The Truth Behind Obama's Defense of Islam

WHAT’S THE STORY? The Truth Behind Obama’s Defense of Islam by Jeannie DeAngelis at Clash Daily

From the Files of Jeannie DeAngelis at Clash Daily

Regardless of what Muslim adherents say, every time a terrorist beheads, shoots, or blows up civilized human beings, an unsolicited handful of world leaders feel it’s their duty to step forward to clarify that those doing the terrorizing aren’t really Muslims.

That’s why someone should really find out who is convincing non-Muslim terrorists to pretend to be Muslim, because if ever there was cause for confusion, the “terrorists aren’t Muslim” issue is it.

From France’s President François Hollande to America’s very own President Barack Obama, apologists simply refuse to agree that those who openly admit dedication to the prophet Mohammed are fervent followers of the Islamic faith.

Although with great regularity Islamic extremists begin and end their bloodbaths by shouting “Allahu Akbar” and go enthusiastically to their deaths proud to be “avenging the prophet” Mohammed, for some strange reason President Obama feels it is his obligation to repudiate the testimony of martyrs.

Not only that, but a contradiction arises, because as the president has already proven with his “bitter clinger” remark, if a shooter were to shout “Praise Jesus” instead of “Allahu Akbar”, it’s highly unlikely similar PR would be offered on behalf of Christians.

Let’s face it – in the ongoing effort to place Christians in the crosshairs of progressive criticism, those on the left cannot afford to have Muslims out-evil the “right wing extremists” and Bible-thumpers. That’s why, regardless of how many body bags jihadists fill, Obama will always be at the ready to remediate the reputation of Islam in the eyes of those who see it for what it is.

So what if Muslims blow away political cartoonists for exercising the right to free expression. As evidenced by the Ferguson, Missouri street riots and the tacitly government-approved animosity directed toward police officers, here in Obama’s America, lack of tolerance exhibited by one group no longer justifies refusal to tolerate the intolerable in the other.

Yet the question here is why does Barack Obama refuse to take Muslim jihadists at their word?

Could it be because terrorism places Mohammed in a bad light, and according to a politically pragmatic president attempting to cultivate cultural and religious diversity, “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam?”

Also, according to Barack Obama, “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.” Therefore, by his insistence on portraying Islam in a light contrary to reality, what the president is actually doing is ensuring tolerance be extended to the intolerant.

As the body count continues to rise, Barack Obama continues to assert that “Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace.”

Huh?

Who cares if three individuals declaring vengeance for Allah wreak bloody havoc on an iconic European city? If Barack Obama decides that Islamic “rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings,” then even if what he says is contradicted by what is actually happening, one way or another his complicated rhetoric will twist the truth and blatant lies will eventually be accepted.

Let’s not forget, this is Barack Obama, the man who has redefined everything from Hope and Change to what constitutes police “acting stupidly.” Therefore, why shouldn’t he also redefine Islam, even if doing so controverts the profession of faith by those willing to be die for their beliefs?

What’s odd is that this defense of Islam is coming from a man who claims to be a Christian. Then again, it’s probably easy for Obama to disavow the claims of terrorists who call themselves Muslims because, despite admitting belief in Jesus, the president lives a life alien to the creed Christ lays out for His followers.

By his own example, Barack Obama has shed much-needed light on individuals who identify with a religious dogma and then act in a way contrary to their stated beliefs. Whether the president realizes it or not, the benchmarks he’s put forth in defense of Islam are standards that can also be applied to his own dubious relationship with God of the New Testament.

In truth, when it comes to liberal social edicts that support abortion on demand, gay marriage and free contraceptives, the president of the United States is nothing more than another radical extremist who, instead of an AK-47 or a machete, uses a phone and a pen. Moreover, everything that is “honorable, and right, and pure, and lovely” has already been dumbed down and ascribed a new meaning, so why not Islam?

Even still, notwithstanding the president’s effort to whitewash the “religion of peace,” in addition to Obama’s dogged assertion that disciples of Mohammed blowing away shoppers in a deli merely for being Jewish has nothing to do with the faith they proclaim, there may be other, more useful benefits that can result from the president reinventing reality.

Maybe what Obama is doing has little to do with Islam. The same way basic concepts of freedom and fairness have been redefined, mischaracterizing Islam may be just another example of the world’s most dedicated cultural Marxist assigning different meanings to conventional perceptions in order to skew the truth and control the opinion of the masses.

After all, the president’s socialist vision hinges on framing a make-believe world. That’s why the left’s most valuable tool is still propaganda. So, although initially the president’s “terrorists aren’t Muslim” posturing seemed confusing, on second thought it may not be confusing at all.

Barack Obama’s attempt to redefine a 1,400-year-old religion to suit his political agenda may have nothing to do with protecting Islam. Instead, shielding Muslims from condemnation may be part of an ongoing effort to remake, redefine, and impact reality so dramatically that what will finally take hold is unquestioning compliance.

Visit the personal site of Jeannie DeAngelis at Jeannie-Ology.com

______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Muslims burn husband and pregnant wife to death

Religion of peace strikes again: Pakistani Christian man and pregnant wife burned alive from the files of Colonel Allen B. West

Husband and Wife Burned to Death because They Were Christians - Religion of Peace

Yesterday we shared the words spoken by President Obama’s special envoy on ISIS, retired Marine General Allen, who told a gathering on Monday in Kuwait, “we must also tell a positive story, one that highlights our respect – our profound respect for Islam’s proud traditions, its rich history, and celebration of scholarship and family and community.”

Sadly today I was emailed a copy of a letter sent by Catholic League President Bill Donahue to President Barack Hussein Obama on a most heinous and sickening incident in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan — relating to its archaic and barbaric blasphemy laws.

As reported by the Catholic News Agency, “The reported killing of a Christian couple in Pakistan by a mob on Tuesday has sparked calls for the nation’s government to protect its people, and especially its minorities.

“The burning alive of a Christian couple is a test case for our government. Our government must provide protection to all citizens and especially to the poor and downtrodden Christians,” Fr. James Channan, O.P., director of the Peace Center Lahore, told CNA Nov. 4 in an email interview.”

“That morning, Shahzad Masih and his wife Shama, a Christian couple, were allegedly killed and their bodies burned by a mob after they were accused of desecrating the Quran. The couple lived in Kot Radha Kishan, a city located nearly 40 miles southwest of Lahore. The wife Shama was pregnant, and the couple had three additional children.”

I challenged the politicized words of General Allen as bad policy and reiterate that position. A year ago in the summer I had the honor to meet a young Pakistani Christian woman named Julie Aftab who, because of her refusal to convert to Islam was attacked and had acid thrown on her and down her throat.

And even when taken to the hospital for treatment, she was shot because the rumor was spread that she had offended Islam — the Muslim doctors refused to treat her. Blessings of God that Julie was rescued from that horrific situation and brought to America. She now lives in Houston and I understand she’s about to be married and has finished her undergrad studies there.

What manner of barbarism is this? And what manner of cowardice refuses to denounce it, preferring games of political correctness? Another bad policy.

This recent story from Pakistan where the Christian community lives in constant fear is chilling. Here is a short synopsis, “Legal Evangelical Association Development, a Pakistani minority rights group, was told by Muhammad Rafique, one of the Masihs’ coworkers, that following the recent death of Shahzad’s father, Shama collected some of his things, burning them and throwing the ashes in the garbage.

According to Rafique, their employer noticed this, and charged that some of the burnt pages were from the Quran; he then detained them. They owed him money, and he refused to release them without being paid. It was then announced from local mosques that the couple had desecrated the Quran, and a mob forced their way into the room where the Masihs were held, beat them, and then burnt them alive in the kiln’s furnace.”

Here is the entire letter sent to President Obama by Catholic League President Donahue yesterday.

I suppose even presenting this story will once again earn me the label of “islamophobe” — feel free. I will not relent in reporting this savage barbarism that we believe can be conquered by appeasement, dismissal or calling a different name.

Is this a Pakistani version of “workplace violence?”

I encourage you all to copy this letter and send it to the White House, attention President Obama, State Department attention John Kerry, office of Senator Mitch McConnell, and office of House Speaker John Boehner, and demand cutting off all foreign aid to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan until they revoke their insidious blasphemy laws and also release the Pakistani doctor who identified Obama bin Laden ~ Dr. Shakil Afridi.

We must stand for human rights and I am waiting to hear from the women’s rights groups appalled at the heinous torture and murder of Shama and her unborn child.

_____________________________________________________________

Click Here - Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Control Freaks: Islam - Dracula - Leftists

CONTROL FREAKS: Dracula, Leftists and Islam! from the files of Audrey Russo at Clash Daily.com

Read the Russo File at Clash Daily.com

It’s that time of year again. Every horror movie under the sun, surfaces for Halloween. Thanks to all the retro cable stations popping up, we can still watch some of those old black and white horror flicks with that blood-sucking, hypnotist Dracula - always busy controlling his followers one bite at a time.

It reminds me of Leftists - but they don’t do it one-by-one through hypnosis. They work deceptively under, over and around the democratic process until they have a stranglehold on a society. Law-abiding citizens (which they were never) end up having to do their bidding. Leftists are wannabe tyrants in denial.

But, worse and scarier than these two, are those devout, Quran-worshiping followers of Islam. These are the Muslims who know that the verse of Abrogation substitutes the later, violent verses for the earlier peaceful verses of the Quran. They do as Muhammed did in conquering, raping, pillaging and murdering for Allah.

They control not merely those that follow Islam by force, but all those that are allowed to live in Islamic lands.

Proof of this tyrannical, OCD-like behavior can be found in the home of Islam’s most holy sites of Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is the birthplace of Muhammed, the Quran and Sharia Islamic Law. Wahhabi Islam, the strictest form of Islam, is practiced by the Saudi Kingdom.

This form of Islam was named after Abdul Wahhab, a stern 18th century Muslim revivalist who considered that Islam (and Arabia in particular) needed cleansing and purifying back to Islam’s fundamentals. Saudi Arabia is considered the paradigm for an Islamic society, run by the Sharia.

And infidels, non-Muslims are forced to comply with Sharia Law.

They have:

• No individual freedom
• No free speech rights 
• No religious freedom (Bibles, Crosses and Stars of David are all confiscated and destroyed on entry to the Saudi Kingdom)
• No independence for women
• Barbaric punishment for ‘crimes’

The ideology of Islam and its adherents rather than Dracula and current-day Leftists, are by far the scariest control freaks on earth today.

If you doubt it, try moving to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

_____________________________________________________________

Click Here - Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Iran executes woman who killed her rapist

Iran executes woman who killed her rapist from the files of Colonel Allen B. West

Click Here to Read the West Files

The Obama administration is seeking to ease nuclear sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The Democrat party is also using a tired theme of “war on women” in this midterm election cycle.

Perhaps they should pay attention to the nexus of these two points as reported by The Jerusalem Post.

Last weekend, ” A twenty-six year-old Iranian woman convicted of murdering a man she accused of trying to rape her as a teenager was hanged on Saturday, the official news agency IRNA said, despite international pleas for her life to be spared.”

“Reyhaneh Jabbari walked to the gallows at dawn on Saturday in Tehran’s Evin prison after failing to secure a reprieve from the murder victim’s relatives within the 10-day deadline set by sharia law in force since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. In 2007, Jabbari was arrested for killing Morteza Abdolali Sarbandi, a former employee of the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence.

Jabbari claimed that she was defending herself against Sarbandi’s sexual advances. She was given the death penalty by a Tehran court in 2009. The Iranian supreme court denied her appeals against the sentence.”

Remember, under Islamic sharia law, a woman needs three male witnesses on her behalf in order to corroborate any accusations she may bring against a male — as part of the traditions of Muhammad. So, as in the case of the Sudanese Christian woman Meriam Ibrahim, where were all these feminist voices to speak out against this action?

I guess Pelosi, Wasserman-Schultz, and Fluke — as well as Sen. Mark Udall — are just too “politically” busy to address a real war on women. No, feminist groups would rather video little girls in princess outfits dropping f-bombs to help their cause.

Of course this only represents the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the abhorrent conditions for women in the Islamic world.

Where is the Freedom from Religion Foundation or all the other “separation of church and state” organizations who want to use the IRS against Christian pastors? What does the lesbian Mayor of Houston have to say about how Iran — and Islam — treats homosexuals? I guess she sees Christian ministers and their sermons a bigger threat because I’ve never heard her use her “activist” voice in this matter.

The case of Ms. Jabbari was decided under sharia law — not the rule of law and jurisprudence of individual rights and equal protection under the law. So where is that venerable international organization promoting global rights and freedoms — the United Nations? Well, I doubt they UN Human Rights organization with its stellar list of nations cared much.

Especially since that same body has adopted UNHR Resolution 16/18, an initiative of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (formerly Organization of Islamic Conferences), the confederacy of 56 Islamic states. Resolution 16/18 seeks to limit speech viewed as “discriminatory” or which involves the “defamation of religion” – specifically that which can be viewed as “incitement to imminent violence.”

In other words, it effectively condemns anyone deemed “offensive” or “critical” of Islam — to the possible point of criminal indictment.

Perhaps that’s why former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as well as former UN Ambassador Susan Rice both speak very little about the plight of women in the Islamic world — after all, they both supported the March 2011 resolution.

The bottom line is, why does the Obama administration wish to circumvent the U.S. Congress and relieve sanctions against Iran, allowing it to march towards a nuclear capacity — and not for peaceful means? Iran still holds U.S. citizen and Pastor Saeed Abedini — but I guess his life just isn’t worth anything to the progressive socialists and Islamist enablers of the Obama administration — namely Barack Hussein Obama himself.

In the end, the war on women is just a political gimmick for Democrats to use against their political opposition. It certainly isn’t the fundamental basis for a policy to put pressure on such countries as Iran, Saudi Arabia and others in the Muslim world.

It further demonstrates that in America, politics and gimmicks trump principled policy — sadly Ms. Jabbari was executed with nary a peep from the hypocrites on the Left. Thankfully Meriam Ibrahim, wife of an American citizen and mother of two American children, was rescued by the efforts of the Italians — certainly not a finger was lifted by Obama, nor was there a hashtag campaign by First Lady Obama, heck, not even a mention — nor an invite to the White House.

The real war on women is against those women not deemed politically expedient to the progressive socialist political cause.

_____________________________________________________________

Click Here - Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

The Islamic madness persists

The Islamic Madness Persists from the Warning Signs by Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

ISIS/ISIL Fighters - Know the Caruba Warning Signs

The lull in the coverage of all things Islamic was broken by two terrorist attacks in Canada, a reminder that so long as the world does not unite to destroy the Islamic State, we shall all remain vulnerable. A “lone wolf” terrorist can kill you just as dead as one in a terrorist organization, particularly one encouraging these attacks.

While the media’s herd mentality continues to report about Ebola in West Africa and gears up for massive coverage of the forthcoming November 4 midterm elections, the Middle East remains in a low state of boil, never failing to produce bombings, skirmishes, and the usual inhumanities we associate with Islam.

Americans pay attention to the Middle East only when blood is flowing and at the present time the only element generating that is the Islamic State (ISIS) which continues to attack Kobani in northern Syria and assault the Yazidis and other targets in Iraq. The U.S., Britain and France are bombing ISIS forces, largely to protect and assist the Kurdish Peshmerga forces, the only fighting force of any consequence.

Virtually unreported are the 18 million Muslim refugees throughout out the Middle East. The U.N. reports that these and internally displaced persons reflect the turmoil in Afghanistan, Iraq. Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. To grasp this, think about what either the U.S. or Europe would be like with a comparable number of refugees.

As David P. Goldman, a Senior Fellow at the London Center for Policy Research and Wax Family Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum, noted October 20 on the Forum website, “That is cause for desperation: unprecedented numbers of people have been torn from traditional society and driven from their homes, many with little but the clothes on their backs.”

“There are millions of young men in the Muslim world sitting in refugee camps with nothing to do, nowhere to go back to, and nothing to look forward to…never has an extremist movement had so many frustrated and footloose young men in its prospective recruitment pool.”

So what does John Kerry, our Secretary of State, think is the greatest problem in the Middle East? While discussing the ISIS coalition with Middle East leaders, Kerry expressed the opinion a week ago that the Israeli-Palestine situation was the real problem. Apparently he is unaware that there is no Palestinian state and never has been. The one on the West Bank exists thanks to Israeli support and the one in Gaza, controlled by Hamas, provoked Israeli defense measures by rocketing it for months.

Prof. Efraim Inbar, director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies and a Shillman/Ginsberg fellow at the Middle East Forum, has a quite different point of view. “In reality, however, the novelty of the Islamic State, as well as the magnitude of the threat it poses, are greatly exaggerated.”

Noting that many of the Arab states have “failed to modernize and deliver basic services” Prof. Inbar has little anticipation that ISIS could do that either. Moreover “Much of the fragmented Arab world will be busy dealing with its domestic problems for decades, minimizing the possibility that it will turn into a formidable enemy for Israel or the West.”

What has seemed to escape Kerry’s and the President’s attention is the threat of a nuclear armed Iran. The negotiations to encourage Iran to step back from its efforts to create the warheads for its missiles do not appear to promise a favorable outcome. Iran managed to get some sanctions lifted and that was likely why Iran entered into them. They don’t care what the West or the rest of the Middle East wants.

Neither Israel, nor Saudi Arabia are as naïve as the U.S. In March, Richard Silverstein, writing in Tikun Olam, reported that “the level of intense cooperation between Israel and Saudi Arabia in targeting Iran has become clear. Saudi Arabia isn’t just coordinating its own intelligence efforts with Israel. It’s actually financing a good deal of Israel’s very expensive campaign against Iran.” A recent explosion at an Iranian nuclear facility suggests that the campaign is still quite active.

Noting “airtight military censorship in Israel”, Silverstein pointed out that information about the Israeli-Saudi relationship would not have been reported in an Israeli daily newspaper, Maariv, if both governments did not want Iran and the U.S. to know. In effect, the Saudis have replaced the U.S. as a source of support given President Obama’s barely concealed dislike of Israel.

“But Israel,” wrote Silverstein, “isn’t going to war tomorrow.” Israel will watch the outcome of the U.S.-Iran negotiations and determine what action to take or not at that point. Meanwhile, it will keep the pressure on Iran with its covert program.

At some point the news media will begin to pay more attention to the Middle East. It will not get much cooperation, however, from ISIS because the Islamic State has made it clear that only journalists that obey its rules and write what it wants will live very long.

The “religion of peace”, Islam, has not produced much peace in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world for the last 1,400 years.

_____________________________________________________________

Click Here - Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Why beheading?

Why Beheading? from the files of Jeff Jacoby at the Boston Globe

Read the Jacoby Files at the Boston Globe

ISLAMIC STATE has made the beheading of victims a key element in its campaign of terror and conquest. Most conspicuous in recent weeks have been the murders of Westerners James Foley, Steven Sotloff, and David Haines, whose severed heads and decapitated bodies have been shown in threatening videos produced by the jihadists.

In the years since 9/11, other Islamist terrorist groups have circulated equally ghastly beheading videos. Among the earlier victims were journalist Daniel Pearl, businessman Nicholas Berg, and construction contractors Jack Hensley and Eugene Armstrong — all Americans beheaded by Al Qaeda.

Last week, meanwhile, Australian police arrested 15 suspects allegedly linked to Islamic State; they are accused of plotting to publicly behead a victim abducted at random.

Why this obsession with cutting off people's heads?

Clearly the terrorists relish the horror beheading evokes in America and other Western democracies, as well as the fear it inspires among Kurds, Shiites, or other local forces standing in the path of their juggernaut.

Psychological warfare is an essential element in Islamic State's military strategy, writes Shashank Joshi, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London. Even when heavily outnumbered, Islamic State has been able to leverage its reputation for implacable brutality "to dissuade Iraqi forces from ever seeking battle."

And by killing American and British hostages with such sadistic relish, it aims to intensify the desire of many in the West to wash their hands of involvement in Iraq once and for all.

But there are other ways to terrorize, other gruesome means of mass murder — suicide bombings, poison gas, hijackings. Why the emphasis on beheading?

No doubt part of the explanation is that beheadings tend to draw more attention than suicide bombings and exploding cars. Deadly though they are, car bombs and shootings have lost much of their shock value in Western eyes. It takes an unusually high death toll for a bombing in Iraq to attract as much media attention as the decapitation of a single hostage by an English-speaking Islamist wielding a knife.

Terrorists crave attention, more now in the digital age, perhaps, than ever before. Islamic State and other jihadist groups have many ways to commit mass murder. But for generating a spectacle that will be noticed — and shuddered at — the world over, sawing off the head of an American journalist or a European relief worker, then uploading the video to the Internet, is hard to beat.

Yet beheadings, too, can lose their shock value. It wasn't all that long ago that decapitation was a familiar punishment in Western culture. As late as 1977, the guillotine was still being used for executions in France.

In the colonial era, severed heads of criminals were sometimes displayed on Boston Common. Plus, modern video games and ultrarealistic computer graphics make it easier than ever to grow inured to almost any image or scene, no matter how grisly or intense or intimate.

But the beheadings aren't just a fashion.

There is more to the Islamist passion for decapitation than psychological warfare and a hunger for notoriety. There is also Muslim theology and history, and a mandate going back to the Koran. In a 2005 study published in Middle East Quarterly, historian Timothy Furnish quotes the famous passage at Sura 47:4:

"When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks." For centuries, Furnish observes, "leading Islamic scholars have interpreted this verse literally," and examples abound throughout Islamic history.

Yet Western leaders keep insisting that the beheading of "infidels" is unrelated to the jihadists' religious outlook.

"When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks," the Koran commands. For centuries leading Islamic scholars have interpreted this verse literally. Examples of mass beheadings abound throughout Islamic history.

"When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks," the
Koran commands. For centuries leading Islamic scholars
have interpreted this verse literally. Examples of mass
beheadings abound throughout Islamic history.

Last week, after British aid worker David Haines became the third Western hostage to be decapitated by Islamic State, Britain's immigration minister, James Brokenshire, made a point of going to a mosque in London to declare that the "atrocious" beheadings "have nothing to do with Islam."

At an international emergency conference in Paris the same day, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius likewise insisted that neither Islamic State nor its "throat-cutters" were "representative of Islam."

President Obama repeatedly makes the same assertion. When he outlined new military steps against Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) in a televised address this month, he avowed categorically: "ISIL is not Islamic."

Alas, ISIL disagrees. And so do the radicalized Western Muslims flocking to the Middle East to join its brutal jihad, many of them stimulated by propaganda videos that feature the beheading of "unbelievers." To millions of moderate and peaceable Muslims the world over, beheadings in the name of Islam may seem a terrible defilement of the religion they love.

To a fanatical Islamist minority, they are just what Allah demands.

It may take a long while to destroy that enemy, but surely the first step is to call it what it is.

____________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Islam: Sex Slaves and Beheadings

Islam, Sex Slaves, Beheadings: Mohammed Would Be Proud from the files of Audrey Russo at Clash Daily.com

Read the Russo Files at Clash Daily.com

We in the West have been lied to.

Our leaders, out of either political expediency or cowardice, have sold us a bill of goods.

We have heard, and continue to hear ad nauseam, that the savage beheadings and underage rapes committed by devout Mohammedans have nothing to do with Islam.

But the funny thing is, according to the experts, in antithesis to the current rhetoric:

Sex slaves and beheadings are indeed Islamic, and it would thrill Muhammed that his followers continue his paradigm.

The first words that emanate from the lips of Western leaders following a savage beheading or the “discovery” that more young girls have been kidnapped/sexually abused by Muslims, is:

These actions have nothing to do with Islam.

Au Contraire… According to author/scholar Raymond Ibrahim, Western leaders have it wrong. Here’s some of what his meticulous research has revealed:

Beheadings:

• Begin with the command from the Koran, “Fight them [those who oppose Islam], Allah will torment them with your hands, humiliate them, empower you over them, and heal the hearts of the believers, removing the rage from their hearts” (Koran 9:14-15).
• Now, in order to comprehend the context, one must look to the Sira and Hadith…the biography and anecdotes of Muhammad, correspondingly. Amr bin Hisham was a pagan Arab chieftain (infidel)…who had fierce opposition to Islam.

A close companion to Mohammad and a new convert, mortally wounded Amr during the Battle of Badr…then started abusing him.

“According to Al-Bidaya wa Al-Nihaya (“The Beginning and the End”), Ibn Kathir’s authoritative history of Islam, ‘After that, he [Abdullah] slit his [‘Amr’s] head off and bore it till he placed it between the hands of the Prophet. Thus did Allah heal the hearts of the believers with it.’

“This, then, is the true significance of Koran 9:14-15:

‘Fight them, Allah will torment them with your hands [mortally wounding and eventually decapitating], humiliate them [pulling his beard], empower you over them [standing atop him], and heal the hearts of the believers, removing the rage from their hearts [at the sight of his decapitated head].'”

Sex Slaves/Rape (Grooming) Gangs (from The Religion of Peace):

• Since Dar al-Islam (House of Islam) considers itself in a perpetual war with Dar al-Harb (House of War), which includes all infidels…Muslims believe that the booty of war includes human chattel (women and children). This is according to the Koran 33:50; 23:5-6; 70:29-30, to name a few verses.
• The Islamic booty or “Spoils of War” are confirmed by Raymond Ibrahim. This includes captive infidel women (which we are seeing currently in Iraq, Syria & Nigeria).
• Muslim men are taught that infidel women are unclean whores, so raping them is permissible.

The problem with the Western parrots, who repeat the paltering poop about these savage acts (and the ideology behind them) is…out of a desire to satisfy Political Correctness/Cultural Marxism (and for a time, they are protected from the fruit of their lies)

They are happy to throw the rest of the West to Mohammed’s mutts. Their self-serving myopia prevents them from seeing the truth:

That those savage beasts will eventually eviscerate them, as well.