Uber deception: Understanding lies of Islam

From the files of Audrey Russo at Clash Daily.com

Read the Audrey Russo Files at Clash Daily.com

Let’s be honest: Lying is wrong…if you hold to Judeo-Christian precepts. There are lies of discretion, like lying when old Aunt Fanny asks if you like her new eyeglass frames…that make her look like Elton John.

But what about lies that help perps commit their crimes against humanity? You’re about to discover the four lies that Islam encourages…in order to conquer…YOU.

As I have learned by many credible friends who are either ex-Muslims in exile from Muslim persecution or Christians now living in freedom, who escaped Muslim persecution…

Islam permits lying. The four kinds of Islamic deceit (Louis Palme):

• Taqiyya is defined as concealment about ones Muslim identity. Based upon (Surah 3:28) “Let believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful– he that does has nothing to hope for from Allah– except in self-defense (illaa an-tattaqu minhum tuqah).” “Self-defense” is justification for concealment. Also based upon Islamic Sharia Law (Reliance of the Traveler, Para r8.2), “When it is possible to achieve an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible, and lying is obligatory if the goal is obligatory.”

Illustration: This would include lying to protect Islam or Muslims.

• Tawriya is defined as camouflage, and it’s also referred to as “creative lying”. Based upon(Reliance of the Traveller, sections o19.1 and o19.5) “ It is acceptable to break the intent of the oath, as long as you don’t break the letter of the oath.”

Illustration: Suppose someone protests that Surah 1 of the Quran demeans Christians and Jews, because it is a request Muslims make to Allah 17 times a day to keep them from the path of “those with whom God is angry” and “those who have lost their way”. A Muslim might respond, “Surah 1 never mentions Jews or Christians.” He is practicing Tawriya, because while Surah 1 does not mention Jews and Christians by name, he clearly knows that the words “those” refer to Jews and Christians.

• Kitman is characterized by someone telling only part of the truth.

Illustration: When a Muslim says that jihad really refers to an internal, spiritual struggle, he is telling half the truth. Often, Kitman results in a glaring distortion of the truth. In the example given, the Quran uses jihad and its derivatives 59 times. Of those, only 16 could be considered “internal” with no object as the target of the struggle based on the framework of the Surah.

Another common form of Kitman is to quote only the few peaceful passages from the Quran, knowing full-well that that passage was later abrogated by a more militant, conflicting verse.

NOTE: It must be understood that there are two categories of Quranic verses: Pre-Medina (Meccan) and Post-Medina (Medinan). The Meccan or peaceful verses were written when Muhammed was trying to persuade followers in Mecca, from the Pagans, Jews and Christians. The Medinan verses were written after Muhammed was rejected as prophet by Jews and Christians. These are the violent verses which replaced the peaceful ones.

Here are examples that Islamapologists (Journalists, Academics, Politicians, etc.) often use, followed by their placements:

“There is no compulsion in religion” (Surah 2:256) Pre- Medina (Meccan)

“Are they seeking a religion other than Allah’s, when every soul in the heavens and earth has submitted to Him, willingly or by compulsion?” (Surah 3:83) Post-Medina (Medinan)

“Permission to take up arms is hereby given to those who are attacked, because they have been wronged.” (Surah 22:39) Pre-Medina (Meccan)

“When the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere for them.” (Surah 9:5) Post-Medina (Medinan)

• Muruna is using “flexibility” to blend in with the enemy or the surroundings. Based upon: Surah 2:106, which says, “If we abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We will replace it by a better one or similar.” Therefore, Muslims have permission to “forget” some of the commands in the Quran, as long as they are pursuing a better command. Muslims striving to advance Islam, therefore, can diverge from their Islamic laws in order to cause non-Muslims to drop their guard and place their trust in their Muslim counterpart (this has been extremely successful in the West).

Illustration: Muslims practice Muruna in the same way a chameleon changes colors to avoid detection. They will sometimes shave off their beards, wear western clothing, or drink alcohol to blend in with non-Muslims. And Western converts are a great tool…there’s nothing more useful to Islamists than a blue-eyed, blonde-haired Caucasian Muslim willing to engage in terrorism.

Muruna is useful for a Muslim to marry a non-Muslim or to behave like a non-Muslim so their true agenda will not be suspected. The 9/11 hijackers visited strip clubs and bars, when they weren’t taking classes in the U.S. to fly airplanes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the White House.

Other illustrations include Hillary Clinton’s aide, Huma Abedin, who married Jewish Congressman Anthony Weiner (and whose mother Saleha is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood women’s division) which gave her security credentials that gave her access to the highest levels of the Administration.

Should we really be surprised about Islam’s deceit when the Quran boasts about Allah being the “master of machinations” (Sura 13:42), and “proficient at his scheming” (Sura 8:30)?

This can prove to be one of the most valuable lessons we learn from 9/11. One that can help us better assess our surroundings (since our government has abdicated its responsibility to protect us).

And if we love our freedom…I hope we learn it well.

_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Obama promotes Islam with your tax dollars

From the files of Audrey Russo at Clash Daily.com

Your Tax Dollars at Work in Foreign Countries

A story hit some news outlets a couple of years ago that few Americans took note of…according to Channel 2 Action News (Washington, D.C.) the State Department sent millions of dollars to save mosques overseas.

The State Department was quite proud of its work, displaying before and after photos of the refurbished Mosques.

As of late, there’s been no proof that this program has ended…

Apparently, the President didn’t need Valentine’s Day to passionately blow kisses to his favorite creed, Islam.

And, he didn’t show his love from his own wallet. He did it with YOUR tax dollars.

This was Obama’s attempt to make nice in a feckless attempt to fight Islamic extremism by building relationships with Islamic leaders. The mistake here is: The Middle East mindset views compromise/appeasement (helping rebuild Mosques) as weakness to be subjugated.

Past guest on my radio show, and former Egyptian Muslim, human rights activist and author, Nonie Darwish confirms this conclusion;

This part of the world has a lot of respect for power and America is not showing its power, it’s showing its appeasement. They are laughing all the way to the bank…We are rebuilding mosques to support the radicals, not to support the moderates. We are building mosques to issue Fatwas of death against people like me.

As I quoted Gavin Boby in my latest article:

A mosque is not merely a place of worship. Islamic doctrine requires the application of Islamic law within its geographical reach…Islamic law claims supremacy over the conduct of Muslims and non-Muslims alike. It mandates violence against those who resist it.

And as Turkey’s PM Erdogan has stated unequivocally: “Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers.”

Now, since Obama is all about “fairness” and “fair shares”, surely his compassion doesn’t end with Muslims and their Mosques, right?

Let’s take a look:

• To aid the Christian Militia fighting ISIS’ genocide against them? Monies allotted by this President: Zero.
• Arms to the Kurds fighting ISIS, as they protect their families and Iraqi Christians seeking refuge from ISIS in Northern Iraq? Monies allotted by this President: Zero.

But, by all means, he makes sure to renovate and bring allure and comfort to Islamic places of worship…where ISIS and their supporters renew their hate of non-Muslims, especially Jews and Christians…and plot their destruction.

I believe it was Sun Tzu who once recommended equipping your enemy to kill you - or was that Quisling?

Funding Mosque renovation is a suicidal endeavor. Mosques contain hate because they contain the Quran. If we are in any way making the spread of the contents of that book possible, we are complicit in the acts committed out of that venue.

And that’s not fighting Islamic terrorism - that’s making it more possible.

______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Look who makes an issue of Obama's religion

Look who's making an issue of Obama's religion by Jeff Jacoby at the Boston Globe

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker departs after speaking at the American Action Forum
in Washington last month.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, attending a meeting of the National Governors Association, was asked by two Washington Post reporters whether President Obama is a Christian. "I don't know," Walker candidly replied. He has plenty of company.

During the president's reelection campaign in the summer of 2012, the Pew Research Center polled a national sample of registered voters: "Do you happen to know what Barack Obama's religion is?" More than one-third of the respondents — 36 percent — said they didn't know. Only 45 percent identified the president as a Christian; 16 percent said he's a Muslim.

That was the seventh time in a little over four years that Pew had measured public awareness of Obama's religion. The first poll, back in March 2008, had yielded almost identical results — 36 percent couldn't name then-Senator Obama's religion, while 47 percent said he was Christian and 12 percent answered Muslim.

Other pollsters have reached similar findings. In June 2012, for example, Gallup reported that 44 percent of Americans didn't know the president's religious faith. Those in the "Don't Know" camp spanned the political spectrum:

According to Gallup, 36 percent of Democrats, 46 percent of Independents, and 47 percent of Republicans couldn't identify Obama's religion. (In the 2012 polls, one-third or more of respondents said they didn't know Mitt Romney's religion, either.)

The Post didn't explain why its reporters thought it appropriate to ask Walker, a possible GOP contender for 2016, about Obama's religion. Nor did it give any reason for treating Walker's answer as if it were headline news. When one in three Americans is unsure of Obama's religious affiliation, why should the governor of Wisconsin be expected to weigh in on the matter? Why should any public figure be quizzed about an officeholder's spiritual beliefs?

It is to Walker's credit that he wouldn't venture a judgment on something he doesn't know enough about. "I've actually never talked about it," he responded when the Post pressed him to confirm Obama's Christian identity. "I've never asked him that."

Perhaps he should have reminded the reporters that in this country, the theological views of political leaders carry no constitutional weight. "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office," the Framers specified in Article VI.

Candidates for president need not be Christian, and it is not the business of any presidential hopeful to gauge the religious credentials of the current White House incumbent. Nor is it the business of journalists to try to goad them into doing so.

"Some figures on the right have consistently questioned Obama's faith, with some suggesting he is a Muslim," the Post story smarmily notes. Even if true, what does that have to do with Walker? Some figures on the left have insisted that Obama is an atheist — but reporters aren't buttonholing Democratic governors to ask whether the president believes in God.

As it happens, Obama's religious biography is confusing and convoluted, as he himself has sometimes readily acknowledged.

As President Obama, shown here at the National Prayer Breakfast in 2009, has sometimes
readily acknowledged, his own religious roots are tangled. It isn't hard to understand why
many Americans can't identify the president's faith.

"I had a father who was born a Muslim but became an atheist, grandparents who were non-practicing Methodists and Baptists, and a mother who was skeptical of organized religion," Obama told attendees at the National Prayer Breakfast in 2009, two weeks after becoming president.

"I didn't become a Christian until … I moved to the South Side of Chicago after college." In his memoirs, Obama wrote that as a child in Indonesia, he "had spent two years at a Muslim school, two years at a Catholic school," recounting bits of youthful tomfoolery in both.

Over the years, the president has made numerous comments on religious topics, and his messages haven't always been consistent. It isn't hard to understand why a sizeable minority of Americans, to the extent that they think about Obama's religion at all, might be genuinely puzzled to put a label to it. Honest confusion isn't scandalous.

What is scandalous is when the media spring bogus questions on politicians in an attempt to extract an answer that can then be rushed into headlines dripping with insinuation. There are a thousand-and-one issues on which any national political figure can legitimately be expected to have an opinion.

The inner spiritual life of the president — any president — isn't one of them. By all accounts, Walker hasn't the slightest interest in exploiting Obama's faith, and has done nothing to suggest the contrary.

A shame that the Washington Post holds itself to a lower standard.

______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Summit on terrorism: America is screwed

Reviewing the summit on countering violent extremism: America, we’re screwed from the files of Colonel Allen B. West

Read the Colonel Allen B. West Column

If President Obama could hit the “reset button,” I think he’d rewind this week and try to get a mulligan – but then again, I could be totally wrong.

If I am completely wrong, then our policy towards degrading, defeating, and destroying ISIS is non-existent.

In simple terms, America, we’re screwed.

And just so everyone out there understands, there were things the Bush administration stated regarding combatting this Islamic terrorist enemy with which I did not agree. However, President George W. Bush showed resolve when all seemed against him, and we did indeed defeat al-Qaida in Iraq.

A fragile stability was handed over to President Obama, who then felt a campaign promise was more vital than reality on the ground. No one can debate this simple fact: a vacuum was left in Iraq. That which was defeated has reconstituted — and we have no plan to re-defeat. Speeches and rhetoric, yes, but no vision.

Consider this last week if you will. ISIS beheads twenty-one Egyptian Coptic Christian men and sends a definitive threat towards “Rome.” There are reports of forty-five people burned alive in the town of al-Baghdadi, located just five miles away from 300 Marines at al-Asad Base. And what has been our response in this week?

We need to attend to the “grievances” of the Islamic terrorists. We need to provide jobs and opportunities for the Islamic terrorists. Do I need to remind you State Department spokesperson Marie Harf’s inane comments?

What has been the prevailing theme from President Obama and his administration? We have Islamic terrorists — of course they’re not defined as Islamic — because it is OUR fault. We haven’t done enough for THEM. I guess the mantra emanating from the progressive socialist left is exactly what Hillary Clinton stated: we need to empathize with our enemy.

As reported by USA Today, “President Obama said Thursday he doesn’t use terms like Islamic extremism because doing so would promote the false idea of a Western war with Islam, which would help extremists recruit more terrorists.”

“No religion is responsible for terrorism — people are responsible for violence and terrorism,” Obama told delegates at the White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism. Obama also said military force alone will not defeat terrorism, and the nation must work with local communities to reduce the influence of those who advocate violent extremism. 

“They are not religious leaders,” Obama said. “They are terrorists.” In his summit remarks, Obama cited the “fair amount of debate in the press and among pundits” about the words that used should be used to “describe and frame this challenge” of violent extremism.

Groups like the Islamic State and al-Qaeda “try to portray themselves as religious leaders, holy warriors in defense of Islam,” Obama said, but “we must never accept the premise that they put forward, because it is a lie.” Obama also said Muslim communities have responsibilities to confront the abuse of religion.

“Of course, the terrorists do not speak for a billion Muslims who reject their ideology,” Obama said. “They no more represent Islam than any madman who kills innocents in the name of God, represents Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism or Hinduism.”

Now, I agree, military force alone will not defeat Islamic terrorism. We will need economic force to cut off their sources of funding. We will need diplomatic force to isolate them from the states who sponsor these non-state, non-uniform belligerent. We will need informational force to defeat the ideology of Islamic terrorists — but we must first recognize the ideology.

And therein lies the issue for this current administration that seems to do everything it can to refute what the enemy is and what its actions and own words define it to be.

There is nothing ISIS and Islamic terrorists have done which is not found in the Koran and the Hadiths – that is not debatable. And please, no moral equivalency statements folks. Nowhere in the New Testament does it talk about striking anyone about the neck (beheadings) or refer to any group as apes (Jews).

Here is what President Obama does not want to admit. The first phase of Islam was peaceful, it lasted from 612-622 AD (Mecca I). However, upon Mohammad’s departure from Mecca to Medina, Islam and his “verses” became rooted in violence, force, intimidation, coercion, and references to “instilling terror.” And under the premise of abrogation, these latter violent verses supersede the previous peaceful verses.

ISIS is carrying on an almost 1400-year tradition of Islam — that is truth. You need only trace the expansion of Islam off the Saudi peninsula — kinda different from the Apostles of Jesus and what they preached. And again, don’t give me the moral equivalency from things that happened hundreds of thousands of years ago. Stay on task, we are in the 21st century.

Now, are there “peaceful” Muslims with whom coexistence is possible? Of course, but to deny that violence is rooted in Islam is not only wrong, it represents a dangerous ignorance.

It is incumbent upon leaders in Western civilization to stop making excuses and dismissing Islamic terrorist actions and the history of such. It is terribly disconcerting when Western leaders seek religious relativism in order to hide their recalcitrance and cowardice.

For an entire presidential administration to think we, the people so stupid that they can utter the drivel that jobs and opportunities — along with community organizing — is a means to defeat the 21st century jihad is offensive.

The inability or reticence to accept the reality of the enemy only places Western civilization in a position by which it may not be able to recover. There are Muslims who want to have the Islamic jihad crushed, but what do they think of us when we cannot even admit it exists?

If you’ve noticed the actions of Jordan and Egypt, they don’t believe this is about a jobs program — but they’d like our support in fighting.

And why is it that this administration refuses to support the Kurds, Jordan and Egypt in their stand against Islamic terrorism? Gosh, consider the speech by Egyptian President al-Sisi on New Year’s Day. Compare that to the one given by our President Obama.

Warriors don’t want war but are ready when called upon — we are the peace makers and enforcers. No amount of talk, speeches, and “understanding grievances” will send a message. All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

This week we demonstrated to Islamic terrorists that we are unwilling to do anything — doggone, we showed them we’re actually afraid to even state who they are.

We showed them that we would rather retreat into academic intellectualism and emotional diatribe when all we need is resolve. We showed them we are not willing to stand for our values. We showed them that they are indeed on the march and victorious, as they believe their text commands.

However, the good thing is that they’re not seeing the real us. What they saw this week was not America. And I actually do hope the enemy is emboldened, because it will make the victory even greater. We will defeat Islamic terrorism, jiahdism, fascism, totalitarianism. Never surrender, never, ever, never surrender!

And that is the true nature of whom we are, not Barack Obama or Marie Harf.

_____________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Obama rides his high horse Middle East policy

Obama Continues to Ride His High Horse Radical Islam Middle East Policy from A.F. (Tony) Branco at Comically Incorrect.com

Get Your Daily Dose of Humor from A.F. (Tony) Branco at Comically Incorrect.com

Check out some of the websites listed below that publish the A.F. (Tony) Branco Political Cartoon features.

• Editorial cartoonist
• Net Right Daily
• Legal Insurrection
• Liberty Alliance
• ConservativeDailyNews.com

______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

The other cause of terrorism

The Other Cause of Terrorism from the Warning Signs of Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

Know the Warning Signs from Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

I never fail to be astonished by the amount of corruption there is in the world. It is a very human trait whether it was royalty asserting that they ruled by God’s choice until their subjects rose up against them or modern day despots encountering the same fate.

Available On Line Now

Sarah Chayes has authored “Thieves of State: Why Corruption Threatens Global Security” ($26.95, W.W. Norton) and it is quite timely when you consider that corruption ignited the “Arab Spring”, first in Tunisia when a peddler grew so tired of the police asking for bribes that he set himself afire in protest.

Its dictator’s wife openly displayed the nation’s stolen wealth for which they were driven from power. In Egypt there was a similar response when the public tired of the looting of the state treasury by Mubarak’s son. Revolts from Libya to Syria have been generated by the same cause.

Corruption in the Middle East has a long history, but it is worldwide and, depending on the nation, is either tolerated as part of the way the culture does business or resisted by governments who understand that it undermines their legitimacy. Throw a dart at the map of the world and you are likely to hit a nation where corruption is influencing current events.

As Chayes notes, “Time and again U.S. officials are blindsided by major developments in countries where they work. Too often they are insensible to the perspectives and aspirations of population.”

A classic example is Afghanistan where both the Soviet Union and the U.S. ran into such ingrained corruption that it undermined their objectives, the former to turn it into a satellite and the latter to turn it into a modern, democratic government. Chayes cites Afghanistan as a classic example of why the Taliban emerged as a jihadist movement.

Corruption in the form of bribes, kick-backs, cronyism, is so deeply engrained in Afghanistan that it generated a movement to replace it with sharia law by Islamists.

“If the very Afghan officials by whose sides they planned to combat extremists were generating those extremists themselves—by having men shake down travelers and taking a cut, or leaving bills unpaid, or by providing judiciously selected ‘intelligence’ to engineer a night-raid against a rival trafficking network—it was too big a paradox to take in. NATO officers,” said Chayes, “did not want to know.”

“The corruption networks” in Afghanistan, writes Chayes, “were just too vertically integrated: any move against any official, no matter how lowly, would reverberate all the way up the chain to Karzai.”

In the 1960s and 1970s, Afghanistan had been a constitutional monarchy with a national assembly and local elders affording a check on executive power. “Citizens expected a decent education from their government, health care, even employment in state-owned industries.” That changed when Hamid Karzai took over. At that point government became a criminal enterprise.

The 9/11 attack prompted the U.S. to invade to drive out al Qaeda, but it also led to its staying on to fight the perceived enemies of Afghanistan. They—otherwise known as the Taliban—were being generated in part by the desire to drive out the corrupt Karzai administration.

What we tend to forget about the “Arab Spring” was that “millions of Arabs chose a constructive way to force change. They chose political revolution—a peaceful, civic, inclusive, and responsible form of revolt—directed square at their own leaderships, not at Western countries, not even those seen as regime allies.”

This is not to suggest that Islamism hasn’t degraded from its opposition to widespread corruption into organizations seeking to take control over the nations where it has spread. It has and this is most evidence in the incredibly corrupt nation of Nigeria where since 2009 Boko Haram has developed terrorism to new heights of barbarity—if that is possible.

An oil-rich nation, the billions that it generates have gone missing thanks to the administration of Nigerian president, Goodluck Jonathan. The police in Nigeria are hated as much as Boko Haram and, as we have seen, have not demonstrated any ability to eliminate the terrorist organization.

Why would any police officer or member of the armed forces want to die for a corrupt, kleptocratic administration? This was true back in the days when the U.S. was fighting in Vietnam, true when the Iraqi armed forces fled from those of the Islamic State, and it explains why even the active participation of U.S. forces does not result in victory against the terrorist organizations.

Why then should we be surprised that many throughout the Middle East have turned to Islam to address the problems they encounter from the corruption of their governments? “Lured by militant advocates of a religious ordering of human affairs, they will seek to roll back four hundred years of political history.”

In the West, we regard those regions of the world where corruption is rampant as backward. We can be forgiven for forgetting that our ancestors in England, the Netherlands, and parts of France laid the groundwork for modern democracy by their efforts to curb the corruption of the monarchies that enjoyed the good life at the expense of their subjects.

By the time the Founders came together to create the U.S. Constitution, they had been well-schooled and experienced in what it would require to keep corruption at bay with a government whose powers were limited and divided among executive, legislative, and judicial branches.

We are their beneficiaries, but that does not mean we have defeated corruption. The vast entitlement programs are just one example of the way millions are secured illegally by deception and disbursement. Other forms of corruption are addressed in the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act that forbids the use of bribery by corporations doing business in foreign nations.

The U.S. is not alone, however. Just as occurred in 2008, the too close relationship of the banking community and government led to financial crises in Ireland and Iceland. The public’s rejection of corruption in Ukraine led to its current civil unrest.

The role of corruption in the nations experiencing Islamic terrorism cannot be underestimated. Its role in the conduct of the world’s affairs is huge and a constant threat whose many forms must be understood, addressed, and eliminated to the greatest degree possible.

______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Mayor tells Muslims to F**k Off and leave

Mayor of Rotterdam Tells Muslim Extremists in the Netherlands to 'Fuck Off' featured at News Vice.com

After the terror attacks last week in Paris, the Muslim mayor of Rotterdam took a harsh tone with Islamic hardliners in the Netherlands, essentially saying that people who take issue with certain Western ideals and satirical newspapers can "fuck off."

Mayor Ahmed Aboutaleb, who was born in Morocco and immigrated to the Netherlands when he was 15, made the remark during an appearance on Nieuwsuur, a national television program.

Specifically, he said Muslim immigrants who are unable to accept "humorists" creating content for a newspaper could "fuck off" — or "rot toch op"in Dutch.

He also relayed the message that if any Dutch Muslims are against freedom, then "for heaven's sake pack your bags and leave. . . There may be a place in the world where you can be yourself. Be honest with yourself and do not go and kill innocent journalists."

Aboutaleb explained that he believes Muslim immigrants who cannot find their place in the Netherlands should leave because they're bringing undue scrutiny to the Muslim population at large in the country.

_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Obama needs to say ISLAMIC terrorist attack

Say it Mr. President dammit: It was an Islamic terrorist attack from the files of Colonel Allen B. West

Meet Colonel Allen B. West

Yesterday morning I awoke to a nightmare: a brutal savage Islamic terrorist attack in Paris, France. We have now come to the point where tolerance has become a one-way street leading to cultural suicide.

It was the French who came to the aid of a young America and it was the French who gave us the gift of Lady Liberty. Sadly, it was the French who found themselves on the 21st century battlefield as liberty was assaulted — our venerable freedom of speech and the press, as well as expression.

We have allowed the enemy into our home and refuse to acknowledge it. Our own president, Barack Hussein Obama has said “the future shall not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” and “let me be clear, ISIS is not Islamic.”

So once again, we are forced to acquiesce to a vile theocratic-political totalitarian ideology that does not conform to the concept of “coexistence.”

In the case of this latest attack — the assailants were born in France. Somehow, they never embraced the ideal of liberty and freedom. Somehow, they decided to be parasitic invaders who fed off the host until a time when they deemed it was time to attack.

And over time we have allowed the invading parasite to fester in its own communities all to our detriment — under the guise of “multiculturalism.”

The real question is, what shall we do in response?

1. First of all we need to acknowledge this Islamist enemy — our own White House referred to this attack as “violence.” Only after French President Hollande stated it was a terrorist attack, did the White House refer to it as the same.

However, President Obama just cannot bring himself to say Islamist, jihadist, Islamic terrorism — nothing. It is still this Obama administration which classifies the Islamic jihadist attack at Ft. Hood Texas, and the barbaric beheading of an American woman in Moore Oklahoma, both as “workplace violence.”

If we cannot even admit who this enemy is — especially given that they freely admit the fact — then the Islamo-fascists and terrorists are indeed winning. They are censoring us and instilling fear. Why did it take President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry to even say the word?

And we have cultural jihadist apologists who buy into this perverted and warped sense of political correctness and condemn those who call Islamists out. I refuse to, and will not call this “radical” Islam. It is what it is, and that is islam — pure and simple, and without any type of reformation bringing this belief system into the 21st century we will continue to confront the problem. The system of “nakeesh” (abrogation) means the latter and more violent verses of the Koran supersede the previous — meaning these jihadist actions are justified within their doctrine — their playbook.

I applaud the hashtag campaign saying “We are all Charlie” – oh, just like the hashtag campaign to free the girls taken by Boko Haram, remember that one? I’m glad there are signs in Paris stating, “Not Afraid” — but I have had friends already telling me news editors are telling them to not do anything to upset Muslims. Yes, they win.

2. We cannot continue to make our culture and values subservient in some ill-advised “can’t we all just get along” moment. We welcome those from other countries, but Western civilization values have promoted individual freedoms and liberties.

Instead we have those who tell us that we must accommodate them — while there is no reciprocation. I just have to ask, why is it that Mecca is “off limits” to “kafirs?” How is it that in the 21st century we have an entire city that is ruled verboten to those not belonging to a certain belief? Who can embrace a belief system and ideology that shoots a young girl in the head just because she wants an education — and where are all those feminist voices – but that is a topic for another day.

How can it be that we are allowing Sharia law practices into our culture, which is something totally antithetical to our fundamental core beliefs? Again, we bow down before the false god of multiculturalism, which has now become a cancerous premise and has enabled values which conflict with the basics of freedom to be made superior. We are accepting subjugation and subservience.

Yes, Western civilization is superior, and there’s nothing for which we should be ashamed. We must begin to win the information and propaganda war and stop redefining evil just to make ourselves feel better — actually wishing away the problem because we prefer to dismiss its existence.

3. We must begin to reconsider who is allowed into our countries. We don’t have to roll out the welcome mat to everyone — especially those from areas which are breeding grounds for Islamic terrorist activity. We must begin to cordon off Islamo-fascism. We also must take a stand against those within our countries who embrace and support this jihadism and not provide an umbrella of protection. Proselytization that advances concepts contrary to that of a Constitutional Republic is not free speech, it is sedition.

I was criticized by stating that imams, clerics, and mullahs residing in this country who are found to be preaching jihad should be removed from this country. Why did I say that? Because they are fomenting the type of action that occurred in Paris. Even Egyptian President al-Sisi called out the imams — but then again, the cultural jihadist apologists would rather attack me or others instead of those who would slay them, as happened in Paris.

The Muslim community must come to realize it has a responsibility and the collective patience of Western civilization grows thinner with each of these incidents — at least from those who love freedom and liberty and refuse to surrender.

We must accept the reality of this enemy and make a decision sooner rather than later to vanquish it. And yes, that means developing a strategy for victory.

I’m just waiting for those who will say, “this is what can happen and perhaps it was deserved.” Do the Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Copts deserve what they are getting? Are we now accepting crucifixions of Christians and the massacre of children at a school in Pakistan?

It is time we shrink the global footprint of Islamic jihadism.

It is time we unite and make the stand to say no more. It is time we say we reserve the right to criticize and editorialize against those we wish. We cannot cower in fear because of a cartoon caricature of a 7th century figure. We cannot allow anyone to define the limits and constraints on our freedoms and liberties. If so, then we pass onto our subsequent generations something that shines a lot less bright than the gift which we were given.

Islamic blasphemy laws? Give me a break.

There is a moment in time relating to this Paris Islamic terror attack which we must seize upon — before the news cycle moves on to something else. We are going to have to decide whether our liberties are worth the fight.

And in closing — a study of Islamic history of conquest will show this is no perversion of the faith, just a following.

_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

ISIS Islamic Penal Code: Comply or Die

ISIS Islamic penal code: Comply or Die from Audrey Russo at Clash Daily.com

Read the Russo Report at Clash Daily

If you ever thought that devout Muslims, such as ISIS, weren’t concerned with law and order…you’d be mistaken. According to MEMRI, ISIS has a “new” penal code they WILL enforce ardently…upon ALL who live under its rule.

That would be Muslim or infidel alike. It begins with Quranic verses that implore Muslims to obey the Sharia (Islamic Law), and considering all who refuse to comply…equal to an unbeliever.

Here are its crimes and their respective punishments:

• Blasphemy against Allah ~ Death. (Quran 6:93; 33:57; 33:61)
• Blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad ~ Death even if the accuser repents, so no Mercy from Allah the merciful. (Quran 6:93; 33:57; 33:61)
• Blasphemy against Islam ~ Death (Quran 6:93; 33:57; 33:61)
• Adultery ~ Death by Stoning, if the adulterer was married, and 100 lashes and exile if he or she were unmarried - if she makes it through the 100 lashes. Notice that the adulterer is a “she”.  (Bukhari 6:60:79; 83:37)
• Sodomy - homosexuality ~ Death for the person committing the act, as well as for the one receiving it. (Quran 7:80-84)
• Theft ~ Cutting off the hand (Quran 5:38)
• Drinking alcohol ~ 80 lashes forbidden (Quran 2:219; 4:43; 5:90) (Bukhari, Punishments, vol. 8, 6776)
• Slandering unless you happen to be doing it for the sake of Allah and Islam, which is Taqiyya, then it’s ok ~ 80 lashes
• Spying for the unbelievers - we see this carried out in Gaza, as well: Death Apostasy - Leaving Islam ~ Death

Include the following, which are directly from Quran 5:33: “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive after corruption in the land is that they be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet be cut off on opposite sides, or that they be exiled from the land…”

Banditry ~ thievery:

1. Murder and stealing ~ Death and crucifixion
2. Murder only ~ Death
3. Stealing as part of banditry ~ Cutting off the right hand and the left leg
4. Terrorizing people ~ Exile

What ISIS is establishing is completely Islamic and certainly not new. So, as absurd as this may sound and in our current milieu with terrorism, it shouldn’t, individual States in the US, and Western countries in general, should soberly consider passing anti-Sharia Laws.

Because as surreptitiously as they have crept into our language (“Islamophobia”) and used our laws meant to protect our freedoms, AGAINST our freedoms (Lawfare), they will surely influence our own Legal system, to our detriment and bondage.

______________________________________________

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

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