Navigation

DISSENT!

Defend Israel

The Patriots Call
The Black Robe Regiment - The Patriots Call

Democrats party of Racism
Racism of the Democrat Party
Herman Cain - The DNC has BRAINWASHED most of the Blacks of this Nation
Racism - the Nemesis of the Democrat Party
Democrats invented racism and democrats HATE all blacks
The Snooper Report articles on Democrat invention of racism

The March on DC
Callin’ All the Clans Together
Sick and tired - marching towards the Constitution of the United States
We. Are. Finished. With.  DC.
We. Are. Finished. With. DC. - Addendum Part 1

Civility: The Leftinistra Own None Of It
Civility: The Leftinistra Own None Of It Part 2(?)
Civility: Leftinistra Own None Part Three
Obama, Civility and The Clansmen of Dumb
Brain Dead Leftinistra: Their Stoic Civility
Libtards Have No Class - Civility Escapes Their Brain Deadness
The States Will Be the Next Battlefield in the Fight Over ObamaCare
War Is Coming: Blood On Our Own Streets - Thanks Democrats
Civil War…
We Are In The Midst of Chaos and Civil War
Live Free Or Die
Live Free Or Die Trying
State’s Sovereignty or Live Free Or Die
Live Free Or Die - The Movement Marches On
The Country Surrounds The City

When They Came
Is The Left Still “Proud To Be a Left-Wing Extremist”?
Be It Known - Attention Unconstitutional Congress
Obama: One Big Ass Mistake America
Do Birthers Rock and Roll or Stop and Drool?
Good vs Evil…It Is Your Choice
I Apologize For My Nation
Obama’s Civilian National Security Forces (CNSF)
Obama’s Brown Shirts - Civilian National Security Forces
What Is It About The American Liberal?
The Plan To Destroy America
Another Soldier Has Been Given the Haditha Treatment!
Callin’ All The Clans Together
Callin’ All The Clans Together Show
A History of the List of 45
Constitutionality: The Movement
Vindication: Iraq’s Saddam and Al Qaeda Links Revealed
Redefining The Center or the Moderate
The HIC (Hoax In Charge) Going To Copenhagen
We Didn’t Start This Goddamn War!

Copy Cat Frauds of the IAVA

Contract With America
Snooper’s Declaration of Independence
Thanks Obama

Contract From America

Timothy McVeigh
Thoughts To Ponder and Reflect Upon
Snooper Report Vindication: Al Qaeda, TWA Flight 800 and OKC Bombing
Clinton alludes to 1995 bombing, says words matter

Missing 13th Amendment
TITLES OF “NOBILITY” AND “HONOR” - The Missing 13th Amendment

The Coup
Military Coup Against Obama

The United States Constitution
Our founding document wasn’t set in stone for a reason

Deepwater Horizon
Did Hugo Chavez Sink the Deepwater Horizon Oil Platform?

MSLSD Lies
The New Right

Arizona Rising

Texas Wars

This is pretty much a bunch of crap, FYI.
Editor's Choice


REFERENCE MY NEW WEB SITE

Snooper Report dot org

CHRISTIAN WEB SITE





SEARCH HERE


Powered by Squarespace

1980

1984

Wake Up GOP

This is pretty much a bunch of CRAP, FYI HINT: “MOSTLY TRUE” is a “MOSTLY FALSE” deal which means “MOSTLY TRUE” is a LIE.

Entries in Jihad World Conquest (3)

Thursday
Feb122009

Cultural Difference: Jihad Imperatives

Read this

Now comes Victoria News with a one sided approach to inter-cultural dialog. Google alerted me to the existence of their editorial from which I have quoted a few excerpts out of context with my comments.

EDITORIAL: Conversations about ethnic and cultural differences right way to go

This arises in context of Lorenzo Bouchard's campaign to ban Islam from Canada. He allegedly posted demands for an Islam ban on bulletin boards at a local university. Subsequently, Muslim students claimed to be in fear for their physical safety because of those postings.

Fears about safety have been churned up in the Muslim student community at the University of Victoria recently

Is there any rational basis for those 'fears", or are they the product of paranoia or political expediency? Does Lorenzo Bouchard have a proven history of making or carrying out threats of physical violence? Was there any threatening language in those posters? While those questions remain unanswered, I will presume that the claims of "fears" are the product of political expediency.

Click to read more ...

Saturday
Dec202008

Defamation Resolutions: Enough Already!

I learned about the existence of this CNS News article through a link at Eye On the UN.

UN Passes Islamic ‘Defamation’ Measure, But Critics Hail ‘Backlash’
Thursday, December 18, 2008
By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor

In that article, I found a link to a statement by four human rights experts, named in the last page of the document.

International Mechanisms for Promoting Freedom of Expression
JOINT DECLARATION ON DEFAMATION OF RELIGIONS, AND ANTI-TERRORISM AND
ANTI-EXTREMISM LEGISLATION

Having read that statement, I now endorse it, reserving the exception of the following quoted points, to each of which I dissent. [Emphasis added.]

Recognising the importance to democracy, as well as to holding social institutions accountable, of open debate about all ideas and social phenomena in society and the right of all to be able to manifest their culture, religion and beliefs in practice;
Since Islam sanctifies & mandates genocidal1 conquest2 using terrorism3 as a battle tactic, manifesting its practice is a wrong, not a right.
The definition of terrorism, at least as it applies in the context of restrictions on freedom of
expression, should be restricted to violent crimes that are designed to advance an ideological, religious, political or organised criminal cause and to influence public authorities by inflicting terror on the public.
Advocacy of casting terror, incitement to cast terror and glorification of the act & those who perform it are essential to the perpetuation of terrorism and must be condemned as part and parcel of it.
The criminalisation of speech relating to terrorism should be restricted to instances of intentional incitement to terrorism, understood as a direct call to engage in terrorism which is directly responsible for increasing the likelihood of a terrorist act occurring, or to actual participation in terrorist acts (for example by directing them). Vague notions such as providing communications support to terrorism or extremism, the ‘glorification’ or ‘promotion’ of terrorism or extremism, and the mere repetition of statements by terrorists, which does not itself constitute incitement, should not be criminalised.
Terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy. Moral condemnation of conquest in which men are killed, their widows raped4 and orphans sold into slavery5 is not consequent upon the terror inflicted, it is consequent upon malum in se; the pure evil of aggression against innocent persons. Sanctification of conquest, with a divine mandate to perform it until the entire globe is dominated by Islam6, would be sufficient cause to outlaw the propagation of Islam, even in the absence of its 1398 year history of rapine.

Not withstanding those reservations, I endorse the rest of the statement, particularly the following:

The concept of ‘defamation of religions’ does not accord with international standards regarding
defamation, which refer to the protection of reputation of individuals, while religions, like all beliefs, cannot be said to have a reputation of their own.

Restrictions on freedom of expression should be limited in scope to the protection of overriding individual rights and social interests, and should never be used to protect particular institutions, or abstract notions, concepts or beliefs, including religious ones.

Restrictions on freedom of expression to prevent intolerance should be limited in scope to advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.

International organisations, including the United Nations General Assembly and Human Rights
Council, should desist from the further adoption of statements supporting the idea of ‘defamation of religions’.


In my opinion, that last sentence was poorly written, introducing an ambiguity which should not be allowed to persist. The named bodies should rescind their previous resolutions as listed in the statement, and refrain from passing further resolutions condemning or attempting to outlaw criticism of Islam.

  1. Genocide:
    1. until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. [8:67]
    2. smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them [47:4]
    3. those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed [Abu Dawud 38.4390]
  2. Conquest:
    1. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [8:39]
    2. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah ... among the people of the Scripture ... until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. [9:29]
    3. The Good News that Muslims will conquer the Known World, and ultimately the Entire World
  3. Terrorism:
    1. We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve [3:151]
    2. ...I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes. [8:12]
    3. Allah brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts [33:26]
  4. Rape:
    1. ...Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess.... [4:24]
    2. ..."We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. ... [Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459]
  5. Slavery: and a group (of them) you made captives. [33:26]
  6. Global domination:
    1. ...) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world ].... [8:39]
    2. ...to make it superior over all religions even though the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) hate (it). [9:33]
    3. The Good News that Muslims will Dominate the People of the Book

Thursday
Jul262007

Dear Idiot Leftinistra,

The following is something that ALL MUST take into consideration. The Jihadists of the world are getting bolder and bolder each and every day that YOU want to cut and run and say something as retarded as thusly, "If we would just leave Iraq,all will be back to normal".

Nothing can be further from the truth.


THE MIDDLE EAST MEDIA RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Special Dispatch Series - No. 1668
July 27, 2007 No.1668
Debate in Salafi Islam over Jihad Against 'Heretical' Arab Regimes

On July 16, 2007, Sheikh Abu Basir Al-Tartusi [1] responded on his website (www.abubaseer.bizland.com ) to a claim made by Sheikh Hamed Al-Ali [2] on his own website (www.h-alali.info/index.php ) that jihad against the Arab regimes is doomed to failure while jihad against foreign forces occupying Muslim lands is destined to succeed. Tartusi warned that this claim could be exploited by various elements to discourage the Muslims from launching jihad against the regimes that oppress them. He added that Islam commands the Muslims to wage jihad against any Muslim leader who has "become completely heretical," and that disobeying this command can only bring greater oppression and suffering to the Muslims.

Sheikh Tartusi's website is hosted by Performance Systems International Inc., based in WashingtonDC.

Sheikh Al-Ali's website is hosted by FortressITX, based in New Jersey.

Following are excerpts from Tartusi's response:


"If the Leader and His Regime Suddenly Become Completely Heretical, the Nation Must Come Out Against Them"

"I [recently] had the opportunity to read an enjoyable article by Sheikh Hamed bin Adballah Al-'Ali from May 27, 2007, titled 'The Status of the Emblems of Jihad...' I found it to be a very useful article in terms of its topic and purpose, but one paragraph caught my attention. [This paragraph] said that 'the jihad program is a program of transformation for a nation that needs to awaken, and if it is not [carried out] in a supportive environment, it will fail. Consequently, plans to confront the [Arab] regimes will not meet with success, while plans to resist occupation will be successful."

This paragraph caught the attention of other brothers [besides myself], and they asked me to [publish] a written response. Indeed, a wide [range] of people with various [different] orientations and goals could present [Al-Ali's] statement as evidence that it is forbidden to wage jihad against the heretical and apostate tyrants and against their heretical, corrupt and collaborating regimes... [This statement could be used] to prevent the [Muslim] nation and peoples from waging jihad to liberate [themselves] from oppression and tyranny and to obtain the rights that these tyrannical regimes have neglected and deprived them of - [for people will conclude that] there is no point in waging jihad if we know in advance that it is doomed to fail...

"I therefore decided to answer the brothers who asked me, and to respond to this paragraph. My reply is as follows:

"1)...According to the Koran, the Sunna, and the accepted view among religious scholars, if the leader and his regime suddenly become completely heretical, the nation must come out against them... for it is said: 'Never will Allah grant to the unbelievers a way [to triumph] over the believers [Koran 4:141]'; 'And follow not the bidding of those who are corrupt and make mischief in the land, and mend not [their ways]' [Koran 26:151-152]; 'O ye who believe! If ye obey the Unbelievers, they will drive you back on your heels, and ye will turn back [from Faith] to your own loss [Koran 3:149].'"

Failure to Launch Jihad Against the Arab Regimes will Result in Greater Suffering

"2) Now that we understand that Allah has commanded us to come out against heretical, apostate and tyrannical rulers, it is clear that disobeying this command or acting in a way that contravenes it - i.e., following the heretical, apostate and oppressive tyrants - will undoubtedly lead to greater damage, oppression and civil strife, and the [damage] that we feared would result from coming out against the tyrants will [actually] result many times over from not coming out against them... For it is said: 'And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah [Koran 8:39]'; 'Unless ye go forth [to jihad], He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place [Koran 9:39].'

"Therefore, to those who shed crocodile tears over the losses and the civil wars that may result from waging [jihad against tyrannical and heretical regimes], we say: The greatest civil war breaks out when peoples accept [the rule] of heretical, oppressive and apostate tyrants...

"You have not come out [against your regimes] and look at the heavy price you are paying in [terms of] your religion, honor, security, freedom and what you hold dearest... Allah has said: 'You are commanded to fight, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you [Koran 2:216]'...

"3) Launching [jihad] against heretical and tyrannical leaders is a religious commandment, and therefore saying that this [endeavor]... is destined to succeed when directed against an infidel, but doomed to fail when directed against an apostate... is tantamount to saying that Allah's law is valid at [certain] times but not at [others], or in [certain] places but not in [others], or with respect to one infidel but not with respect to [another]. Such an interpretation is very dangerous, and Sheikh [Al-'Ali] surely did not mean to [imply] it, but his statement, on its face, cannot be understood in any other way.

"4) It is a mistake to draw an analogy between [jihad] against the heretical leaders of today and the [jihad] launched by certain companions of the Prophet and by the members of the generation that followed the Prophet against the leaders of their day... Today, Muslims wage [jihad] against the heretical apostates... whereas [the early Muslims] waged [jihad] against other Muslims... If one wishes to draw an analogy, one should compare the [jihad] waged by Muslims today against the tyrannical, heretical and apostate leaders with the jihad waged by the early Muslims against Musaylamah Al-Kadhab [3] and his state... [a war] that cost [the Muslims] tens of thousands of martyrs... The laws of triumphant [war] do not stipulate that the war must necessarily be against an external enemy, and that an internal enemy who is an even greater infidel should be left alone..."

The Duty of Jihad Against the Arab Regimes is Incumbent Upon All Sectors of Society

"5) Faced with any failed jihad attempt in our times, we should blame ourselves and examine the reasons for the failure... [instead of] saying 'the principle [of jihad] against our heretical, oppressive and apostate regimes is erroneous, and [the war] doomed to failure... because it is an internal war against [one of our own] regimes.' [This claim stands in contradiction to] the religious commandment, and is [a way to] evade responsibility and self-examination...

"6) When we talk about launching [jihad] against heretical tyrants and regimes, this does not mean that a group of 100 people or less should undertake the responsibility of waging [jihad], while all other sectors of the population disregard the duties and tasks that their religion requires them to perform. [Waging jihad] means that all sectors of the population - [including] religious scholars, workers, merchants, teachers, doctors, students and journalists, women and men, young and old - are responsible for fulfilling this religious [duty] as part of their obligation towards their faith, nation and society. Each [must contribute] according to his ability... by all available and legitimate means, from popular resistance and general strikes to angry demonstrations - and [even] violent [resistance], if the heretical tyrant acts in opposition to the will of the [Muslim] nation and peoples.

"All this is legitimate and is not regarded as sinful by the religion - [on the contrary,] it is one of the most honorable [forms] of jihad. You will find that, when carried out in this manner... it is easier than you thought and feared, and the price of fighting the oppressive tyrants is smaller than the price of suffering [their oppression]...

"Why do you think that the tyrannical and heretical leaders are so worried about the spread of the principle of takfir [accusing others of heresy] and by the accusations of heresy directed against their corrupt and oppressive regimes? Because they know that perceiving them as infidels and as [people] who have strayed from the right path is the... first step towards rebellion, [towards] the destruction and elimination of their corrupt regimes, and [towards] a conflict that would encompass [all] the peoples and all sectors of society..."

The Collaborating Arab Regimes and the Foreign Occupiers Are One

"7) The claim that resistance against the occupying enemy succeeds while resistance against local rulers, that is, the internal enemy, is doomed to failure is a theoretical argument that is false from the practical and factual perspectives. Reality tells us that the external occupying enemy and the internal enemy... are one. They are joined in mutual loyalty against Islam and the Islamic nation, and often the internal enemy surpasses the external occupying enemy in hostility, violence and oppression [of the Muslims]. Even if they differ somewhat in aspirations and in their narrow, personal interests, there is one thing that unites them, and that is their collaboration in a war against Islam and the Muslims, as is happening now under the pretext of 'war on terror'...

"How can [you] get to the external occupying enemy [when] the internal, local enemy is always watching over the occupying enemy and his interests, [and when the local enemy] hunts you down, kills you, imprisons you and turns you away from your faith even before you reach the borders of the occupiers' domain? Who is it that prevents the hosts of jihad from making advancing safely to expel the enemy that occupies Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and other occupied countries, and arrests thousands of young Muslim jihad fighters?... Is it not the internal enemy, namely the tyrannical leaders and their corrupt regimes that collaborate [with the external enemy]?...

"8) I find that the Sheikh [Hamed Al-'Ali] is not quite clear on this issue [himself]... [since], in another [article], he allows violent demonstrations as a means of opposing a heretical tyrant whose heresy is beyond any doubt, while in [this] article, 'The Status of the Emblems of Jihad,' he states that 'plans to oppose the authorities will not succeed, while plans to resist occupation will succeed...' How can he allow something and then deny it can succeed?...

"My esteem for Sheikh [Al-'Ali] is well-known, but I hold the truth above all.

"[Signed:] 'Abd Al-Mun'im Mustafa Halima,

"'Abu Basir Al-Tartusi,'

"The first day of Jumada Al-Akhira, 1428 / June 16, 2007."


[1] Sheikh Al-Tartusi, whose real name is 'Abd Al-Mun'im Mustafa Halima, is a Syrian expatriate living in London, and is a prominent theoretician of the Salafi jihadist trend in Islam.

[2] Sheikh Al-'Ali is a prominent Islamist Kuwaiti sheikh known for his support of the jihad fighters.

[3] A false Muslim prophet of Muhammad's time, against whom Muhammad's companions fought.