The Wall Street Journal has HR1 of ‘09 in the form of a 647 pg. pdf file. Other than the huge numbers, it appears to be mainly gobbldygook. There can be little doubt that a great deal of money will be wasted without lasting good effect. An email from Freedom Works asserts that: This week both the House and Senate will be moving a massive $825 billion economic stimulus package full off wasteful spending, and worse still multi-billion dollar handouts to their liberal allies. Specifically, radical Left-wing groups such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) could have access to billions of dollars should this stimulus plan pass. [Emphasis added.] This quote comes from pg. 141: (4) $100,000,000 for carrying out activities under section 1110 of the Social Security Act, of which $50,000,000 shall become available on Octo- ber 1, 2009: Provided, That the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall distribute such amount under the Compassion Capital Fund to eligible faith- based and community organizations: Provided fur- ther, That the provisions of section 1106 of this Act Freedom Works wants us to visit this page to send email to our Congressmen telling them to vote against the bill. A search of the bill did not turn up “ACORN”, but it did turn up reference to “faith based” and “community organizations”. A little ambiguity goes a long way. What are the chances that your Representative will develop a half-assed understanding of this high tonnage of turgid text in the span of one week? I can assure you that I would not be ready to vote on it within that time span.
When I read this email from the ACU, I immediately clicked the link and sent my email, with one little edit. I told my Congressman that "No" is too weak, this fraudulent scheme requires a profoundly profane four word vote. Rise up and raise Hell!!!
JUST SAY "NO" TO MASSIVE PORK-BARREL BILL
In this twenty first installment of Offensive Jihad in Fiqh, we receive enlightenment by the late great 'man of god', Ruhollah Khomenei.
Another modern interpreter of jihad is Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomenei (d. 1989), who in a speech in 1942 clarifies that, as the title suggests, "Islam Is Not a Religion of Pacifists".[Cit. ur red. Rubin & Rubin, Anti-American Terrorism and the Middle East, s. 29, 32-6.]
As soon as I read this email from CEA, I visited their web site and sent the email. I urge you to take the same action. The Bureaucrats need to hear from us, now and loudly. It is 40 years too damn late for sensible action, and we can't wait any longer! Please do your part to make it happen.
STOP THE PERSECUTION OF GEERT WILDERS BY THE DUTCH STATE AND HELP THE CAUSE OF FREE SPEECH
Text from the Video Description mentioned in the video:
TWO WAYS TO HELP:
1. Please copy this letter (or alter/replace it with your own letter) and post/email to
Mr Ernst Hirsch Ballin
Dutch Minister for Justice
2500 EH Den Haag
Dear Mr Ballin
Amsterdam Court of Appeal vs. Mr Geert Wilders
As you now seek to jail Mr Geert Wilders on charges of discrimination and hate speech I wonder if you will also seek to ban the Qur'an that has page upon page of discrimination and hate speech, calling for death and punishment for a vast range of activities which are perfectly legal in The Netherlands - such as for not being Muslim, particularly for being Jewish, for being an apostate or an adulteress or for a selection of other actions or beliefs that would hardly rank as indiscretions or misdemeanours by any non-Qur'anic terms of reference?
In this twentieth installment looking into offensive Jihad in Fiqh, we tap into a more modern source.
Al Azhar University, which can be seen as Sunni Islam's equivalent of the papacy, held a conference in 1968, after the Arab defeat in the U.S. war against Israel. The conference advocated for jihad as the only way to defeat Israel.
[Cit. ur Bat Ye’or, Dhimmi: Jews and Christians Under Islam, s. 391-4.]
|Jihad is legislated in order to be one of the means of propagating Islam. Consequently Non-Muslims ought to embrace Islam either willingly or through wisdom and good advice or unwillingly through fight and Jihad. […] It is unlawful to give up Jihad and adopt peace and weakness instead of it, unless the purpose of giving up Jihad is for preparation, whenever there is something weak among Muslims, and their opponents are, on the other hand, strong. […] War is the basis of the relationship between Muslims and their opponents unless there are justifiable reason for peace, such as adopting Islam. [Shaikh Abdullah Ghoshah, chief judge of the hashemite kingdom of Jordan]|
In this nineteenth installment of offensive Jihad in Fiqh, we examine another quote from a Sufi.
Shah Wali-Allah, d. 1762, teolog, sufi, politisk aktivist. Cit. ur Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, Shah Wali-Allah and His Times (Canberra 1980), s. 294-6, 299, 301, 305.
Tell me again about how Sufism is pacifism. According to this Sufi, Kafirs should be humiliated and dispersed, absolutely enfeebled. Jihad should be Islam's first priority.
NTI's Global Security News Wire reported on a presentation by three members of the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism to the House Armed Services Cmte.
The article includes a link to the Commission's Dec. '08 report, a 161 page .pdf file. The following quote is from the Executive Summary, occurring on
page xxiii of the report [pg. 24 of the .pdf]. [The main Pakistan section runs from pg. 94-104 of the .pdf and includes more recommendations.]
|JudgeBob has sent you a post!
A personal message from JudgeBob:
Visit JudgeBob’s Vox:
This post features a full transcript of Brigitte Gaabriele’s address to the Heritage Foundation. She reveals things which Americans need to know, to save our nation from the fate Lebanon is experiencing.
For America’s sake, click the Read more link and read the whole thing!!
I commenced my dissection of President Obama's Inaugural Address with his message to Muslims. In this episode, I return to excerpts
From the President's Prepared Remarks, as published by the Miami Herald.
Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred.
On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.
On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.
We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things.
Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.
We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.
The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified.
As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake.
And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more. Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.
- Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred.
That sentence does not fit in with those which follow it. He fails to elaborate, without naming the enemy, without specifying the theaters of war or evaluating the status of the war effort. Why did he raise the issue of war so briefly only to drop it to hint at his Socialist agenda? The objective clause is problematic because it exemplifies an effort to distract us and divert our attention from the identity & nature of the enemy.
Eighteenth in a series on offensive Jihad in Fiqh.
al-Majlisi, d. 1698, shia-jurist. ”The Treatise Lightning Bolts Against the Jews”, övers. V.B. Moreen, Die Welt des Islams (32:1992), s. 187-93.
In this case, the jurist was paraphrasing & explaining an infamous ayat, do you recognize it? What does it command Muslims to do; to whom? What are the essential elements of the compound terminal condition?Does this vary significantly from the Sunni Fiqh?
Got a clue yet? Its 9:29.
The Jewish Press has a most excellent oped piece by Rabbi Steven Pruzansky which I urge you to read. It is full of facts and well founded opinions based upon those facts. These samples should be sufficient to whet your appetite for more.
Israel's greatest weakness is its lack of a plan for victory, which suggests to the world that the outcome of this war - the eighth war in Gaza since 1948 - should be yet another round of Israeli concessions and the resuscitation of the futile land-for-peace formula. Nothing that has occurred has stripped most Israeli politicians of the illusions that one can negotiate evil away; that all that is required for peace to erupt is a little more talk, a little more time, and another signed agreement; that rockets from Gaza can be stopped without Israeli boots on the ground; and that victory is not possible - the first war in history in which victory has been pronounced an impossibility.
Nonetheless, the party with the end game usually prevails over the party that dithers, fantasizes and projects its good intentions and nobility on a cruel and heartless foe - and it is this that bears reflection in the days and months ahead.The enemy deserves a heavy and sustained blow for each rocket it launches - or will launch - against our brethren. Compassion for the cruel is one of the most harmful emotions in man, and guilt over the preservation of Jewish life in the face of a brutal and sadistic enemy - one that uses its own children as cannon fodder - is un-Jewish, foolhardy, dangerous and counterproductive.
Please click the link, read the entire article and share it as widely as possible.
King James Bible Mt 23:24
Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
They bollixed the Presidential oath of Office, so the Chief Justice and President Obama repeated the oath, just to make sure. How in the eternal love of God can they worry about the sequence of words in a vain, forsworn oath while ignoring the more significant fact that President Obama has failed to prove one of the vital factors of eligibility: his status as a native born citizen?
"I Barack Hussein Obama do solemnly swear that I will execute the office of president to the United States faithfully," "And will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, so help me God," [WND]
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." [memory.loc.gov]
The adverb's sequence does not effect the meaning in this case.
If anything would ruin the oath, it is that last addition, which is not in the Constitution. What harm does it do? It was repeated in the re-enactment.
Why all the fuss and news coverage over an inconsequential detail while Obama's eligibility and illegal fund raising practices are totally ignored?
Which office is most important, President or Vice President? Compare their oaths of office.
I, A— B—, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[Wikipedia]
If the sequence of verb and adverb were significant, wouldn't the extra bindings in the VP oath be even more so? So why hasn't the Constitution been amended to enrich the Presidential oath?
Obama was probably born in Kenya to an alien and an underage citizen, if he is a citizen, he traveled illegally to Pakistan, and he sealed the records which would disclose his citizenship status. He refuses to display the vault copy of his birth certificate and spent enormous amounts of money contesting litigation demanding its disclosure, but the Supreme Court don't give a damn. Yet the Chief Justice made a special trip to the White House to re-administer the oath. Am I the only one to perceive the incongruity?
The Amsterdam Court of Appeals ordered prosecutors to bring charges against MP Geert Wilders, claiming that he vilified and incited hatred against Muslims with his video and his speeches.
This persecution sets an extremely bad precedent, thereby threatening our first amendment right to free expression. I have added my endorsement to this petition and I urge you to join the signers in promising a boycott of Dutch products in retaliation for persecuting Wilders. Please sign this petition immediately and forward it to your friends.
To: The Dutch Government
WHEREAS Geert Wilders has exercised his fundamental human right of freedom of expression and spoken out, with facts and evidence, of the threat posed by radical Islam;
WHEREAS certain elements within Islamic communities have threatened a boycott of Dutch goods if Geert Wilders is not punished by the Dutch government for exercising his freedom of expression; and
WHEREAS certain elements in Dutch industry and the Dutch government are suggesting that Geert Wilders be prosecuted civilly or criminally, in order to prevent such a boycott;
IT IS RESOLVED that, in the event that the Dutch government attempts, in any way, to punish or prosecute Geert Wilders, civilly or criminally, for exercising his freedom of expression, the undersigned will initiate a boycott of any and all Dutch goods.
In this seventeenth installment of offensive Jihad in Fiqh, we discover how passive and spiritual the Sufis really are.
Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi, d. 1624, sufi. Cit. ur Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, Muslim Revivalist Movements in Northern India in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Agra, Lucknow 1965), s. 247-50; Yohanan Friedmann, Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi. An Outline of His Thought and a Study of His Image in the Eyes of Posterity (Montreal 1971), s. 73-4.
Shariat can be fostered through the sword.
Kufr and Islam are opposed to each other. The progress of one is possible only at the expense of the other and co-existence between these two contradictory faiths is unthinkable. […]
The execution of the accursed kafir of Gobindwal [Arjun, fifth guru of the Sikhs, executed in 1606] is an important achievement and is the cause of great defeat of the accursed Hindus. Whatever might have been the motive behind the execution, the dishonour of the kafirs is an act of highest grace for the Muslims. […] Whenever a Jew is killed, it is for the benefit of Islam.
Islamic law can be spread by the sword. So far, so good, such a peaceful mystical Sufi. Co-existence is unthinkable. Yes, it really is! Whenver a Jew is killed, islam benefits. Got a clue yet?
The Miami Herald published the prepared text of President Obama's Inaugural Address. For the purpose of this blog post, I present one paragraph excerpted from the transcript for dissection.
To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.
- To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.
Anything other than seeking to emancipate them from Allah's yoke of slavery is a step backward. Peaceful coexistence with Islam is not possible because Islam is permanent war.
- based on mutual interest
We have no mutual interest with Islam. Islam's interest is total world conquest and domination, so that only Allah is worshiped altogether and everywhere; so that Shari'ah is enforced globally. Our interest is in liberty, security, prosperity & peace. There is no intersection, no convergence; nothing shared.
- and mutual respect.
There is no mutual respect and can be none. Islam is contemptuous of everything un-Islamic. Islam hates our way of life without reservation and seeks to destroy it. It labels us Kuffar: rebells against Allah who must be defeated and gathered together into Hell.
To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict,
That is what Islam is all about: total world conquest; to make Allah's word superior; his writ run on a global scale. That is why the Qur'an contains open ended, unlimited imperatives to fight pagans and make war upon people with scriptural religions. That is why Muslims first attacked our merchant vessels in the 18th century.
- or blame their society's ills on the West -
Such projection is standard operating procedure for tyrants, Muslim & Kuffar alike. We serve as a handy focus of popular resentment to prevent it turning inward against the tyrants.
- know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy.
Islam measures glory by building empire, not peace & prosperity. Islam is about power & predation, not about construction, production & consumption. The Muslim who reconquers Israel will receive the highest honors, superceeded only by the Muslim who conquers America.
- To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.
Those hands always have been, are now and always will be clenched upon swords. Islam seeks conquest; nothing else. The contest among Muslims is over who will sit upon the throne, wield power and reap the spoils. While they hold power, they will be stirring up Jihad. Whoever holds power among Muslims will be rousing the rabble to fight; that is their divine mission which will only be completed when the entire world is ruled by Moe's Caliph. The Muslim ruler who drops his sword will be overthrown eventually by one who will grasp and wield it.
Giving foreign aid to Islamic nations is the ultimate in idiocy; it allows them to dedicate more of their own resources to preparation for Jihad.
President Obama's remarks to the 'Muslim world' are based upon false premises; assumptions of mutual interests and respect, both of which are purely mythological. His remarks assume that Islamic aggression is a function of nationalism & personal leadership, while it is actually based upon Islamic doctrine. Bold blue underlined text in this blog post is linked to sources of vital information, particularly the Qur'an and Jihad: The Islamic Doctrine of Permanent War. Read them and know the magnitude of the blunder you participated in November four of last year.
This is the sixteenth in a series about offensive Jihad in Fiqh.
al-Amili, d. 1622, teolog under shah Abbas I. Jami’-i ’Abbasi: yakdawrah-i fiqh-i Farsi (Teheran 1980-talet), s. 153 f.
Islamic Holy war against followers of other religions, such as Jews, is required unless they convert to Islam or pay the poll tax.
Whatever would account for al-Amili having that opinion? Perhaps it was something Allah said.
9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Could it be something Moe said?
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."
That combination is what Shari'ah is made of.
This is number fifteen in a series on offensive Jihad in Fiqh. [ Emphasis added for clarity. ]
Fadl-Ullah bin Ruzbihan Isfahani, d. 1521, shafi’i. Suluk ul-Muluk (övers. Muslim Conduct of State, Lahore 1974)
A brief account of the duties which are obligatory on the Imam and the Sultan with regard to (their offices of) the Imamate and the Sultanate. (s. 61)
His sixth duty is to fight with those who opposed Islam. But before taking such action he should invite them to surrender and if they refuse then fight with them until they surrender or are obliged to compromise. (s. 62)
You must be aware, that the literal meaning of Jihad is ”to strive” or ”to endeavour according to one’s ability and strength.” But in the religious sense it means ”to strive in war against the non-believers according to one’s ability and strength.” (s. 455)
You must be aware, that Jihad against the non-believers is an obligation. As regards the Hanafite opinion it has been cited in the Hidaya that Jihad is a duty in general on all the Muslim community. If a group of Muslims observe this duty the rest of them are exempt from it; and if none of them observe it the whole community commits a sin for their negligence. Whenever there is a general call for Jihad it will become a duty for all. A general call may be put in this way; that, on account of the strength of the non-believers, an Imam calls all the Muslims to arms so that they may drive the non-believers out of the land of Islam. The fight against the non-believers is an obligation even if they do not commence fighting. But the Jihad is not lawful against children, slaves, women, the blind, the crippled and he who has not come to the battle-field.
If enemies invade one of the lands of Islam, the Jihad will become an obligation to all Muslims for their self-defence. (s. 462)
As regards the Shafi’ite laws of Jihad, it has been cited in the Anwar that during the lifetime of the Prophet, the Jihad was an obligation in general on all the Muslim community. In our days there are two kinds of Jihad as it is an obligation on each and every Muslim and at the same time an obligation in general on all the community.
Whenever the non-believers invade one of the lands of Islam or besiege one of our towns with the intention of its conquest, it is the duty of the inhabitants of that town to repel the invaders at any cost. (s. 463)
The second kind of Jihad is an obligation in general on all the Muslim community. For example, if the non-believers who are well-established in their own country intend to fight against the Muslims, and they refuse to check them, the whole community commits a sin. But if some of the Muslims, whose strength is sufficient to repel the enemy, come forward, the rest of the Muslims will be exempted from Jihad. The sufficiency is achieved by two means. Firstly, the Imam should block the incursion of the non-believers by appointing a group of the soldiers well enought to face the non-believers on the opposite side. Moreover, he should build forts, dig trenches and take similar other steps. […] Secondly, the Imam himself should lead incursions into the Dar-ul-Harb or send someone capable of carrying out this business. The minimum number of incursions in a year is one. It is not permissible to abandon Jihad and let a year pass without an incursion except, God forbid, for the reason of weakness in the Muslims, the large number of the enemies and finally the lack of fodder for the horses on the way. (s. 464-5)
A note from Radarsite. There's no doubt about it. Tomorrow promises to be an extraordinary day. But why? Because we have made the great leap forward? Because we have broken the links to a shameful racist past and voted a black man into the highest office of the land? Because we have finally officially accepted the world's liberal premise that we, we Americans, are what's wrong with this world? Because we have decided that the best way to protect America is to sit down and talk with madmen? Or perhaps because we have decided that protecting our individual civil liberties is more important than protecting our country? Are these some of the reasons that will make tomorrow a truly extraordinary day?
Not to this observer. For me, tomorrow will be an extraordinary day like December 7, 1941 was an extraordinary day. Or perhaps like September 11, 2001 was an extraordinary day. January 20, 2009 will mark a watershed event. Tomorrow we will take the first official step toward realizing a whole new America. An America which is well on its way to becoming utterly unrecognizable from that great traditional America. The fateful consequences of this historic election will reverberate down through the years and may prove to be irreversible.
Tomorrow we celebrate the victory of all those who want to change the very fabric of this great nation. All those who want America to be something else. Something perhaps closer to the EU. A nation more tolerant of intolerant religions. A nation more amenable to dialogue with our sworn enemies than confrontation -- anything rather than confrontation. And, finally, a blatantly racist nation. A nation of 'belligerent victims', a nation born out of the epic struggles of the downtrodden and the have-nots, determined to break free of the vicious white man's yoke. A new nation with a new leader who represents -- no, who virtually embodies -- the vengeful revolutionary will of all of the colored peoples of this world.