No Compromise Media

by Amil Imani

There is a division of the house. On one side are the politically correct in government, the leftist mainstream media, and a raft of Islamist apologists. One and all are tripping over each other in reassuring us that the mass murderers such as Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan and suicide bombers who detonate their explosive vests in crowded marketplaces and even mosques are individual anomalies and Islam is not responsible for what they do.

On the other hand are those who have been fed up with the numberless daily horrific acts that are clearly committed under the banner of Islam throughout the world. In all fairness, there needs to be a distinction. Numerous criminal acts are also committed, on a daily basis, by non-Muslims. The critical difference is that non-Muslim criminals do not hoist a religious banner to justify their misdeeds, while the Muslims proudly claim that they commit their heinous acts in obedience to the dictates of their religious faith.

Would someone, please, explain what motivated Nidal Hasan who had been, at tax payer’s expense, educated from college all the way through medical school and post medical-school training, to turn his deadly weapons against a nation that gave him everything he had?

If Islam had nothing to do with what Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan did, why:

▪ had he repeatedly preached the ascendancy of Islam to the U.S. Constitution?

▪ had he publicly supported Islamic suicide bombing?

▪ had he proclaimed his highest loyalty to Islam?

▪ had he been in contact with violent anti-U.S. Islamists and a virulent Yemeni Imam?

▪ did he distribute copies of the Quran to people the morning of his bloody attack?

▪ did he keep screaming “Allah-o-Akbar” as he heartlessly sprayed over a hundred bullets, killing thirteen and injuring some thirty innocent men and women?

Here is the truth, as bitter as it may be. Islam is the culprit. Islam is anything but a religion of peace. Violence is at the very core of Islam. Violence is institutionalized in the Muslim’s holy book, the Quran, in many suras:

Qur’an:9:5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”

Qur’an:9:112 “The Believers fight in Allah’s cause; they slay and are slain, kill and are killed.”

Qur’an:8:39 “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).”

Qur’an:8:65 “O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding.”

Qur’an:9:38 “Believers, what is the matter with you, that when you are asked to go forth and fight in Allah’s Cause you cling to the earth? Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? Unless you go forth, He will afflict and punish you with a painful doom, and put others in your place.”

Qur’an:47:4 “When you clash with the unbelieving Infidels in battle (fighting Jihad in Allah’s Cause), smite their necks until you overpower them, killing and wounding many of them. At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly, making (them) captives. Thereafter either generosity or ransom (them based upon what benefits Islam) until the war lays down its burdens. Thus are you commanded by Allah to continue carrying out Jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam.”

And the Quran is considered by Muslims as the word-for-word literal edicts of the Muslims’ god, Allah.

Right from the start, violence served as the engine of Islam under the command and supervision of Muhammad himself. For one, the Prophet’s son-in-law cousin, Ali, was titled the Commander of the Faithful for his unsurpassed feats of butchery. Ali with the assistance of one or two of his thugs, beheaded some seven hundred captives, most of them Jews, in only one day. This man, highly esteemed by the prophet of Allah, had a sword that had its own name—Zolfaghar. Ali’s portrait, holding the menacing sword, adorns the homes and shops throughout Shi’a’-lands. And this man, Ali, is revered by the Shi’a at the same level as Muhammad.

On the Sunni side, Muhammad’s co-revered is Umar, another unabashed killer of untold numbers. And of course the choice weapon of these champions of the religion of peace was the sword. And to this day, a sword adorns the flag of the birthplace of the religion of peace, Saudi Arabia.

And Islam, by the nature of its very doctrine, appeals to man’s base nature. It promotes intolerance, hatred, discrimination, and much more:

Qur’an:61:2 “O Muslims, why say one thing and do another? Grievously odious and hateful is it in the sight of Allah that you say that which you do not. Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in a battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure.”

In reality, Islam is like a deadly contagious disease. Once it invades the mind of its victim, this debilitating disease is capable of transforming him to a helpless pawn that has no choice but to execute what he is directed to do.

Of the reported 1.3 billion Muslims in the world, millions are already trapped in the terminal stages of this affliction while millions of others are rapidly joining them. The people enslaved with the extreme cases of Islamic mental disease are highly infectious. They actively work to transmit the disease to others, while they themselves engage in horrific acts of mayhem and violence to demonstrate their unconditional obedience to the dictates of the Islamic cult of violence.

The savagery and variety of the actions of these Islamic captives are seendaily around the globe. Many of these acts, committed under the banner of Islam, have become so commonplace that the world has come to view them as the normal part and parcel of a troubled humanity. And, from time-to-time, the world is shocked into a passing and momentary realization of the evil deeds these Islamist robots commit and quickly gets over it and does nothing to seriously address this affliction of humanity.

The recent dastardly mass murder at Fort Hood, committed by Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan will be forgotten by the public before very long. Life will continue on its deadly course, pushed along in a variety of ways by agents of death, Islamists. Only the families who lost their loved-ones and those who survived the bullets have to live the rest of their lives with incapacitating injuries, in the main, won’t be able to put the episode behind them.

The mass murderer Nidal Malik Hasan did not riddle people with bullets under the pressure of momentary insanity. The insanity, ironically, in a man who was trained to help people with sanity was introduced in him from the moment of birth and from the very early years when he prostrated himself five times daily toward Mecca in expression of total submission to the dogma of hate called Islam.

Islam is a mental retrovirus that has mutated into numerous varieties and degrees of severity, over the past 1400 years. Everyone born in a Muslim family, as well as those who convert to Islam, contract a particular mutation of the Islamic Virus. As is the case with all retroviruses, the Islamic Virus burrows deeply in the person and erupts, from time-to-time with potentially devastating consequences.

The Islamic Virus first divests the person of his most fundamental human attribute. It takes away his right to make decisions himself and absolves him, in return, of any responsibility for his actions rendered in blind obedience to it.

A true Muslim does not and cannot believe in freedom of choice. In the religion of Islam—Submission—everything is up to Allah, as clearly and repeatedly stipulated in the Quran .The Raison d’être for the Muslim is to be an unconditional submissive to the will and dictates of Allah. Everything that a “good” Muslim does is contingent upon the will and decree of Allah, he is indoctrinated to believe.

Humanity is facing a deeply troubling dilemma. On the one hand is the desire of enlightened people whose aim it is to forge a world of diverse people into one universal society ruled by peace and justice for everyone while, on the other hand, Islamists are hell-bent on imposing their stone-age system on everyone. Tellingly, the Muslims themselves are at one another’s throat regarding which of dozens of Islamic sects’ dogma should rule.

For now, Islam is busy with what it did from the time of its birth, fighting the non-Muslims and infighting.

Truth be told: Violence is the animating force of Islam. Islam is a religion born through violence, raised by violence, thrives on violence and dies without violence.

No Compromise Media

“Walking the Plank to a Dhimmi Nation”

8

Welcome to the White House

by Mary Christina Love

Direct relations were established between the White House and the Muslim community under Bill Clinton from 1992-2000, and were strengthened under George W. Bush’s administration from 2000-2008. Bill Clinton was the first to commend Islam in public speeches, and the first to issue invitations to the White House on Islamic holidays such as a yearly dinner celebrating the Islamic fasting month of Ramadan that continued through George W. Bush’s Administration and into the Barrack Obama’s.

The State Department established an Islamic website in 2000, proving that Bill Clinton’s administration was actually sanctioning Islam in the White House while the pledge of allegiance and nativity scenes were being systematically removed from schools and public institutions. Furthermore, the date was prior to 9/11. Madeline Albright formally encouraged Muslims to apply for the Foreign Service as she endorsed the website at the White House hosted Islamic dinner in 2000:

“I am pleased that since last year the State Department has inaugurated a new website entitled Islam in America.” Its purpose is to help people everywhere learn more about the positive force that Islam has become in American life and about the growing role of Muslim Americans as they are there to play a role in ensuring the security, prosperity, and freedom of our land. Equally vital are the international exchange and people-to-people programs we conduct with Muslim-majority nations. These efforts bring distinguished Muslim visitors to our shores to exchange views and promote understanding… We are strongly encouraging young Muslim Americans to apply to the Foreign Service as part of our overall effort to attract talent and promote diversity…”[1]

A 2009 program sponsored by the department called Citizen Exchange Program gives a grant to the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the National Peace Foundation to co-sponsor a citizen exchange project between the U.S. and the Middle East. The ISNA is instrumental in financing and exercising control over most of the mosques in the United States, and is an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood that created Hamas. The program is apparently a one-way exchange, as it is meant to explore Islam, the functions of Islamic institutions in the United States, and the activities of interfaith work. Professionals from Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates will visit the United States, and American professionals will visit the Middle East. [2]

Former Reagan Defense official, and President of the Center for Security Policy, Frank Gaffney Jr., wrote a lengthy article in 2003 describing how Islamists and individuals from the Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR) were invited into the White House. According to Gaffney, Grover Norquist was a conservative coalition builder against Communism in Central America, Africa and Afghanistan who he knew personally. Norqist formed the Islamic Institute in 1998 as an outreach organization, initially financed by Abdurrahman Alamoudi who was also Bill Clinton’s Islamic Affairs Advisor and financial supporter. Its stated purpose was to cultivate Muslim-Americans and Arab-Americans with conservative family values. Their professed confidence in capitalism made them potential Republican Party allies for the 2000 Presidential election.

Read the rest of this entry »

TR:  Is America ‘too big to fail’?  Stay tuned as the most dangerous, phony president of all time moves us ever closer to the brink..

‘The Muslim World’ – One-way multiculturalism.

By Mark Steyn, National Review Online

Heavy Element: Steynium

As recently as last summer, General Motors filing for bankruptcy would have been the biggest news story of the week. But it’s not such a very great step from the unthinkable to the inevitable, and by the time it actually happened the market barely noticed and the media were focused on the president’s “address to the Muslim world.” As it happens, these two stories are the same story: snapshots, at home and abroad, of the hyperpower in eclipse. It’s a long time since anyone touted GM as the emblematic brand of America – What’s good for GM is good for America, etc. In fact, it’s more emblematic than ever: Like General Motors, the U.S. government spends more than it makes, and has airily committed itself to ever more unsustainable levels of benefits. GM has about 95,000 workers but provides health benefits to a million people: It’s not a business enterprise, but a vast welfare plan with a tiny loss-making commercial sector. As GM goes, so goes America?

But who cares? Overseas, the coolest president in history was giving a speech. Or, as the official press release headlined it on the State Department website, “President Obama Speaks to the Muslim World from Cairo.”

Let’s pause right there: It’s interesting how easily the words “the Muslim world” roll off the tongues of liberal secular progressives who’d choke on any equivalent reference to “the Christian world.” When such hyper-alert policemen of the perimeter between church and state endorse the former but not the latter, they’re implicitly acknowledging that Islam is not merely a faith but a political project, too. There is an “Organization of the Islamic Conference,” which is already the largest single voting bloc at the U.N. and is still adding new members. Imagine if someone proposed an “Organization of the Christian Conference” that would hold summits attended by prime ministers and presidents, and vote as a bloc in transnational bodies. But, of course, there is no “Christian world”: Europe is largely post-Christian and, as President Obama bizarrely asserted to a European interviewer last week, America is “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.” Perhaps we’re eligible for membership in the OIC.

The One Holy Orator

I suppose the benign interpretation is that, as head of state of the last superpower, Obama is indulging in a little harmless condescension. In his Cairo speech, he congratulated Muslims on inventing algebra and quoted approvingly one of the less bloodcurdling sections of the Koran. As socio-historical scholarship goes, I found myself recalling that moment in the long twilight of the Habsburg Empire when Crown Prince Rudolph and his mistress were found dead at the royal hunting lodge at Mayerling – either a double suicide, or something even more sinister. Happily, in the Broadway musical version, instead of being found dead, the star-crossed lovers emigrate to America and settle down on a farm in Pennsylvania. Recently, my old comrade Stephen Fry gave an amusing lecture at the Royal Geographical Society in London on the popular Americanism “When life hands you lemons, make lemonade” – or, if something’s bitter and hard to swallow, add sugar and sell it. That’s what the president did with Islam: He added sugar and sold it.

The speech nevertheless impressed many conservatives, including Rich Lowry, my esteemed editor at National Review, “esteemed editor” being the sort of thing one says before booting the boss in the crotch. Rich thought that the president succeeded in his principal task: “Fundamentally, Obama’s goal was to tell the Muslim world, ‘We respect and value you, your religion and your civilization, and only ask that you don’t hate us and murder us in return.’” But those terms are too narrow. You don’t have to murder a guy if he preemptively surrenders. And you don’t even have to hate him if you’re too busy despising him. The savvier Muslim potentates have no desire to be sitting in a smelly cave in the Hindu Kush sharing a latrine with a dozen halfwitted goatherds while plotting how to blow up the Empire State Building. Nevertheless, they share key goals with the cave dwellers – including the wish to expand the boundaries of “the Muslim world” and (as in the anti-blasphemy push at the U.N.) to place Islam, globally, beyond criticism. The non-terrorist advance of Islam is a significant challenge to western notions of liberty and pluralism.

Read the rest of this entry »

by Stephen Brown

It was a watershed moment of capitulation.

On Thursday, February 12, visiting Dutch politician Geert Wilders was humiliatingly bundled back on to a plane to his native Holland shortly after arriving in London. Wilders had been invited to show his controversial, 17-minute documentary film, Fitna, in Britain’s House of Lords but was warned in a letter from the British Home Office last Tuesday he would be denied entry to the country. As reasons for his being declared persona non grata, Wilders was told in the letter he would “threaten community harmony and therefore public security.” The directive never stated, however, that the statements Wilders made in Fitna are false or misleading in any way.

by Paul Revere

Sometimes I get slightly discouraged about the ability of the “anti-jihad” message to get any traction amongst Americans. Although I agree that “the economy” is probably the number one issue (for now), I still believe that the coordinated jihad by Islamic fundamentalists against all things Western is a strong second.

But I heard someone say that the Revolutionary War – which gained independence from the tyranny of the British monarch – was won with only ten percent of the colonists participating. Yes, it was only ten percent of Americans that fought the British – and won.  I think that is probably still true today; if ten percent of the U.S. populace were unified in standing up against the creeping Islamic tyranny that desires the downfall of the United States, then we would have victory.

That is why the following quotes from Petition Online: Defining the Jihadist Enemy are so encouraging. There are over a thousand signatures. Read, enjoy, and be encouraged by these fellow freedom lovers, and then sign the petition yourself to help our congress people specifically name the enemy that wants to destroy us.

•  … protect this nation and her citizens. ISLAMIC terrorists ARE OUR ENEMY. To say any less is to show our enemies that we are willing to submit. Don’t hamstring those of us that ARE willing to fight for our freedoms.
• It’s a Jihad! Stupid (PR’s favorite)
• Lost two neighbors 9/11 to this ‘enemy you are too cowardly to name
•  It is the height of idiocy to assume that we can defeat an enemy without saying the enemy’s name, or his association to the ideology that drives him.
• Islam is Enemy of Freedom. Jihad is a process to destroy our freedom. You canot take Jihad out of Islam to make it clean. Jihad and Islam are tightly connected.
• If we can’t name the enemy we can’t fight it.
• We have met the enemy and he is us. (PR sez: not everyone, thank God)
• Put the Islam back in Islamic terrorism….
• We will not submit
•  a terrorist by any other name is still a terrorist
• Who is our enemy again? Are we fighting secular terrorists? Are we fighting rogue Hindu, Christian and Jewish warriors? Or is it that we are fighting Muslims devout in the belief that jihad is their religious duty. Oh…my mistake, you mean there is no religious element to this War on “Terror”. What the heck was I thinking?
• Islam is the greatest evil in the history of the world.
•  It is a jihad, and they are Islamic. Therefore, “Islamic Jihadists” is accurate.
• I have to take off my shoes at the airport because of Muslim terrorists. Quit trying to white wash Islam.
•  If it is a pig, call it a pig (PR sez: most are  not afraid to eat pork either).
• Iran (muslims) Syria (muslims) Palestinians (muslims) Hamas (muslims) Hezbolla (muslims) Al-Quaeda (muslims) CAIR (muslims) 11′000 plus terror attacks since 9-11(muslims) did that clear it up any? (PR sez: we’re actually approaching 13,000 deaths at the hand of Islamic fundamentalists in 8 years. Is this really an anomaly from a “tiny minority?” Get real!)
• 1984 NewSpeak
• We cannot defeat an enemy we are not allowed to speak the TRUTH about.
•  … it has been the very agents of terror themselves who have self identified as Muslim and quoted Islamic sources. They have self-labelled as Jihadis. The least we can do is to acknowledge their own chosen name.
• Thank you congressmen, for making it easier for Muslims to kill Americans. (PR sez: sarcasm, I hope)
•  Please continue to use the proper term: “Jihad”; don’t hide your heads in the sand.

You'll be the first to go!

Okay, one last one from PR’s mom, who responded back to me about Fitna producer Geert Wilders’ rejection at Heathrow Airport, and the cowering of British leaders under one Islamic Lord’s threats, and how when Wilders quotes the violent, hateful verses in the Qur’an and shows what the strictest adherents to Islam do with the Qur’an’s inspiration … he is labled the “hater.” Okay, here’s the “mom” quote:

Those who kiss the ass of extremists will be living under their rule in time.

Gotta love mom! (Thanks).

Remember sign the petition yourself to help our representatives specifically name the enemy that wants to destroy us. 

London, Feb. 12, 2009

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much.

Thank you for inviting me. Thank you Lord Pearson and Lady Cox for showing Fitna, and for your gracious invitation. While others look away, you, seem to understand the true tradition of your country, and a flag that still stands for freedom.

This is no ordinary place. This is not just one of England’s tourist attractions. This is a sacred place. This is the mother of all Parliaments, and I am deeply humbled to speak before you.

The Houses of Parliament is where Winston Churchill stood firm, and warned – all throughout the 1930’s – for the dangers looming. Most of the time he stood alone.

In 1982 President Reagan came to the House of Commons, where he did a speech very few people liked. Reagan called upon the West to reject communism and defend freedom. He introduced a phrase: ‘evil empire’. Reagan’s speech stands out as a clarion call to preserve our liberties. I quote: If history teaches anything, it teaches self-delusion in the face of unpleasant facts is folly.

What Reagan meant is that you cannot run away from history, you cannot escape the dangers of ideologies that are out to destroy you. Denial is no option.

Communism was indeed left on the ash heap of history, just as Reagan predicted in his speech in the House of Commons. He lived to see the Berlin Wall coming down, just as Churchill witnessed the implosion of national-socialism.

Today, I come before you to warn of another great threat. It is called Islam. It poses as a religion, but its goals are very worldly: world domination, holy war, sharia law, the end of the separation of church and state, the end of democracy. It is not a religion, it is a political ideology. It demands your respect, but has no respect for you.

There might be moderate Muslims, but there is no moderate Islam. Islam will never change, because it is build on two rocks that are forever, two fundamental beliefs that will never change, and will never go away. First, there is Quran, Allah’s personal word, uncreated, forever, with orders that need to be fulfilled regardless of place or time. And second, there is al-insal al-kamil, the perfect man, Muhammad the role model, whose deeds are to be imitated by all Muslims. And since Muhammad was a warlord and a conqueror we know what to expect.

Islam means submission, so there cannot be any mistake about it’s goal. That’s a given. The question is whether the British people, with its glorious past, is longing for that submission.

We see Islam taking off in the West at an incredible speed. The United Kingdom has seen a rapid growth of the number of Muslims. Over the last ten years, the Muslim population has grown ten times as fast as the rest of society. This has put an enormous pressure on society. Thanks to British politicians who have forgotten about Winston Churchill, the English now have taken the path of least resistance. They give up. They give in.

Thank you very much for letting me into the country. I received a letter from the Secretary of State for the Home Department, kindly disinviting me. I would threaten community relations, and therefore public security in the UK, the letter stated. For a moment I feared that I would be refused entrance. But I was confident the British government would never sacrifice free speech because of fear of Islam. Britannia rules the waves, and Islam will never rule Britain, so I was confident the Border Agency would let me through. And after all, you have invited stranger creatures than me. Two years ago the House of Commons welcomed Mahmoud Suliman Ahmed Abu Rideh, linked to Al Qaeda. He was invited to Westminster by Lord Ahmed, who met him at Regent’s Park mosque three weeks before. Mr. Rideh, suspected of being a money man for terror groups, was given a SECURITY sticker for his Parliamentary visit.

Well, if you let in this man, than an elected politician from a fellow EU country surely is welcome here too. By letting me speak today you show that Mr Churchill’s spirit is still very much alive. And you prove that the European Union truly is working; the free movement of persons is still one of the pillars of the European project.

But there is still much work to be done. Britain seems to have become a country ruled by fear. A country where civil servants cancel Christmas celebrations to please Muslims. A country where Sharia Courts are part of the legal system. A country where Islamic organizations asked to stop the commemoration of the Holocaust. A country where a primary school cancels a Christmas nativity play because it interfered with an Islamic festival. A country where a school removes the words Christmas and Easter from their calendar so as not to offend Muslims. A country where a teacher punishes two students for refusing to pray to Allah as part of their religious education class. A country where elected members of a town council are told not to eat during daylight hours in town hall meetings during the Ramadan. A country that excels in its hatred of Israel, still the only democracy in the Middle-East. A country whose capitol is becoming ‘Londonistan’.

I would not qualify myself as a free man. Four and a half years ago I lost my freedom. I am under guard permanently, courtesy to those who prefer violence to debate. But for the leftist fan club of islam, that is not enough. They started a legal procedure against me. Three weeks ago the Amsterdam Court of Appeal ordered my criminal prosecution for making ‘Fitna’ and for my views on Islam. I committed what George Orwell called a ‘thought crime’.

You might have seen my name on Fitna’s credit role, but I am not really responsible for that movie. It was made for me. It was actually produced by Muslim extremists, the Quran and Islam itself. If Fitna is considered ‘hate speech’, then how would the Court qualify the Quran, with all it’s calls for violence, and hatred against women and Jews? Mr. Churchill himself compared the Quran to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Well, I did exactly the same, and that is what they are prosecuting me for.

I wonder if the UK ever put Mr. Churchill on trial.

The Court’s decision and the letter I received form the Secretary of State for the Home Department are two major victories for all those who detest freedom of speech. They are doing Islam’s dirty work. Sharia by proxy. The differences between Saudi-Arabia and Jordan on one hand and Holland and Britain are blurring. Europe is now on the fast track of becoming Eurabia. That is apparently the price we have to pay for the project of mass immigration, and the multicultural project.

Ladies and gentlemen, the dearest of our many freedoms is under attack. In Europe, freedom of speech is no longer a given. What we once considered a natural component of our existence is now something we again have to fight for. That is what is at stake. Whether or not I end up in jail is not the most pressing issue. The question is: Will free speech be put behind bars?

We have to defend freedom of speech.

For the generation of my parents the word ‘London’ is synonymous with hope and freedom. When my country was occupied by the national-socialists the BBC offered a daily glimpse of hope, in the darkness of Nazi tyranny. Millions of my country men listened to it, illegally. The words ‘This Is London’ were a symbol for a better world coming soon. If only the British and Canadian and American soldiers were here.

What will be transmitted forty years from now? Will it still be ‘This Is London’? Or will it be ‘this is Londonistan’? Will it bring us hope, or will it signal the values of Mecca and Medina? Will Britain offer submission or perseverance? Freedom or slavery?

The choice is ours.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We will never apologize for being free. We will never give in. We will never surrender.

Freedom must prevail, and freedom will prevail.

Thank you very much.

Geert Wilders MP