liberty and justice for all. To stand for liberty and justice is to take a stand against Islamic bigotry.

Is Islam Intrinsically Islamist?

Below is a short but excellent response by an ACT! for America chapter leader in Arizona to an article by Dr. Krauthammer that erroneously asserts that Islam is not intrinsically Islamist.

===========================================================

Dear Dr. Krauthammer,

In your otherwise excellent article in today's Washington Post you wrote:

"Islam is no more intrinsically Islamist than present-day Germany is Nazi..."

This assertion is patently false. Of course, Islam is intrinsically "Islamist" because of what is in the Koran and the sayings of Muhammad which are inseparable from Islam. "Islamism" cannot possibly be separated from "Islam".

This does not mean that all Moslems follow the Islamist doctrines of Islam. You are making a common error of conflating the doctrines of Islam with the behavior of Moslems who may or may not follow the doctrines. "Islam" could mean "the world of Islam including the behavior of Moslems", and, if that is what you mean, then you should be clear about it and say "Muslims" instead of "Islam".

However, "Islam" usually refers to the body of Islamic doctrines and beliefs. To anyone who has read the Koran and the sayings of Muhammad, as well as the writings of the most respected Islamic religious authorities, it is perfectly clear that Islam, as a body of doctrines and beliefs, contains the Allah-given requirement for Moslems to make war on non-Moslems and to establish sharia law throughout the world. Even if many or most Moslems do not follow those doctrines, many other Moslems do follow them. Because those doctrines are taught and preached throughout the Islamic world, there will always be many Moslems who will take them seriously. Therefore, those jihadist, supremacist doctrines (both violent and non-violent!) will always be a source of trouble for the world.

Respectfully yours,

act-arizona@cox.net

Phoenix, Arizona

Symbolizing Victory, Islamic Conquerors Erect Mosques Over Sacred Sites

Below is an interesting article that highlights why the Islamists want to build a grand mosque at "Ground Zero" in NYC. The "real reason" isn't quite what they say. They say it is to promote peace and understanding between Muslims and non-Muslims. According to history, however, their smiling faces and pleasant words hide the real reason. [The article has been adapted from a Thomas Moore Law Center publication, Wednesday, August 11, 2010]

Ever wonder why Islamists want to build a mosque at "Ground Zero" in NYC? Consider their history. Muslim conquerors have built mosques over sacred places of invaded countries to show their superiority.

For example, the al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem is built on top of one of the holiest sites in Judaism, the Temple Mount.

The former St. Sophia’s Basilica, once the world’s largest cathedral and orthodox patriarchal basilica, was torn down and replaced with the principal mosque of Istanbul.

The Cordoba mosque in Spain was a former Christian cathedral. Muslims have engaged in this practice for centuries, symbolizing their victories over the infidels.

Today, in New York City, Muslim leaders are plotting to build a mega-mosque near the site of the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center, where over three thousand Americans were callously murdered by Islamic jihadists. The site of the Twin Towers has become the most hallowed ground in United States history since Pearl Harbor.

The Thomas More Law Center is defending the right to oppose the construction of the mega-mosque.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Across Nation, Mosque Projects Meet Opposition

Hmm, the following article suggests that building mosques at other locations throughout the country besides "Ground Zero" in NYC isn't as easy as once thought. There seems to be growing opposition by local population to such buildings. This article highlights this opposition, and even mentions ACT! for America, a national organization dedicated to defending our country against radical Islam and creeping Sharia law.

=========================================================================

Across Nation, Mosque Projects Meet Opposition

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN

Published: August 7, 2010

While a high-profile battle rages over a mosque near ground zero in Manhattan, heated confrontations have also broken out in communities across the country where mosques are proposed for far less hallowed locations.

In Murfreesboro, Tenn., arguments broke out over a planned Muslim center.

In Murfreesboro, Tenn., Republican candidates have denounced plans for a large Muslim center proposed near a subdivision, and hundreds of protesters have turned out for a march and a county meeting.

In late June, in Temecula, Calif., members of a local Tea Party group took dogs and picket signs to Friday prayers at a mosque that is seeking to build a new worship center on a vacant lot nearby.

In Sheboygan, Wis., a few Christian ministers led a noisy fight against a Muslim group that sought permission to open a mosque in a former health food store bought by a Muslim doctor.

At one time, neighbors who did not want mosques in their backyards said their concerns were over traffic, parking and noise — the same reasons they might object to a church or a synagogue. But now the gloves are off.

In all of the recent conflicts, opponents have said their problem is Islam itself. They quote passages from the Koran and argue that even the most Americanized Muslim secretly wants to replace the Constitution with Islamic Shariah law.

These local skirmishes make clear that there is now widespread debate about whether the best way to uphold America’s democratic values is to allow Muslims the same religious freedom enjoyed by other Americans, or to pull away the welcome mat from a faith seen as a singular threat.

“What’s different is the heat, the volume, the level of hostility,” said Ihsan Bagby, associate professor of Islamic studies at the University of Kentucky. “It’s one thing to oppose a mosque because traffic might increase, but it’s different when you say these mosques are going to be nurturing terrorist bombers, that Islam is invading, that civilization is being undermined by Muslims.”

Feeding the resistance is a growing cottage industry of authors and bloggers — some of them former Muslims — who are invited to speak at rallies, sell their books and testify in churches. Their message is that Islam is inherently violent and incompatible with America.

But they have not gone unanswered. In each community, interfaith groups led by Protestant ministers, Catholic priests, rabbis and clergy members of other faiths have defended the mosques. Often, they have been slower to organize than the mosque opponents, but their numbers have usually been larger.

The mosque proposed for the site near ground zero in Lower Manhattan cleared a final hurdle last week before the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission, and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg hailed the decision with a forceful speech on religious liberty. While an array of religious groups supported the project, opponents included the Anti-Defamation League, an influential Jewish group, and prominent Republicans like Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker.

A smaller controversy is occurring in Temecula, about 60 miles north of San Diego, involving a typical stew of religion, politics and anti-immigrant sentiment. A Muslim community has been there for about 12 years and expanded to 150 families who have outgrown their makeshift worship space in a warehouse, said Mahmoud Harmoush, the imam, a lecturer at California State University, San Bernardino. The group wants to build a 25,000-square-foot center, with space for classrooms and a playground, on a lot it bought in 2000.

Mr. Harmoush said the Muslim families had contributed to the local food bank, sent truckloads of supplies to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, and participated in music nights and Thanksgiving events with the local interfaith council.

“We do all these activities and nobody notices,” he said. “Now that we have to build our center, everybody jumps to make it an issue.”

Recently, a small group of activists became alarmed about the mosque. Diana Serafin, a grandmother who lost her job in tech support this year, said she reached out to others she knew from attending Tea Party events and anti-immigration rallies. She said they read books by critics of Islam, including former Muslims like Walid Shoebat, Wafa Sultan and Manoucher Bakh. She also attended a meeting of the local chapter of ACT! for America, a Florida-based group that says its purpose is to defend Western civilization against Islam.

“As a mother and a grandmother, I worry,” Ms. Serafin said. “I learned that in 20 years with the rate of the birth population, we will be overtaken by Islam, and their goal is to get people in Congress and the Supreme Court to see that Shariah is implemented. My children and grandchildren will have to live under that.”

“I do believe everybody has a right to freedom of religion,” she said. “But Islam is not about a religion. It’s a political government, and it’s 100 percent against our Constitution.”

Ms. Serafin was among an estimated 20 to 30 people who turned out to protest the mosque, including some who intentionally took dogs to offend those Muslims who consider dogs to be ritually unclean. But they were outnumbered by at least 75 supporters. The City of Temecula recently postponed a hearing on whether to grant the mosque a permit.

Larry Slusser, a Mormon and the secretary of the Interfaith Council of Murietta and Temecula, went to the protest to support the Muslim group. “I know them,” he said. “They’re good people. They have no ill intent. They’re good Americans. They are leaders in their professions.”

Of the protesters, he said, “they have fear because they don’t know them.”

Religious freedom is also at stake, Mr. Slusser said, adding, “They’re Americans, they deserve to have a place to worship just like everybody else.”

There are about 1,900 mosques in the United States, which run the gamut from makeshift prayer rooms in storefronts and houses to large buildings with adjoining community centers, according to a preliminary survey by Mr. Bagby, who conducted a mosque study 10 years ago and is now undertaking another.

A two-year study by a group of academics on American Muslims and terrorism concluded that contemporary mosques are actually a deterrent to the spread of militant Islam and terrorism. The study was conducted by professors with Duke’s Sanford School of Public Policy and the University of North Carolina. It disclosed that many mosque leaders had put significant effort into countering extremism by building youth programs, sponsoring antiviolence forums and scrutinizing teachers and texts.

Radicalization of alienated Muslim youths is a real threat, Mr. Bagby said. “But the youth we worry about,” he said, “are not the youth that come to the mosque.”

In central Tennessee, the mosque in Murfreesboro is the third one in the last year to encounter resistance. It became a political issue when Republican candidates for governor and Congress declared their opposition. (They were defeated in primary elections on Thursday.)

A group called Former Muslims United put up a billboard saying “Stop the Murfreesboro Mosque.” The group’s president is Nonie Darwish, also the founder of Arabs for Israel, who spoke against Islam in Murfreesboro at a fund-raising dinner for Christians United for Israel, an evangelical organization led by the Rev. John Hagee.

“A mosque is not just a place for worship,” Ms. Darwish said in an interview. “It’s a place where war is started, where commandments to do jihad start, where incitements against non-Muslims occur. It’s a place where ammunition was stored.”

Camie Ayash, a spokeswoman for the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, lamented that people were listening to what she called “total disinformation” on Islam.

She said her group was stunned when what began as one person raising zoning questions about the new mosque evolved into mass protests with marchers waving signs about Shariah.

“A lot of Muslims came to the U.S. because they respect the Constitution,” she said. “There’s no conflict with the U.S. Constitution in Shariah law. If there were, Muslims wouldn’t be living here.”

In Wisconsin, the conflict over the mosque was settled when the Town Executive Council voted unanimously to give the Islamic Society of Sheboygan a permit to use the former health food store as a prayer space.

Dr. Mansoor Mirza, the physician who owns the property, said he was trying to take the long view of the controversy.

“Every new group coming to this country — Jews, Catholics, Irish, Germans, Japanese — has gone through this,” Dr. Mirza said. “Now I think it’s our turn to pay the price, and eventually we will be coming out of this, too.”

[Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/us/08mosque.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1]

Top Ten Reasons why Sharia is bad for all Societies

1. Islam commands offensive and aggressive and unjust jihad against non-Muslims.

2. Islam orders apostates to be killed.

3. Islam orders death for Muslims and possible death for non-Muslim critics of Muhammad and the Koran and even sharia itself.

4. Islam orders unmarried fornicators to be whipped and adulterers to be stoned to death.

5. Islam commands that homosexuals be executed.

6. Islam demands that highway robbers should be crucified or mutilated.

7. Islam commands that a male or female thief must have their hand cut off.

8. Islam allows an injured plaintiff to exact legal revenge, pysical eye for physycal eye.

9. Islam allows husbands to hit their wives even if the husbands merely fear for highhandiness in their wives.

10. Islam commands that drinkers and gamblers should be whipped.

Note: The province of Quebec, Canada has forbidden sharia. This is the right initiative.

[Source: James Arlandson, American Thinker, August 4, 2010. http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/08/top_ten_reasons_why_sharia_is.html]