The real enemy is not jidhad Islamists, but rather, Islam itself. In order for there to be such a thing as peaceful Islam there must first be a 'peaceful' Qur'an."

As we have learned by watching the film: "Islam -- 3 things you need to know," unlike the Christian bible or the Hebrew Troah,  the Qur'an is "time-sensitive", with the latter passages superseding the earlier ones. We also learned that the more 'peacefull' passages in the Qur'an were written in Muhammad's early Meccan years, only to be abrogated later by more violent passages in his Medinese years.

Given that introducing innovation in Islam is a serious crime ... subject to Islamic punitive measure, which is death, how then can Muhammad's peaceful early writings supersede his more violent later ones, without innovation? Unless those Muslims who now advocate such a stance are simply following the dictates of taqiyya for their on personal gain and/or in furtherance of the Islamic concept of achieving world peace through worldwide subjugation to Shari'a Law.

         ex animo

Monday, September 13, 2010

By Patrick Goodenough  

(CNSNews.com) -- "At a time when religious tolerance is in the spotlight globally, President Obama should challenge Islamic governments to lift restrictions on religious freedom that target non-Muslim minorities, some activists say. 

 "This is the best time to do it while the international community is focused on Islam," said Ali Alyami, executive director of the Washington-based Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia. 

"Until the wording was dropped in September 2007, Saudi Arabian Airlines on its Web site warned openly that among items prohibited for visitors were "Bibles, crucifixes, statues, carvings, items with religious symbols such as the Star of David, and others.

"A small minority might object but by looking at other Gulf countries who share similar cultural values and have allowed churches, and even Hindu temples, building churches and temples in Riyadh would attract very little objection from the people."

For more, go to: "Obama Urged to Confront Islamic States on Religious Freedom "

But before I do, I highly recommend the reader click here to learn the three things all non-Muslims must know about the Qu'ran, Sharia Law and Muslim deception as a religious tenet.

Wright writes:

"The best ally in the struggle against violent Islamism is moderate Islam. The unfounded attacks on the backers of Park51 and others, along with such sideshows as a pastor calling for the burning of Korans, give substance to the Al Qaeda argument that the U.S. is waging a war against Islam, rather than against the terrorists' misshapen effigy of that religion. Those stirring the pot in this debate are casting a spell that is far more dangerous than they may imagine."

As you can see after viewing the video, Wright is fundamentally and dangerously wrong when he asserts that the World Trade Center Towers were destroyed by misguided radical Islamists who have hijacked the otherwise peaceful tenets of Islam.

As the video states;

"Islam has been hijacked is what non-Muslims naturally assume because they assume all religions are the same. The reason non-Muslims are so easily confused is that most of us don't realize the difference between the Qu'ran and every other religious book we are familiar with.

"The Christian bible is a collection of writings from various authors written sometimes hundreds of years apart, with parables, advise and dreams, all collected together into one book. The same with the Jewish Torah. Even those of us in the west who are neither Christians nor Jews are still familiar with these religions to know this much, and therefore we assume the same is true for the Qur'an. But the Qur'an is only one book, written by one man in his own lifetime. It is meant to be taken literally and it is not full of symbolism or vague analogies. It is mostly direct commands.
 

"Of course, the Qur'an has contradictory statements just like other religious books, but the Qur'an itself provides the reader with a way to know what to do with the contradictions. It is explained in the Qur'an that if you have two passages that contradict each other, the one written later supersedes the one written earlier. Most Westerners are unaware that the peaceful, tolerant passages were written earlier in Mohammad's prophetic career. According to the Qur'an, those passages have been abrogated by later, more violent and less tolerant passages.

"So when most Westerners hear Jihadists quoting violent passages from the Qur'an, and then peaceful Muslims quoting peaceful passages, they interpret that the way they would if someone was quoting from  the Bible or the Torah. They think to themselves, Oh, there must be many different and contradictory passages in the Qur'an, like there are in other religious books, so Muslims can pick and choose what they like and justify whatever actions they want to take. But the Qur'an is nothing like that. There is no picking and choosing. It says very explicitly and in no uncertain terms that a Muslim must not alter or ignore any part of its very clear and direct message or they will burn in a fiery torment forever."

Following the Islamic practice of "taqiyya" then allows Imam Rauf to repeatedly invite Faiz Kan to preach at his Burlington Coat Factory building who believes the following:

"...the inescapable fact [is] that 9/11 was an inside job."

"The prime factor for the success of the criminal mission known as 9/11 did not come from the quarter known as 'militant Islam,' although the phenomenon known as 'militant Islamic networks' may have played a partial role, or even a less than partial role -- perhaps the role of patsy and scapegoat," he wrote in documents uncovered by the Investigative Project on Terrorism." 

ex animo
davidfarrar

President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, in Phoenix.

On "The Early Show on Saturday Morning," he explains why he opposes the proposed Islamic Center two blocks from Ground Zero in New York. He says Plans for Controversial Center Near Ground Zero Grow From "War of Ideas" Among Muslims Worldwide.

Dr. Zuhdi writes,

"We Muslims should first separate mosque and state before lecturing Americans about church and state." He continues, "American freedom of religion is a right, but ... it is not right to make one's religion a global political statement with a towering Islamic edifice that casts a shadow over the memorials of Ground Zero. ... Islamists in 'moderate' disguise are still Islamists. In their own more subtle ways, the WTC mosque organizers end up serving the same aims (as) separatist and supremacist wings of political Islam."

Click here for full article.

ex animo
davidfarrar

While anti-Muslim sentiment is definitely growing here in the United States and abroad, it hasn't yet reached pandemic proportions. And while the insistence of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf to place his rabat at Ground Zero certainly doesn't help; I don't think it's the real cause of this recent anti-Muslim growth.

I think it largely comes from an almost subliminal recognition of the fact that "moderate" Muslims simply haven't done enough to help fight radical Islam, "...an evil," as Obama says, "that has taken over their own religion."

To many Muslims, radical Islam has been looked upon as a necessary evil that is needed to right the many wrongs Muslim societies have found themselves victim of within the last century.

Let's take one obvious point, Israel. Most Muslims, be they "moderate" or "radical," simply cannot accept the very existence of the State of Israel not being in Islamic hands. Therefore, most Muslims, like Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, himself, see the solution to the Israel problem as a one-state solution. Meaning, the State of Israel would be an Islamic state, which would allow Jews to exist in some form...but only those Jews who can prove their authentic Jewish heritage, no European Jews allowed.

From Palestine, Lebanon, Hamas, Hezbollah Iran, Iraq, what is missing from the civilized hunt for solutions to these problems is a strong and powerful voice of Muslim moderation. A "moderate" Muslim voice that not only calls out for peace, but is strong enough to achieve it.

ex animo

davidfarrar

On June 14, 2009 a special investigative unit infiltrated the Al-Rahman Mosque in Orlando, FL - a Muslim Brotherhood (founder of Hamas) Front Organization. What they uncovered was an international conspiracy to fund Islamic terorism from within the US via George Galloway, Imam Mahdi Bray, and Imam Mohammed Musri (pictured above). One year later, Federal, State and local authorities have granted permission to release the video below.

Click here to see the video.

Created by Tom Trento

Dir. Florida Security Council

ex animo

davidfarrar

Islam center's eerie echo of ancient terror

by Amir Taheri

"Should there be a mosque near Ground Zero? In fact, what is proposed is not a mosque --nor even an "Islamic cultural center."

"The Prophet imposed his rule on parts of Arabia through a series of ghazvas, or razzias (the origin of the English word "raid"). The ghazva was designed to terrorize the infidels, convince them that their civilization was doomed and force them to submit to Islamic rule. Those who participated in the ghazva were known as the ghazis, or raiders.

"After each ghazva, the Prophet ordered the creation of a rabat -- or a point of contact at the heart of the infidel territory raided. The rabat consisted of an area for prayer, a section for the raiders to eat and rest and facilities to train and prepare for future razzias. Later Muslim rulers used the tactic of ghazva to conquer territory in the Persian and Byzantine empires. After each raid, they built a rabat to prepare for the next razzia.

"It is no coincidence that Islamists routinely use the term ghazva to describe the 9/11 attacks against New York and Washington. The terrorists who carried out the attack are referred to as ghazis or shahids (martyrs).

"Thus, building a rabat close to Ground Zero would be in accordance with a tradition started by the Prophet. To all those who believe and hope that the 9/11 ghazva would lead to the destruction of the American "Great Satan," this would be of great symbolic value."

 

Read more.

        ex animo

        davidfarrar

An expert on Sharia Law who advocates that Sharia is inconsistent with modern time. He lectures of the propriety of Muslim states relying on secular law as opposed to Sharia law. Director of Sharia Law at the Muslim Canadian Congress in Toronto.

HASSEN MAHMUD: The following is an example of graceful behavior when it comes to religious tolerance: On March 3, 2002, the Hindustan Times in India conducted a poll on building a temple on the ruins of the Babri mosque destroyed by radical Hindus. The destruction involved mass-murder, mass-rape and the burning of properties of thousands, mainly Muslims, in communal riots. The result of the poll showed an astounding 69.13% of Hindus supporting the rebuilding of the original mosque and in opposition to building a Hindu temple. That was enlightenment on their part.

Ground Zero is a place of the mass-murder of innocents. Opposition to building a mosque there is not "anti-Islamic conspiracy" but the opinion of nearly 70% Americans and 61% of local citizens (CNN, Aug 17, 2010). Indeed we have a legal right to build it, but lest we forget: applying a right attached to religious faith mandates serious wisdom. The plethora of "Legal Right" gave unethical legitimacy not only to the mosque-builders but also to the "Koran Burning" project on 9/11 of Rev. Terry Jones' of Florida Dove Outreach Center. "It is our right" he claimed on CNN. Yes, Jones finally abandoned his idea of carrying out the plan yesterday (Thursday, September 9), but one still wonders: Is Jones not aware that progressive Muslims also share his agony about Sharia law? Is he not aware that, after functioning for fourteen years with the support of provincial law, the Canadian Sharia Court was legally uprooted not by violence but mainly by the forceful movement of progressive Muslims (i.e. the Muslim Canadian Congress, The Canadian Council of Muslim Women and the International movement against Canadian Sharia Court)?

For more of Hasan Mahmud's article, click here.

ex animo

davidfarrar

As many of you know, I have been somewhat critical of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's thinly veiled attempt to plant a victory mosque at the location of the former, blood-stained Burlington Coat Factory. But HillBuzz editors may have just found a way to gain my support for the project.  Donald Trump may be planning to acquire the property through eminent domain proceedings. I would like to go on record now to clearly and unequivocally state: I am totally opposed to using eminent domain proceedings for private gain.

As I have said before, Rauf has a right to build his mosque at 45-47 Park Place. Using government thievery to deny him his 1st Amendment right is completely unacceptable in my book.

Click here for more details.

ex animo

davidfarrar

Bravo, Rev. Terry Jones. A true peaceseeker.

 A few days ago I wrote a post here entitled: "Rauf to build his Victory Mosque, Jones to burn Qu'ran".

I outlined the two principle players in this present drama. And ended my post with the following conclusion:

"It seems strange to me, both of these holy men, directed to pursue peace by their creator, have thus far failed to recognized the first aspect of peace: Seeking peace. Both are far more interested in pursuing their own goals, than seeking peace. I can only conclude then that neither are men of peace."

Whether Rev Jones changes his mind or not, we now know who among the two was willing to take the first step towards peace. Who among the two is the true "peaceseeker.' But far, far more important, we now know who Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is -- he is something beneath the good preacher.

ex animo

davidfarrar

"Obama says Rev Jones threatened 9/11 protest is "completely contrary to our values as Americans." What Obama apparently doesn't understand is Rev Jones threatened activities on 9/11 is completely within our values and his 1st Amendment right to free speech."

Suggesting further that Rev Jones threatened action on 9/11 anniversary will lead to a "recruitment bonanza", is even more incorrect. As is Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's recent statement suggesting if  Rev Jones proceeds with his 9/11 threat, "the Muslim World," not just radical Islamists, "will resort to violence."

Where are these people leading us?

Sure, Rev Jones threatened action on the anniversary date of 9/11 is reprehensible, but it's still simply a non-violent exercise of 1st Amendment right to free speech. He isn't physically threatening anybody.

But even if all these treats of physical violence were true, which they aren't, but even if they were, the very last thing we should do as Americans -- the very last thing our President should be doing is acquiescing in the face of physical threats. The America I know...the Presidents I knew, would never have backed down in the face of physical threats. 

My God! People, this is 8th Century stuff. If the civilized world backs down from this kind of terrorists' logic, we will doom ourselves to relive 8th Century religious intolerance all over again. President Obama should have known that religious tyranny never backs down in the face of weakness. They will exploit it, God willing.

ex animo

davidfarrar

ex animo
davidfarrar

Ignoring growing protests over the placement of a victory mosque at Ground Zero. Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf stated today that he intends to proceed with his Cordoba House project.

Rev. Terry Jones, ignoring growing protest over his intention to burn several copies of the Ou'ran on 9/11, also stated today that he plans to proceed with his plans.

It seems strange to me, both of these holy men, directed to pursue peace by their creator, have thus far failed to recognized the first aspect of peace: Seeking peace. Both are far more interested in pursuing their own goals, than seeking peace. I can only conclude then that neither are men of peace

ex animo

davidfarrar

CBN News Sr. Reporter

"We were expecting Islam to adapt to France and it is France adapting to Islam." 

A Warning to the West 

The French parliament is expected to debate the burqa law in September. Jean-Francois Cope, president of the Union for a Popular Movement political party, has a warning for the West and for America. 

"We cannot accept the development of such practice because it's not compatible with the life in a modern society, you see," he said. "And this question is not only a French question. You will all have to face this challenge. "

Islam is a peaceful religion, but it is also a political force. Unless we recognize this, we will some day be where France is today.

ex animo

davidfarrar