If islam, was truly a religion of peace. We would all be here extolling the virtues of said wonderful religion. Instead we are here to let everyone know that in reality, islam is a very violent, vicious, hating, and bloodthirsty cult.
Its as simple as that.
Everyday all over the world, muslims send us great examples of just how deadly islam is. From the USA to Africa.
From honor killing of apostates to slavery in the Saudi Repub.
Its time for real muslims to take stock of their religion.
muslims keep telling us , islam is peace. .
then we hear of bombings in Iraq.
islam is peace.
then we hear of raped detainees in Iran.
islam is peace.
and a bus is blown up killing 12.
islam is peace.
and a hotel is bombed killing 156.
Is islam really peace? that's not what devote muslims are showing us. Instead they say, those extremists are not real muslims.
Then are those extremists reading a different koran?
I don't think so. I think they are following it to the letter
Right now, this very day...there are 44 violent locations going on in the world. Some more severe then others. Most of these areas are in Africa.
Sudan, Darfur, Ehtiopia, Kenya, Nigeria, Somalia...and you know what they have in common?
everyone entails muslims fighting. that's right!!
All these areas of violence..and that is 44...are being done by devote islamists. Islamists that read the koran faithfully. They are not your average muslim, they are the ones causing trouble.
Muslims love to say:
"We are not violent. Read the Qu'ran for yourself to see. Its the Americans that are killing muslims."
Well, all we have to do is watch the media form all over the world. What is happening? Its muslim killing muslim. In Iraq, In Afghanistan, In almost every area in Africa. As to muslims are taking out the Jews too. Rockets fire into Israel almost daily.
So where is the United Nations on this? Where are they, when the muslims cause trouble?
Conveniently silent.
Well, as the free world sees it. Muslim extremists run the islam religion. And that is a shame. Because what this does, is just cause the regular average muslim, like those that expose the virtue of peace, on Youtube...to make excuses for their bloodthirsty brothers. Doing so they try to point the finger in every other direction but themselves.
That's why we always hear:
"its the Jews fault"
"Its Americas fault"
The finger is pointed elsewhere to try to get attention away from islam..
Blaming others to hide the violence of islam is a very old trick. But its not working anymore. All we have to do, is read the papers, listen to the news and watch the articles on the Internet.
The media is not making any of this up. All they do is report the news. And what they report about islam is pure evil and destruction.
9/11 did more for the demise of the stature of slam then anything ever reported.
I guess because of that, we have to thank those 19 radical extremists.
So anyways...that's islam in a nutshell.
As I said earlier, if islam was a religion of peace....we would not have all those web sites...
news articles...
documentaries...
movies....
books....
grassroots committees.....
or those 44 different wars involving muslims...
Monday, August 24, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Islam's European Conquest: Is America Next?
By John Griffing
Islamic lands that were occupied by the enemies will once again become Islamic...We proclaim that we will conquer Rome, like Constantinople was conquered once, and as it will be conquered again."
- Ali Al-Faqir, the Jordanian Minister for Religious Endowment
Britain, birthplace of parliamentary democracy, has fallen to Islam. Oxford, once home to the likes of C.S. Lewis, now houses a giant Eastern Islamic Studies Center. If this were the only Islamic addition to Oxford, the mood would be less somber, but when Oxford citizens are forced to awake every morning to the Muslim call to prayer with the full consent of the Church of England, nothing short of conquest has taken place.
Britain's Muslim demographic is now so dominant that the British government recently began to allow Islamic civil and religious law, known as Sharia, to be enforced along side British law.
But if religious tolerance is good, why is this a problem? Simple-this is not an issue of religious liberty. Islam is not designed to co-exist with western civilization. It is designed to conquer it.
Most would agree that Judeo-Christian values are consistent with Anglo-American tradition. Can the same be said of Islam? Even Muslims don't think so. The chief Justice of London's Sharia Court made this chilling statement:
If Sharia is implemented then you can turn this country into a haven of peace...Once a thief's hand is cut off, nobody is going to steal. Once an adulterer is stoned, nobody is going to commit this crime at all. This is why we say we want to offer it to British society.
Statements like this have not stopped prominent British figures from endorsing Sharia. The Archbishop of Canterbury, the Protestant equivalent of the Pope, called Sharia "unavoidable."
Under Sharia, non-Muslims are forbidden to even criticize Islam. This is significant, considering that a Policy Exchange Poll found that forty percent of British Muslims prefer to be governed by Sharia. Thirty-six percent believe that "apostates" from Islam should be punished by death. A Guardian Poll indicates that a sizeable number of British Muslims favor terrorist attacks on the United States and even England.[1]
There are presently 85 Sharia courts all across Britain, and, although initial defenders of the transformation claimed that Sharia courts would only exercise authority when consistent with British law, recent developments indicate that Muslims want Sharia pushed still further. Many Muslims advocate a separate police force due to the repeated embarrassment of rampant "honor killings."
Honor killings represent a new and growing form of homicide in many European countries, whereby Muslim families collaborate to kill fellow family members to restore honor. This practice is not alien to the US. Recently, a US Muslim man beheaded his wife, confessed to authorities, and still received a scheduled award from the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).
Britain is not alone in its Muslim plight. In 2005, France experienced massive Muslim riots in 300 cities. Public buildings were firebombed, 200 policemen were injured, and 4,000 were arrested.[2] This is not unusual as a Muslim response to perceived offenses. Remember the Danish cartoons?
The central problem is assimilation. Most Muslims don't move to a country with the purpose of becoming real citizens of that country. Muslims don't want to be British or French. Muslims come for the wealth of the west, and to make the west Muslim. The evidence is transparent to anyone paying attention. The Parisian riots of 2005 were committed by second and third generation children of Muslim immigrants.
The ultimate aspiration of Muslims is total, global dominion within a theocracy known as a "caliphate." Be they peaceful Muslims or radical Muslims, all share in this goal.
And, incredibly, we cooperate with this reverse assimilation. Somehow we Westerners now feel compelled to assimilate with Muslims instead of expecting the reverse. Paris fashion runways have even begun designing and modeling "Muslim inspired head wraps and...tunics splattered with simulated blood in what some fashionistas dubbed carnage couture."[3]
The problem of Muslim integration is so sensitive that 751 areas have been willingly ceded to Islamic residents by the French government. Called "no-go zones" by many, these areas are off-limits to non-Muslims who value their lives. The UK is home to an indistinguishable number of "no-go zones," with violence toward non-Muslims increasing in once peaceful areas.
Dutch Muslims have such a grip on Holland that those who speak out must live in safe houses, like Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders. Yet the Dutch Minister of Justice still wants to make full Sharia an option on the next ballot, which would make Holland the first fully Islamic theocracy in the heart of Europe.
Germany could be next. Matthias Rohe, Judge on the Court of Appeals in Nuremburg wants to see full Sharia in Germany, saying, "we are ready to accept these kind of differences and would apply the norms." Many areas of Germany are now off limits to police and other uniformed personnel, as in France and the UK.
Muslim majorities will soon be a reality. By 2050, one out of every three people in Europe will be age 60 and over. The UN's Populations Division estimates that by 2050, if current birth rates are held, Europe will shrink by 200 million as a new Muslim majority dawns.
And now, onto this stage strides President Barack Hussein Obama, who advocates the European model for all aspects of American life; for the economy, for healthcare, and now, in our dealings with Muslims. We know where that road leads. It has been travelled by an entire continent now doomed to cultural and economic destruction.
Is this what we want? Do we really want European civilization, cultivated for centuries, to suddenly vanish? Do we really want American culture to disappear?
President Obama travels the world apologizing for America's very existence. He redefines Islam's historical goal as one of peaceful coexistence, its moral ethos as one of "tolerance and the dignity of all human beings," despite the evidence to the contrary. He pledges that the US "never will be-at war with Islam," blindly ignoring the present strategic situation. He claims that we are the "biggest Muslim country in the world," despite the fact that 80 percent of Americans say they are Christian.
The US has steadily been bowing to Islamic pressure. Many US banks and investment firms have formally adopted Sharia Finance. Harold Koh, recent Dean of Yale Law School and current Obama Advisor to the Secretary of State, openly talks about the compatibility of Sharia with American legal precedent.
What is our fascination with Islam? Why are we so willing to capitulate to its aims without resistance? Can't western civilization continue to champion religious liberty without committing suicide?
Radical Islam is inconsistent with American ideals, plain and simple. No two ideologies that embrace concepts so divergent as global domination and freedom can hope to coexist. There can be no compromise.
Europe is among the walking dead; their future is an Islamic one. America, however, still has a choice if we have the courage to make it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Tony Blankley, The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Battle of Civilizations? (Washington, DC: Regnery, 2005), pp. 51, 55.
[2] Patrick J. Buchanan, State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, (New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2006), 194.
[3] Molly Moore, "For the French Joie de Vivre Fades into Fear," Washington Post, 25 Mar. 2006, 1,13.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Islamic lands that were occupied by the enemies will once again become Islamic...We proclaim that we will conquer Rome, like Constantinople was conquered once, and as it will be conquered again."
- Ali Al-Faqir, the Jordanian Minister for Religious Endowment
Britain, birthplace of parliamentary democracy, has fallen to Islam. Oxford, once home to the likes of C.S. Lewis, now houses a giant Eastern Islamic Studies Center. If this were the only Islamic addition to Oxford, the mood would be less somber, but when Oxford citizens are forced to awake every morning to the Muslim call to prayer with the full consent of the Church of England, nothing short of conquest has taken place.
Britain's Muslim demographic is now so dominant that the British government recently began to allow Islamic civil and religious law, known as Sharia, to be enforced along side British law.
But if religious tolerance is good, why is this a problem? Simple-this is not an issue of religious liberty. Islam is not designed to co-exist with western civilization. It is designed to conquer it.
Most would agree that Judeo-Christian values are consistent with Anglo-American tradition. Can the same be said of Islam? Even Muslims don't think so. The chief Justice of London's Sharia Court made this chilling statement:
If Sharia is implemented then you can turn this country into a haven of peace...Once a thief's hand is cut off, nobody is going to steal. Once an adulterer is stoned, nobody is going to commit this crime at all. This is why we say we want to offer it to British society.
Statements like this have not stopped prominent British figures from endorsing Sharia. The Archbishop of Canterbury, the Protestant equivalent of the Pope, called Sharia "unavoidable."
Under Sharia, non-Muslims are forbidden to even criticize Islam. This is significant, considering that a Policy Exchange Poll found that forty percent of British Muslims prefer to be governed by Sharia. Thirty-six percent believe that "apostates" from Islam should be punished by death. A Guardian Poll indicates that a sizeable number of British Muslims favor terrorist attacks on the United States and even England.[1]
There are presently 85 Sharia courts all across Britain, and, although initial defenders of the transformation claimed that Sharia courts would only exercise authority when consistent with British law, recent developments indicate that Muslims want Sharia pushed still further. Many Muslims advocate a separate police force due to the repeated embarrassment of rampant "honor killings."
Honor killings represent a new and growing form of homicide in many European countries, whereby Muslim families collaborate to kill fellow family members to restore honor. This practice is not alien to the US. Recently, a US Muslim man beheaded his wife, confessed to authorities, and still received a scheduled award from the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).
Britain is not alone in its Muslim plight. In 2005, France experienced massive Muslim riots in 300 cities. Public buildings were firebombed, 200 policemen were injured, and 4,000 were arrested.[2] This is not unusual as a Muslim response to perceived offenses. Remember the Danish cartoons?
The central problem is assimilation. Most Muslims don't move to a country with the purpose of becoming real citizens of that country. Muslims don't want to be British or French. Muslims come for the wealth of the west, and to make the west Muslim. The evidence is transparent to anyone paying attention. The Parisian riots of 2005 were committed by second and third generation children of Muslim immigrants.
The ultimate aspiration of Muslims is total, global dominion within a theocracy known as a "caliphate." Be they peaceful Muslims or radical Muslims, all share in this goal.
And, incredibly, we cooperate with this reverse assimilation. Somehow we Westerners now feel compelled to assimilate with Muslims instead of expecting the reverse. Paris fashion runways have even begun designing and modeling "Muslim inspired head wraps and...tunics splattered with simulated blood in what some fashionistas dubbed carnage couture."[3]
The problem of Muslim integration is so sensitive that 751 areas have been willingly ceded to Islamic residents by the French government. Called "no-go zones" by many, these areas are off-limits to non-Muslims who value their lives. The UK is home to an indistinguishable number of "no-go zones," with violence toward non-Muslims increasing in once peaceful areas.
Dutch Muslims have such a grip on Holland that those who speak out must live in safe houses, like Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders. Yet the Dutch Minister of Justice still wants to make full Sharia an option on the next ballot, which would make Holland the first fully Islamic theocracy in the heart of Europe.
Germany could be next. Matthias Rohe, Judge on the Court of Appeals in Nuremburg wants to see full Sharia in Germany, saying, "we are ready to accept these kind of differences and would apply the norms." Many areas of Germany are now off limits to police and other uniformed personnel, as in France and the UK.
Muslim majorities will soon be a reality. By 2050, one out of every three people in Europe will be age 60 and over. The UN's Populations Division estimates that by 2050, if current birth rates are held, Europe will shrink by 200 million as a new Muslim majority dawns.
And now, onto this stage strides President Barack Hussein Obama, who advocates the European model for all aspects of American life; for the economy, for healthcare, and now, in our dealings with Muslims. We know where that road leads. It has been travelled by an entire continent now doomed to cultural and economic destruction.
Is this what we want? Do we really want European civilization, cultivated for centuries, to suddenly vanish? Do we really want American culture to disappear?
President Obama travels the world apologizing for America's very existence. He redefines Islam's historical goal as one of peaceful coexistence, its moral ethos as one of "tolerance and the dignity of all human beings," despite the evidence to the contrary. He pledges that the US "never will be-at war with Islam," blindly ignoring the present strategic situation. He claims that we are the "biggest Muslim country in the world," despite the fact that 80 percent of Americans say they are Christian.
The US has steadily been bowing to Islamic pressure. Many US banks and investment firms have formally adopted Sharia Finance. Harold Koh, recent Dean of Yale Law School and current Obama Advisor to the Secretary of State, openly talks about the compatibility of Sharia with American legal precedent.
What is our fascination with Islam? Why are we so willing to capitulate to its aims without resistance? Can't western civilization continue to champion religious liberty without committing suicide?
Radical Islam is inconsistent with American ideals, plain and simple. No two ideologies that embrace concepts so divergent as global domination and freedom can hope to coexist. There can be no compromise.
Europe is among the walking dead; their future is an Islamic one. America, however, still has a choice if we have the courage to make it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Tony Blankley, The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Battle of Civilizations? (Washington, DC: Regnery, 2005), pp. 51, 55.
[2] Patrick J. Buchanan, State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, (New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2006), 194.
[3] Molly Moore, "For the French Joie de Vivre Fades into Fear," Washington Post, 25 Mar. 2006, 1,13.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, August 7, 2009
The Clock Is Ticking Folks!!!
Toronto's newest speaking star: a would-be suicide bomber
Terry Glavin, Special to the National Post
"Long live the Taliban" might seem an unlikely thing for a prominent anti-war figure to declare, but that's to-day's peace movement for you. Stranger still, the man who recently uttered those words, Azzam Tamimi, is being promoted by a new Toronto-based institute that says it is embarking upon a national campaign to cultivate wholesome, faith-based civic virtues among Canada's young Muslims.
The Mississauga, Ont.-based Al-Fauz Institute for Islamic Thought claims its purpose is to teach young Muslims how to apply Islamic ideas to Canada's pluralistic society and "prepare young minds that will take up the mantle of the Muslim community." But Tamimi -- who currently has top billing on the Al-Fauz website, and is listed as a member of the institute's "faculty" -- has loudly renounced democracy. Indeed, he recently proclaimed: "I don't believe in democracy anymore," explicitly praises suicide bombers, and says he is willing to blow himself up in Israel: "It's the straight way to pleasing my God and I would do it if I had the opportunity." He distinguishes good Muslims from their adversaries this way: "We love death. They love life."
You'd never know any of this from the billing the Al-Fauz Institute gives Tamimi. He's presented as a Palestinian-born British academic and a "political activist." His leading role with Britain's Stop The War Coalition is noted. But nowhere does the institute mention that Tamimi is also a high-ranking advisor to Hamas, an organization considered by Canada to be a terrorist group. His best-known book is titled Hamas: A History From Within. Nor is this fact mentioned by Toronto's Ryerson University, which is permitting Tamimi to deliver a four-day "intensive course on Islamic history" from July 24 to July 27.
Aside from Tamimi, five well-known Canadian imams are listed by the Al-Fauz Institute as "faculty" members. But the best known among them -- Hamid Slimi, chairman of the Canadian Council of Imams -- told me he'd never even heard of the institute. "I don't know anything about this," Slimi said. "I must be completely out of the loop."
Iqbal Masood Nadvi, the institute's "senior patron," denied any knowledge of Tamimi's dodgy associations or his various bloodcurdling pronouncements. "I am hearing this from you for the first time," he said. "I don't believe in the Taliban. What I know about Tamimi is he is an academic person."
Nadvi referred further questions to the Al-Fauz Institute's co-ordinator, Junaid Mirza, who had taken the lead in bringing Tamimi onboard. While Mirza was quite familiar with Tamimi's political background, he said it was Tamimi's academic expertise in the history of Islamic reform movements that landed him the institute faculty post and the Ryerson gig. But if the point is to present Canadians with "a balanced and comprehensive vision of Islam," isn't a character like Azzam Tamimi pretty well the worst choice the Al-Fauz Institute could have made?
"We'll have other points of view down the road, too," Mirza said.
As for Tamimi's support for the Taliban, Mirza claims that's not so clear. "It's not a blanket defence," Mirza said. And what about Tamimi's grisly advocacy of suicide bombing? Mirza says the subject isn't expected to come up during Tamimi's lectures, which will look back on 1,400 years of Islamic history.
"This is an academic discussion," says Mirza. "We're not trying to get people motivated and inspired like you would at a political rally."
Is the Al-Fauz Institute really interested in helping young Muslim Canadians make healthy contributions to this country's mosaic? Azzam Tamimi preaches a toxic, anti-democratic Islamism and espouses a decidedly oppressive way of life. The Al-Fauz Institute must be called to account -- Canadians deserve to know just what this group has planned.
*We...who watch the current activities of Radical Islam, and the perpetraters and pushers of the poison , known as Shariah Law....are beginning to reach the end of our ropes.
Now...we are not promoting violence, NO, we wouldn't do that.
..................not at this time.....................
But, I for one am getting very close to losing it. Wake up America!! You just read the article from Canada, of all places. Right next door!! Its on our doorstep.
What I am telling everyone and anyone who will listen to me is, its time to take action. Open your mouths!! Send your faxes to your Conressmen!! Pick up the phones. I understand you may be afraid of getting your names out there, but the time is rapidly drawing near.
If we don't do anything now, our children are going to suffer dearly in the future.
Terry Glavin, Special to the National Post
"Long live the Taliban" might seem an unlikely thing for a prominent anti-war figure to declare, but that's to-day's peace movement for you. Stranger still, the man who recently uttered those words, Azzam Tamimi, is being promoted by a new Toronto-based institute that says it is embarking upon a national campaign to cultivate wholesome, faith-based civic virtues among Canada's young Muslims.
The Mississauga, Ont.-based Al-Fauz Institute for Islamic Thought claims its purpose is to teach young Muslims how to apply Islamic ideas to Canada's pluralistic society and "prepare young minds that will take up the mantle of the Muslim community." But Tamimi -- who currently has top billing on the Al-Fauz website, and is listed as a member of the institute's "faculty" -- has loudly renounced democracy. Indeed, he recently proclaimed: "I don't believe in democracy anymore," explicitly praises suicide bombers, and says he is willing to blow himself up in Israel: "It's the straight way to pleasing my God and I would do it if I had the opportunity." He distinguishes good Muslims from their adversaries this way: "We love death. They love life."
You'd never know any of this from the billing the Al-Fauz Institute gives Tamimi. He's presented as a Palestinian-born British academic and a "political activist." His leading role with Britain's Stop The War Coalition is noted. But nowhere does the institute mention that Tamimi is also a high-ranking advisor to Hamas, an organization considered by Canada to be a terrorist group. His best-known book is titled Hamas: A History From Within. Nor is this fact mentioned by Toronto's Ryerson University, which is permitting Tamimi to deliver a four-day "intensive course on Islamic history" from July 24 to July 27.
Aside from Tamimi, five well-known Canadian imams are listed by the Al-Fauz Institute as "faculty" members. But the best known among them -- Hamid Slimi, chairman of the Canadian Council of Imams -- told me he'd never even heard of the institute. "I don't know anything about this," Slimi said. "I must be completely out of the loop."
Iqbal Masood Nadvi, the institute's "senior patron," denied any knowledge of Tamimi's dodgy associations or his various bloodcurdling pronouncements. "I am hearing this from you for the first time," he said. "I don't believe in the Taliban. What I know about Tamimi is he is an academic person."
Nadvi referred further questions to the Al-Fauz Institute's co-ordinator, Junaid Mirza, who had taken the lead in bringing Tamimi onboard. While Mirza was quite familiar with Tamimi's political background, he said it was Tamimi's academic expertise in the history of Islamic reform movements that landed him the institute faculty post and the Ryerson gig. But if the point is to present Canadians with "a balanced and comprehensive vision of Islam," isn't a character like Azzam Tamimi pretty well the worst choice the Al-Fauz Institute could have made?
"We'll have other points of view down the road, too," Mirza said.
As for Tamimi's support for the Taliban, Mirza claims that's not so clear. "It's not a blanket defence," Mirza said. And what about Tamimi's grisly advocacy of suicide bombing? Mirza says the subject isn't expected to come up during Tamimi's lectures, which will look back on 1,400 years of Islamic history.
"This is an academic discussion," says Mirza. "We're not trying to get people motivated and inspired like you would at a political rally."
Is the Al-Fauz Institute really interested in helping young Muslim Canadians make healthy contributions to this country's mosaic? Azzam Tamimi preaches a toxic, anti-democratic Islamism and espouses a decidedly oppressive way of life. The Al-Fauz Institute must be called to account -- Canadians deserve to know just what this group has planned.
*We...who watch the current activities of Radical Islam, and the perpetraters and pushers of the poison , known as Shariah Law....are beginning to reach the end of our ropes.
Now...we are not promoting violence, NO, we wouldn't do that.
..................not at this time.....................
But, I for one am getting very close to losing it. Wake up America!! You just read the article from Canada, of all places. Right next door!! Its on our doorstep.
What I am telling everyone and anyone who will listen to me is, its time to take action. Open your mouths!! Send your faxes to your Conressmen!! Pick up the phones. I understand you may be afraid of getting your names out there, but the time is rapidly drawing near.
If we don't do anything now, our children are going to suffer dearly in the future.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Obama - The Apologizer Bunny
I basically had nothing to do at work when I designed this. I had a few minutes before my boss was coming back, and the image shows the quick job. But I felt that with all the apologizing the new President has been doing, since taking office, we needed something to honor him with. I guess I just have way too much time on my hands.
Jim Feb
- BlackbootJack
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Gaza judge tells female lawyers to wear head scarf
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip – Gaza's top judge said Sunday that he has ordered female lawyers to wear Muslim headscarves when they appear in court, the latest sign that the Islamic militant group is increasingly imposing its strict interpretation of Islamic law on residents of the coastal strip.
Supreme Court chief justice Abdul-Raouf Halabi said female lawyers will be required to wear a headscarf and a long, dark colored cloak under their billowing black robes when the court returns from its summer recess in September.
Halabi said his order was designed to ensure that women dress in accordance with Islamic law, which requires women to cover up in public, wearing loose garments and only showing their hands and faces.
"Showing a woman's hair is forbidden (in Islam)," the Hamas-appointed Halabi told The Associated Press. "We will not allow people to corrupt morals. This (dress code) will improve work in the courts."
Hamas seized power in Gaza in June 2007 and vowed never to impose its conservative values on others. But it has taken a series of steps in recent months that appear to be aimed at forcing residents to accept its Islamic-oriented social agenda.
Police have pressured store owners to cover scantily clad mannequins, and men relaxing on the beach have been ordered to put more clothes on. One secondary girls' school has made wearing a Muslim headscarf and loose robe a mandatory uniform in the upcoming school year.
The Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights issued a statement describing the new dress code for female lawyers a "dangerous violation of personal freedoms and women's rights."
The Hamas government formally says it is not imposing Islamic law on the territory's 1.4 million residents. Instead, it says it is simply ensuring that residents behave in line with the territory's own conservative culture.
Most women already wear the headscarf, and life in the Mediterranean strip comes to a complete standstill on Fridays as men gather for communal prayers in mosques.
Subhiya Juma, a female lawyer, said the judge's decision would affect only 10 or so lawyers — since the vast majority of the 150 registered female lawyers already cover their hair.
Juma, who does not wear a headscarf, said the point wasn't the number of women, but that freedoms were being eroded.
"This is dangerous — it's a clear violation of the law, it is taking away our personal freedoms — and by whom? The very person who is meant to defend our freedoms," Juma said.
*
Now ....after reading this, one must conclude that ALL the lawyers are muslim. That is NOT the case. The standards of Islamic law is being thrust upon anyone living in Gaza. There are non-muslim lawyers. They are NOT exempt from wearing the headscarf.
What does that tell us?
Islam does not care if you are muslim or not, as long as you live in an Islamic country, you WILL abide by Islamic law.
Now when muslims come to the United States....they shall abide by American law.
Do they? Most do.
Some do not, and they press other muslims to resist American Constitutional law.
Americans must not be led into a double standard. If we want muslims to abide by our set of law....the same must be in place for Islamic countries. If you live there, you should abide by their set of laws.
Including wearing the hajib. I see journalists wearing them, as did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
But if a muslim woman wants to free herself of the headscarf...well...in America...she should be able to do so.
Just don't get killed doing so.....
-BBJ
Supreme Court chief justice Abdul-Raouf Halabi said female lawyers will be required to wear a headscarf and a long, dark colored cloak under their billowing black robes when the court returns from its summer recess in September.
Halabi said his order was designed to ensure that women dress in accordance with Islamic law, which requires women to cover up in public, wearing loose garments and only showing their hands and faces.
"Showing a woman's hair is forbidden (in Islam)," the Hamas-appointed Halabi told The Associated Press. "We will not allow people to corrupt morals. This (dress code) will improve work in the courts."
Hamas seized power in Gaza in June 2007 and vowed never to impose its conservative values on others. But it has taken a series of steps in recent months that appear to be aimed at forcing residents to accept its Islamic-oriented social agenda.
Police have pressured store owners to cover scantily clad mannequins, and men relaxing on the beach have been ordered to put more clothes on. One secondary girls' school has made wearing a Muslim headscarf and loose robe a mandatory uniform in the upcoming school year.
The Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights issued a statement describing the new dress code for female lawyers a "dangerous violation of personal freedoms and women's rights."
The Hamas government formally says it is not imposing Islamic law on the territory's 1.4 million residents. Instead, it says it is simply ensuring that residents behave in line with the territory's own conservative culture.
Most women already wear the headscarf, and life in the Mediterranean strip comes to a complete standstill on Fridays as men gather for communal prayers in mosques.
Subhiya Juma, a female lawyer, said the judge's decision would affect only 10 or so lawyers — since the vast majority of the 150 registered female lawyers already cover their hair.
Juma, who does not wear a headscarf, said the point wasn't the number of women, but that freedoms were being eroded.
"This is dangerous — it's a clear violation of the law, it is taking away our personal freedoms — and by whom? The very person who is meant to defend our freedoms," Juma said.
*
Now ....after reading this, one must conclude that ALL the lawyers are muslim. That is NOT the case. The standards of Islamic law is being thrust upon anyone living in Gaza. There are non-muslim lawyers. They are NOT exempt from wearing the headscarf.
What does that tell us?
Islam does not care if you are muslim or not, as long as you live in an Islamic country, you WILL abide by Islamic law.
Now when muslims come to the United States....they shall abide by American law.
Do they? Most do.
Some do not, and they press other muslims to resist American Constitutional law.
Americans must not be led into a double standard. If we want muslims to abide by our set of law....the same must be in place for Islamic countries. If you live there, you should abide by their set of laws.
Including wearing the hajib. I see journalists wearing them, as did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
But if a muslim woman wants to free herself of the headscarf...well...in America...she should be able to do so.
Just don't get killed doing so.....
-BBJ
Saturday, June 20, 2009
TURMOIL IN TEHRAN
TEHRAN, Iran – Thousands of protesters defied Iran's highest authority Saturday and marched on waiting security forces that fought back with baton charges, tear gas and water cannons as the crisis over disputed elections lurched into volatile new ground."
Shall we salute and spiritually support the youth movement in Iran, for standing up against a bloodthirsty, corrupt, dictatorship in Iran?
Should Obama let it be known that the US is supporting this said movement?
Would Iran be better off with Musavi, instead of Amadinajhad?
Simple questions, right?
Not necessarily.....the answers are:
YES!
NO!
NO!
Yes, we should give our support and prayers for the students that are marching and fighting in the streets of Tehran. Reports coming in tell of up to 40 people may have been killed. Undocumented reports also state that helicopters may be pouring chemically enhanced agents from the air. Causing a burning sensation if it comes in contact with the flesh. Thank goodness the women are covered from head to toe.
Those youths that have hit the streets have been met with extreme violence form the police and the civilian militias. Baton wheeling thugs storming into buildings and hospitals seem to relish the though of cracking skulls and popping veins.
So, my answer to this question is...Yes. WE should be behind the protestors. Americans stand for liberty and we should support those that truly wish for it.
Second question? My answer is NO!! Obama has been, and should continue to maintain a moderatly neutral stance. His relationship with the current government depends on it. This "uprising" may fizzle out, as many have done before, and Obama will be weaker then he already is. Not to forget the Arab Islamists are a very un-grateful people. Just look at Iraq.
Not to mention that if Obama speaks out in support of the protestors, it will be just another case of Americans "meddling" in foreign affairs.
Better to keep your mouth shut and see what happens, then to play your cards now and end up the loser.
Last question...another resounding NO!!
NO! Iran would not be better if Musavi won over Amadinajhad. Why? Because they are ALL corrupt!!
Don't forget, Musavi was the last Prime Minister in Iran before the constitutional changes which removed the post of prime minister. And it was under Musavi that Iran started its nuclear programs. Like Ahmadinejad, Musavi said Iran will not halt its nuclear work, but suggested he would do more to assure the West it is not for bomb-making. Big freakin deal!!
Besides, its not the Iranian president that holds power, its the Islamic mullahs. And all they care about is the repression of women, and the elimination of Israel and the jewish race.
Iran would not be better off...well OK, maybe a little. But lets not be naive, the chances of the protestors getting what they wish is very slim. Changing regimes is even slimmer. Iran becoming a semi-democracy is non-existent.
So, we can support them, we can pray for them, we can wish them all the luck in the world. But as far as I'm concerned...they're on their own.
BlackbootJack 6/20/09
http://www.blackbootjack.blogspot.com/
Shall we salute and spiritually support the youth movement in Iran, for standing up against a bloodthirsty, corrupt, dictatorship in Iran?
Should Obama let it be known that the US is supporting this said movement?
Would Iran be better off with Musavi, instead of Amadinajhad?
Simple questions, right?
Not necessarily.....the answers are:
YES!
NO!
NO!
Yes, we should give our support and prayers for the students that are marching and fighting in the streets of Tehran. Reports coming in tell of up to 40 people may have been killed. Undocumented reports also state that helicopters may be pouring chemically enhanced agents from the air. Causing a burning sensation if it comes in contact with the flesh. Thank goodness the women are covered from head to toe.
Those youths that have hit the streets have been met with extreme violence form the police and the civilian militias. Baton wheeling thugs storming into buildings and hospitals seem to relish the though of cracking skulls and popping veins.
So, my answer to this question is...Yes. WE should be behind the protestors. Americans stand for liberty and we should support those that truly wish for it.
Second question? My answer is NO!! Obama has been, and should continue to maintain a moderatly neutral stance. His relationship with the current government depends on it. This "uprising" may fizzle out, as many have done before, and Obama will be weaker then he already is. Not to forget the Arab Islamists are a very un-grateful people. Just look at Iraq.
Not to mention that if Obama speaks out in support of the protestors, it will be just another case of Americans "meddling" in foreign affairs.
Better to keep your mouth shut and see what happens, then to play your cards now and end up the loser.
Last question...another resounding NO!!
NO! Iran would not be better if Musavi won over Amadinajhad. Why? Because they are ALL corrupt!!
Don't forget, Musavi was the last Prime Minister in Iran before the constitutional changes which removed the post of prime minister. And it was under Musavi that Iran started its nuclear programs. Like Ahmadinejad, Musavi said Iran will not halt its nuclear work, but suggested he would do more to assure the West it is not for bomb-making. Big freakin deal!!
Besides, its not the Iranian president that holds power, its the Islamic mullahs. And all they care about is the repression of women, and the elimination of Israel and the jewish race.
Iran would not be better off...well OK, maybe a little. But lets not be naive, the chances of the protestors getting what they wish is very slim. Changing regimes is even slimmer. Iran becoming a semi-democracy is non-existent.
So, we can support them, we can pray for them, we can wish them all the luck in the world. But as far as I'm concerned...they're on their own.
BlackbootJack 6/20/09
http://www.blackbootjack.blogspot.com/
Monday, June 15, 2009
An Interview with the Religion of Peace
Where do you go to get the latest stats on Islamic terror attacks?
Where do you go to get all the resources on Islam?
What is the most quoted web site on the Internet when it comes to Radical Islam?
I managed to steal a little of this mans time to talk to the Infidel Task Force.
Come with us into the mind of the man who runs The Religion of Peace web site.
ITF:
First of all I would like to thank you for taking the time to speak to the viewers of the Infidel Task Force. Your web site, The Religion of Peace, has always been a mainstay in the fight against radical Islam. How did you get the inspiration to create the site?
TROP:
The on-going rate of violence in the name of Islam was an obvious inspiration for TheReligionofPeace.com, but I should also credit the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) with opening my eyes to the reality of this religion.
Even in the aftermath of 9/11, I actually believed that Muslims would lead the battle against Islamic terrorism and root out the extremists. As it turns out, I simply didn’t understand Islam well enough to know that the Muslim world reserves its true outrage for issues that directly affect their religion – such as those involving cartoons and headscarves.
I began watching CAIR closely that September and was astonished by the complete lack of moral perspective with regard to the relatively trivial matters over which the group was soon back to complaining about following the horrific mass murder of 3,000 innocents in the name of Allah. Later, through studying the Qur’an, Hadith and Sira (biography of Muhammad), I came to better understand the narcissism that is deeply rooted in Islam.
ITF:
You have reported on the atrocities of radical Islam for years now. Do you feel it can be a losing battle? Or are people waking up to see what Islam truly is?
TROP:
Ultimately, Islam is its own worst enemy. The more people know about this 7th century desert invention, the more poorly it contrasts with Western liberal values (and common sense).
The success of Islam in the West depends largely on self-censorship and our own willingness to jettison critical thinking when it leads to politically incorrect conclusions. After all, there is a reason why Islam is strictly protected from intellectual dissent in Muslim countries – and it is certainly disappointing that there are some here who want to follow suit.
Still, it is getting harder for these types to deny the dysfunction of the Muslim world, including the widespread problem with devoutly religious terrorists. The challenge is in getting Westerners to see past the ‘multiculturalism barrier’ and recognize that the violence and despotism is ingrained in the legacy of Muhammad.
ITF:
When it comes to the terror attacks by Islamic extremists, why is it that the United Nations remains silent?
TROP:
Because the United Nations isn’t what people think it is.
The romantic fantasy is that the UN is an esteemed body of wise diplomats who gather unselfishly to scratch their beards and determine the common good for the world’s people according to the best intentions of their own citizens.
In actuality, the United Nations is a bloated, massively inefficient and corrupt organization with overpaid staff members and ambassadors who are more likely to be representing the interests of dictators than democracies – each of which count equally when it comes to wielding influence. It is an impotent body with a comical sense of self-importance.
The original ideals of the UN were junked a long time ago (although, to be fair, part of this was because of Cold War politics). Terrorism is not a priority with the organization because it does not serve the political interests of the majority.
ITF:
But when Israel is attacked, the UN seems to have acquired a voice. Why is that?
TROP:
The UN doesn’t acquire its voice unless Israel defends itself following an attack. Again, people have to understand that the organization is not about ideals, but about politics. Israel is a great example.
Since 1967, the UN has clearly thrown in with the Palestinians, pumping in billions of dollars, allowing their resources to be co-opted for military purposes and, of course, famously allowing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to dominate the Security Council agenda 3 to 1 over anything else happening in the world.
Taking a backseat to the Palestinian conflict – which has cost about 15,000 lives over the course of 60 years – has been the Darfur genocide, for example, in which hundreds of thousands of civilians have died since 2003. There is also the brutal occupation of Tibet by China and the displacement or forced internment of millions there, not to mention the millions of Hindus slaughtered and displaced by armed Muslims in Bangladesh, Pakistan and India.
The UN even sat idly by while 800,000 Rwandan Tutsis were massacred over the course of a few months in 1994 – after pulling its "peacekeepers" out of harms way, of course. The Hutu government conducting the genocide actually sat on the Security Council at the time!
The romanticism may persist, but the United Nations hasn’t been worth taking seriously in a very long time.
ITF:
It has been said, that France is one generation away from Muslim majority. Brussels is at 49% Muslim, and the UK seems to have surrendered to the eventual. What can European countries do to stop the influx of Islam from taking over their countries?
TROP:
In the past, if Europeans wanted to live, then they had to stand and fight. Either this lesson has been forgotten, or they no longer feel that their countries are worth saving.
My feeling is that despite their pride and emphasis on community, many in Europe are deeply selfish and simply unwilling to see past an individual desire for maximum personal comfort. Muslim immigration is ultimately driven by the demand of unrealistic social spending. Although this flawed system will eventually collapse on itself, importing Muslim labor is this generation’s way of pushing off the problems onto the next – even as it compounds them in the process.
Eventually the tipping point will be reached, and it will be too late, even if Europeans were suddenly willing to give up their free ride and take only what they earn in life. It is a sickening betrayal of their ancestors, who fought and died to keep them free from the Islamic threat, but for now, the demographic Jihad will continue unless the continent somehow manages to finds its backbone before it is fully doomed.
ITF:
Then you think it’s too late?
TROP:
For Europe? Probably so. To put it in medical terms, the Islamic virus is in the system and it is replicating much faster than anything else. Meanwhile, the host is conceding tissue and actually finding ways of neutralizing its own self-defense mechanisms (with creative accusations of "racism" and "fascism").
It doesn’t take a crystal ball to see where present trends will lead in Europe.
ITF:
Since 9/11/01, there have been 13342 terror attacks around the world. Do you think the United States is due for another?
TROP:
Future deadly Islamic terror attacks on U.S. soil are a certainty. In fact, there has already been one just this month (in Arkansas).
How soon it will be until another 9/11 may depend on just how serious our current leadership is about making the so-called "rights" of terrorists a higher priority than public safety. It amazes me that we have even reached this point.
ITF:
President Obama recently gave a speech in Cairo to the Muslim world. How effective do you think the speech was? And how do you think the Islamic world will react to that speech?
TROP:
It doesn’t really matter what he says. There is still no place in Islam for infidel to defend themselves against a Muslim enemy. As long as Americans fights back against Islamic terror, they will never have the support of the Muslim world.
As someone else once put it, terrorists are the military wing of mainstream Islam.
ITF:
It has often been said, that the world will end, not with a bang, but with a whimper. Knowing what we know about radical Islam, do you still think that phrase is true?
TROP:
By nature, the majority of people do not think long-term. It’s why poor choices are made in life, concerning finances and even matters more serious, where short-term gratification often rules. The frustration for those of us in the anti-Jihad movement is that we are not simply trying to get people to think long-term, but really long-term - well beyond their lifetime, in fact, to a future in which they may have no personal stake.
Westerners are largely obsessed with their own comfortable lifestyle. This, along with political correctness, makes it even more difficult to convince them that quality of life will deteriorate for future generations if present trends continue and we allow Muslim minorities to grow.
Think of the frog that is cooked in boiling water, because it doesn’t react to the gradual rise in temperature. Look at how this is happening in Europe. In each country, Muslims (collectively) are extremely petulant and demanding. Already, they constitute the most violent segment of the population, according to criminal statistics. Yet, Muslims are still able to convince themselves and others that it is all the fault of their hosts!
Will the Western world end with a whimper or a bang? Since it will be at the hands of Islam, I would predict plenty of both.
ITF:
I know that the viewers reading this are thinking: "What can we do?"
Just what CAN we do to maintain our way of life, and prevent our culture from being taken away from us?
TROP:
I always like to answer this question by first making it clear what shouldn’t be done. No Muslim should be harmed or harassed on account of religion. No property should be vandalized, nor should the Qur’an be desecrated.
The battle against Islam can only be won through truth and education. We must teach ourselves and others what it is about Islam that makes it dangerous. How we speak the truth is almost as important as what we say – so it should be with sensitivity, humility and balance.
ITF:
Once again, let me thank you for chatting with us, and may I speak for everyone when I say, keep up the good work on The Religion of Peace.
Where do you go to get all the resources on Islam?
What is the most quoted web site on the Internet when it comes to Radical Islam?
I managed to steal a little of this mans time to talk to the Infidel Task Force.
Come with us into the mind of the man who runs The Religion of Peace web site.
ITF:
First of all I would like to thank you for taking the time to speak to the viewers of the Infidel Task Force. Your web site, The Religion of Peace, has always been a mainstay in the fight against radical Islam. How did you get the inspiration to create the site?
TROP:
The on-going rate of violence in the name of Islam was an obvious inspiration for TheReligionofPeace.com, but I should also credit the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) with opening my eyes to the reality of this religion.
Even in the aftermath of 9/11, I actually believed that Muslims would lead the battle against Islamic terrorism and root out the extremists. As it turns out, I simply didn’t understand Islam well enough to know that the Muslim world reserves its true outrage for issues that directly affect their religion – such as those involving cartoons and headscarves.
I began watching CAIR closely that September and was astonished by the complete lack of moral perspective with regard to the relatively trivial matters over which the group was soon back to complaining about following the horrific mass murder of 3,000 innocents in the name of Allah. Later, through studying the Qur’an, Hadith and Sira (biography of Muhammad), I came to better understand the narcissism that is deeply rooted in Islam.
ITF:
You have reported on the atrocities of radical Islam for years now. Do you feel it can be a losing battle? Or are people waking up to see what Islam truly is?
TROP:
Ultimately, Islam is its own worst enemy. The more people know about this 7th century desert invention, the more poorly it contrasts with Western liberal values (and common sense).
The success of Islam in the West depends largely on self-censorship and our own willingness to jettison critical thinking when it leads to politically incorrect conclusions. After all, there is a reason why Islam is strictly protected from intellectual dissent in Muslim countries – and it is certainly disappointing that there are some here who want to follow suit.
Still, it is getting harder for these types to deny the dysfunction of the Muslim world, including the widespread problem with devoutly religious terrorists. The challenge is in getting Westerners to see past the ‘multiculturalism barrier’ and recognize that the violence and despotism is ingrained in the legacy of Muhammad.
ITF:
When it comes to the terror attacks by Islamic extremists, why is it that the United Nations remains silent?
TROP:
Because the United Nations isn’t what people think it is.
The romantic fantasy is that the UN is an esteemed body of wise diplomats who gather unselfishly to scratch their beards and determine the common good for the world’s people according to the best intentions of their own citizens.
In actuality, the United Nations is a bloated, massively inefficient and corrupt organization with overpaid staff members and ambassadors who are more likely to be representing the interests of dictators than democracies – each of which count equally when it comes to wielding influence. It is an impotent body with a comical sense of self-importance.
The original ideals of the UN were junked a long time ago (although, to be fair, part of this was because of Cold War politics). Terrorism is not a priority with the organization because it does not serve the political interests of the majority.
ITF:
But when Israel is attacked, the UN seems to have acquired a voice. Why is that?
TROP:
The UN doesn’t acquire its voice unless Israel defends itself following an attack. Again, people have to understand that the organization is not about ideals, but about politics. Israel is a great example.
Since 1967, the UN has clearly thrown in with the Palestinians, pumping in billions of dollars, allowing their resources to be co-opted for military purposes and, of course, famously allowing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to dominate the Security Council agenda 3 to 1 over anything else happening in the world.
Taking a backseat to the Palestinian conflict – which has cost about 15,000 lives over the course of 60 years – has been the Darfur genocide, for example, in which hundreds of thousands of civilians have died since 2003. There is also the brutal occupation of Tibet by China and the displacement or forced internment of millions there, not to mention the millions of Hindus slaughtered and displaced by armed Muslims in Bangladesh, Pakistan and India.
The UN even sat idly by while 800,000 Rwandan Tutsis were massacred over the course of a few months in 1994 – after pulling its "peacekeepers" out of harms way, of course. The Hutu government conducting the genocide actually sat on the Security Council at the time!
The romanticism may persist, but the United Nations hasn’t been worth taking seriously in a very long time.
ITF:
It has been said, that France is one generation away from Muslim majority. Brussels is at 49% Muslim, and the UK seems to have surrendered to the eventual. What can European countries do to stop the influx of Islam from taking over their countries?
TROP:
In the past, if Europeans wanted to live, then they had to stand and fight. Either this lesson has been forgotten, or they no longer feel that their countries are worth saving.
My feeling is that despite their pride and emphasis on community, many in Europe are deeply selfish and simply unwilling to see past an individual desire for maximum personal comfort. Muslim immigration is ultimately driven by the demand of unrealistic social spending. Although this flawed system will eventually collapse on itself, importing Muslim labor is this generation’s way of pushing off the problems onto the next – even as it compounds them in the process.
Eventually the tipping point will be reached, and it will be too late, even if Europeans were suddenly willing to give up their free ride and take only what they earn in life. It is a sickening betrayal of their ancestors, who fought and died to keep them free from the Islamic threat, but for now, the demographic Jihad will continue unless the continent somehow manages to finds its backbone before it is fully doomed.
ITF:
Then you think it’s too late?
TROP:
For Europe? Probably so. To put it in medical terms, the Islamic virus is in the system and it is replicating much faster than anything else. Meanwhile, the host is conceding tissue and actually finding ways of neutralizing its own self-defense mechanisms (with creative accusations of "racism" and "fascism").
It doesn’t take a crystal ball to see where present trends will lead in Europe.
ITF:
Since 9/11/01, there have been 13342 terror attacks around the world. Do you think the United States is due for another?
TROP:
Future deadly Islamic terror attacks on U.S. soil are a certainty. In fact, there has already been one just this month (in Arkansas).
How soon it will be until another 9/11 may depend on just how serious our current leadership is about making the so-called "rights" of terrorists a higher priority than public safety. It amazes me that we have even reached this point.
ITF:
President Obama recently gave a speech in Cairo to the Muslim world. How effective do you think the speech was? And how do you think the Islamic world will react to that speech?
TROP:
It doesn’t really matter what he says. There is still no place in Islam for infidel to defend themselves against a Muslim enemy. As long as Americans fights back against Islamic terror, they will never have the support of the Muslim world.
As someone else once put it, terrorists are the military wing of mainstream Islam.
ITF:
It has often been said, that the world will end, not with a bang, but with a whimper. Knowing what we know about radical Islam, do you still think that phrase is true?
TROP:
By nature, the majority of people do not think long-term. It’s why poor choices are made in life, concerning finances and even matters more serious, where short-term gratification often rules. The frustration for those of us in the anti-Jihad movement is that we are not simply trying to get people to think long-term, but really long-term - well beyond their lifetime, in fact, to a future in which they may have no personal stake.
Westerners are largely obsessed with their own comfortable lifestyle. This, along with political correctness, makes it even more difficult to convince them that quality of life will deteriorate for future generations if present trends continue and we allow Muslim minorities to grow.
Think of the frog that is cooked in boiling water, because it doesn’t react to the gradual rise in temperature. Look at how this is happening in Europe. In each country, Muslims (collectively) are extremely petulant and demanding. Already, they constitute the most violent segment of the population, according to criminal statistics. Yet, Muslims are still able to convince themselves and others that it is all the fault of their hosts!
Will the Western world end with a whimper or a bang? Since it will be at the hands of Islam, I would predict plenty of both.
ITF:
I know that the viewers reading this are thinking: "What can we do?"
Just what CAN we do to maintain our way of life, and prevent our culture from being taken away from us?
TROP:
I always like to answer this question by first making it clear what shouldn’t be done. No Muslim should be harmed or harassed on account of religion. No property should be vandalized, nor should the Qur’an be desecrated.
The battle against Islam can only be won through truth and education. We must teach ourselves and others what it is about Islam that makes it dangerous. How we speak the truth is almost as important as what we say – so it should be with sensitivity, humility and balance.
ITF:
Once again, let me thank you for chatting with us, and may I speak for everyone when I say, keep up the good work on The Religion of Peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
