The Stink of the Common
2 days ago
Showing posts with label Islam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Islam. Show all posts
03 May 2012
31 March 2012
Muslim Paedophiles, Feminists and Future Civil War
The British police are slightly less of a disgrace than they were a couple of years ago. In the not-so-distant past there was little reporting of native British girls being drugged, groomed, raped and murdered by gangs of Muslim males in our towns and cities.
This wall of silence was erected in the interests of “community cohesion,” a modern verbal concept invented by our liberal elites who think it is better that the indigenous population remain unaware of the horrifying abuse carried out by British Muslims. This is understandable, because to be aware might make even the most fluffy-headed of liberals question the benefits of mass Muslim migration into the liberal democracy that was once Great Britain.
That is one way of explaining their historical silence, I suppose. The fact that Mohammed’s marriage to six-year-old Aisha was consummated when she was only nine might also play a part in the whole sordid affair, along with the fact that Muslim males consider Muslim females to be second class-citizens — not to mention infidel females.
But now that the liberal silence has been broken, we appear to suffering from an absolute epidemic of Muslim paedophilia and abuse. Dewsbury, Leeds, Blackburn, Blackpool, Derby, Rochdale, Birmingham etc. etc. all seem to have their very own Islamic gang-rape-of-under-age-
If this were a situation where gangs of white males were raping young Muslim girls it would have been headline news a long time ago, but sadly the native British are now very much second-class citizens within their own homeland. In these perverse multicultural times we live in, all cultures are equal except ours.
If the BBC and Germaine Greer are not too busy over the next few days, perhaps they might like to comment on this matter. As the eternal espousers of feminism, it would appear only right for them to do so. Whilst they are at it, perhaps they might also like to weigh in on the 17,000 cases of Muslim “Honour” violence reported by the Independent, along with a recent report stating one in fiveMuslims thinks it permissible to inflict physical violence on women who dishonour their families. (It is one of those odd facets of multiculturalism that such dishonour could be incurred by dating a native Brit.)
But even though the British police have finally plucked up sufficient bravery to overcome the sheer awfulness of being called nasty playground names, and are now belatedly actually doing something to protect our children from Muslim rapists and paedophiles, it might be some time before British feminists and the BBC also garner such courage.
Left-wing ideology still thinks of Muslims as a minority to be protected in the face of relentless oppression by the native British. But quite how a lone thirteen year-old girl could oppress a gang of adult bearded males after being drugged, or rendered comatose via vodka, is one of those not altogether incidental questions the BBC feminists and Ms Greer should really be asking themselves.
And it is important that they do. We are already at the early stages of a tribal/religious civil war in Britain, courtesy of the immigration and appeasement policies of ALL the political traitor class. The Muslim rape of our children now appears to be a driving force in what over the coming years can only make civil war inevitable.
If you think this is an overreaction, please read the following paragraphs, taken from a recent Independent article about white riots in Rochdale:
“We are innocent people loyal to the community,” proclaimed the posters adorning the windows of the Tasty Bites takeaway yesterday. If we are guilty, why the police have not arrested us? Why we are still working? Why our shop is still open?”
But on Monday, takeaways in the Heywood area of Rochdale were mentioned in media coverage of a child sex gang trial involving 11 Asian men at Liverpool Crown Court. Racial tensions have been simmering ever since and on Thursday night they erupted when a demonstration, apparently organised on social media, in protest at the allegations, degenerated into violence.
Up to 150 people — many of them children — took to the streets, some of them brandishing racist placards. During the evening the mob began pelting police with bricks and targeting takeaways on the main shopping parade before being dispersed by riot vans.
Taxi drivers were threatened and an Asian pizza delivery man had his vehicle attacked. A police officer suffered bruising and two people, including a 14-year-old boy, were arrested.
Although Mr Ahmed and his family have nothing to do with the trial or the alleged events which are said to have taken place prior to his purchase of the business, his livelihood has collapsed since Monday. “I have lost all my customers — not a word of a lie. We are suffering. Last night they were doing all sorts of stuff — shouting ‘get the rapist out’. ‘Paedophile’. Quite abusive words.
“The police were there but they were quite limited and they asked us to close the business. It will take me five to 10 years to build it back up again. We have had so many phone calls giving abuse — all kinds of threats; threatening to burn the shop down.”
Four people are employed at Tasty Bites and Mr Ahmed has mortgaged his family home in order to set his son-in-law Ammir Rafiq up in business. Each works seven days a week until at least 1am.
But not last night. Like the other Asian businesses in this predominantly white community, they were rolling down the shutters early as police called for calm and promised a “robust” approach to any further trouble.
Amid the rumours swirling around the town are fears that elements of the far-right might be preparing to exploit the tensions. There have already been calls to ban an English Defence League march due to take place in the nearby town of Hyde following an alleged attack on a white teenager by Asian youths earlier this month.
But no one knows what will happen in Heywood, which has hitherto escaped the kind of rioting which so badly scarred near-neighbours Oldham, Burnley and Bradford in recent years.
The sense of foreboding was palpable. At Eagle Cars 2000, where the drivers are predominantly Asian, most went home early as trouble flared. “One driver told me they saw baseball bats and they were getting out of town. They are frightened as is everybody. The base staff were frightened, I was frightened,” said manager Katie Turner.
Darren Taylor, manager at Domino’s Pizza, said one of his drivers was surrounded. “They were banging and kicking on the car and calling him a paedo and a Paki,” he said.
Police, meanwhile, urged parents to be aware of where young people were over the coming days. Superintendent Chris Hankinson, from Greater Manchester Police said: “Those that seek to use what’s going on at the moment in Liverpool to further their racist agenda will be dealt with robustly.”
The disturbances were condemned by community leaders. Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Manchester-based Ramadhan Foundation, said: “Mob rule or vigilantism is not the way we conduct ourselves in this country.” Colin Lambert, leader of Rochdale Council, said: “Let’s keep the cohesion together. This is about protecting families and children.”
These quisling policemen and council leaders are a little too late. Memo to Superintendent Hankinson: We are not trying to further our racist agenda, we are protesting about racism carried out against us. And memo to council leader Lambert, there is no cohesion to keep together, you half-wit!
And you are way too late to have the sheer bare faced effrontery to talk about protecting families and children in Rochdale, having already betrayed the native British families and children within your manor through your politically correct silence.
SOURCE: GOV
20 March 2012
11 March 2012
New Study Shows Polygamy Leads to Higher Levels of Crime, Violence, Poverty, and Gender Inequality
Source
Interesting. Islam institutionalized polygamous marriage. Researchers have determined that polygamous marriage in a culture leads to higher levels of crime, violence, poverty, and gender inequality. Hence, Islam institutionalized a practice that led to the problems we now see in Muslim societies: rampant violence, poverty, and gender inequality. Shouldn't Allah have known better?
For those unfamiliar with Islamic teachings, here's a quick review. According to the Qur'an, Muslim men are allowed to marry up to four women:
Of course, Allah gave Muhammad (and only Muhammad) special moral privileges, namely, the right to marry more women than anyone else (nothing suspicious here!):
According to Tabari, Muhammad married fifteen women:
Bukhari confirms that Muhammad had at either nine or eleven wives at one time (far more than the standard limit of four):
Since Muhammad is the highest moral example in Islam (Qur'an 33:21), and Muhammad was polygamous, and the Qur'an allows Muslims to engage in polygamy, this practice has been a part of Muslim society for nearly fourteen centuries. And now for the results of Islamic teachings, in a report by Science Daily:
For those unfamiliar with Islamic teachings, here's a quick review. According to the Qur'an, Muslim men are allowed to marry up to four women:
Qur'an 4:3—And if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry (other) women of your choice, two or three or four, but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one or (the captives and the slaves) that your right hands possess. That is nearer to prevent you from doing injustice.
Of course, Allah gave Muhammad (and only Muhammad) special moral privileges, namely, the right to marry more women than anyone else (nothing suspicious here!):
Qur'an 33:50—O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee; and daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated (from Makkah) with thee; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her—this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large).
According to Tabari, Muhammad married fifteen women:
History of al-Tabari, Volume IX, pp. 126-7—“The Messenger of God married fifteen women and consummated his marriage with thirteen. He combined eleven at a time and left behind nine.”
Bukhari confirms that Muhammad had at either nine or eleven wives at one time (far more than the standard limit of four):
Sahih al-Bukhari 268—Anas bin Malik said, "The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number." I asked Anas, "Had the Prophet the strength for it?" Anas replied, "We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men)." And Sa'id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven).
Since Muhammad is the highest moral example in Islam (Qur'an 33:21), and Muhammad was polygamous, and the Qur'an allows Muslims to engage in polygamy, this practice has been a part of Muslim society for nearly fourteen centuries. And now for the results of Islamic teachings, in a report by Science Daily:
SCIENCE DAILY (Jan. 24, 2012)—In cultures that permit men to take multiple wives, the intra-sexual competition that occurs causes greater levels of crime, violence, poverty and gender inequality than in societies that institutionalize and practice monogamous marriage.
That is a key finding of a new University of British Columbia-led study that explores the global rise of monogamous marriage as a dominant cultural institution. The study suggests that institutionalized monogamous marriage is rapidly replacing polygamy because it has lower levels of inherent social problems.
"Our goal was to understand why monogamous marriage has become standard in most developed nations in recent centuries, when most recorded cultures have practiced polygyny," says UBC Prof. Joseph Henrich, a cultural anthropologist, referring to the form of polygamy that permits multiple wives, which continues to be practiced in some parts of Africa, Asia, the Middle East and North America.
"The emergence of monogamous marriage is also puzzling for some as the very people who most benefit from polygyny -- wealthy, powerful men -- were best positioned to reject it," says Henrich, lead author of the study that was recently published in the journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. "Our findings suggest that that institutionalized monogamous marriage provides greater net benefits for society at large by reducing social problems that are inherent in polygynous societies."
Considered the most comprehensive study of polygamy and the institution of marriage, the study finds significantly higher levels rape, kidnapping, murder, assault, robbery and fraud in polygynous cultures. According to Henrich and his research team, which included Profs. Robert Boyd (UCLA) and Peter Richerson (UC Davis), these crimes are caused primarily by pools of unmarried men, which result when other men take multiple wives.
"The scarcity of marriageable women in polygamous cultures increases competition among men for the remaining unmarried women," says Henrich, adding that polygamy was outlawed in 1963 in Nepal, 1955 in India (partially), 1953 in China and 1880 in Japan. The greater competition increases the likelihood men in polygamous communities will resort to criminal behavior to gain resources and women, he says.
According to Henrich, monogamy's main cultural evolutionary advantage over polygyny is the more egalitarian distribution of women, which reduces male competition and social problems. By shifting male efforts from seeking wives to paternal investment, institutionalized monogamy increases long-term planning, economic productivity, savings and child investment, the study finds. Monogamy's institutionalization has been assisted by its incorporation by religions, such as Christianity.
Monogamous marriage also results in significant improvements in child welfare, including lower rates of child neglect, abuse, accidental death, homicide and intra-household conflict, the study finds. These benefits result from greater levels of parental investment, smaller households and increased direct "blood relatedness" in monogamous family households, says Henrich, who served as an expert witness for British Columbia's Supreme Court case involving the polygamous community of Bountiful, B.C.
Monogamous marriage has largely preceded democracy and voting rights for women in the nations where it has been institutionalized, says Henrich, the Canadian Research Chair in Culture, Cognition and Evolution in UBC's Depts. of Psychology and Economics. By decreasing competition for younger and younger brides, monogamous marriage increases the age of first marriage for females, decreases the spousal age gap and elevates female influence in household decisions which decreases total fertility and increases gender equality.
04 March 2012
13 February 2012
15 December 2011
Debbie Schlussel can't take it anymore
Deborah is tired of liberal double-standard.
I’m getting sick and tired of the attacks on Tim Tebow from the religiously intolerant. Even though I am not a Christian, as a religious Jew I see the attacks on him as attacks on me and all religious Jews and Christians. Later on that night, I received the e-mail below from the radio host, who invoked his barely-there Judaism, as if that has anything to do with the price of tea in China.You should note that there are many Jewish fans of Tim Tebow, including Jared Kleinstein, the man who founded and runs Tebowing.com and several rabbis, as detailed in a recent Wall Street Journal article.
But the message on the air was very clear: Islamic terrorists and their enablers–good, VERY GOOD! Devout Christian NFL players who are successful on the field–Just plain TERRIBLE!
04 November 2011
01 November 2011
29 October 2011
27 October 2011
26 September 2011
11 September 2011
27 February 2011
THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD'S "GENERAL STRATEGIC GOAL" FOR NORTH AMERICA
Source
In July 2007, seven key leaders of an Islamic charity known as the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) went on trial for charges that they had: (a) provided "material support and resources" to a foreign terrorist organization (namely Hamas); (b) engaged in money laundering; and (c) breached the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which prohibits transactions that threaten American national security. Along with the seven named defendants, the U.S. government released a list of approximately 300 "unindicted co-conspirators" and "joint venturers." During the course of the HLF trial, many incriminating documents were entered into evidence. Perhaps the most significant of these was "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America," by the Muslim Brotherhood operative Mohamed Akram.
Written sometime in 1987 but not formally published until May 22, 1991, this 18-page document listed the Brotherhood’s 29 likeminded "organizations of our friends" that shared the common goal of dismantling American institutions and turning the U.S. into a Muslim nation. These "friends" were identified by Akram and the Brotherhood as groups that could help convince Muslims "that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands ... so that ... God's religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions."
Akram was well aware that in the U.S., it would be extremely difficult to promote Islam by means of terror attacks. Thus the “grand jihad” that he and his Brotherhood comrades envisioned was not a violent one involving bombings and shootings, but rather a stealth (or “soft”) jihad aiming to impose Islamic law (Sharia) over every region of the earth by incremental, non-confrontational means, such as working to “expand the observant Muslim base”; to “unif[y] and direc[t] Muslims' efforts”; and to “present Islam as a civilization alternative.” At its heart, Akram's document details a plan to conquer and Islamize the United States – not as an ultimate objective, but merely as a stepping stone toward the larger goal of one day creating “the global Islamic state.”
In line with this objective, Akram and the Brotherhood resolved to "settle" Islam and the Islamic movement within the United States, so that the Muslim religion could be "enabled within the souls, minds and the lives of the people of the country.” Akram explained that this could be accomplished “through the establishment of firmly-rooted organizations on whose bases civilization, structure and testimony are built.” He urged Muslim leaders to make “a shift from the collision mentality to the absorption mentality,” meaning that they should abandon any tactics involving defiance or confrontation, and seek instead to implant into the larger society a host of seemingly benign Islamic groups with ostensibly unobjectionable motives; once those groups had gained a measure of public acceptance, they would be in a position to more effectively promote societal transformation by the old Communist technique of “boring from within.”
“The heart and the core” of this strategy, said Akram, was contingent upon these groups' ability to develop “a mastery of the art of 'coalitions.'” That is, by working synergistically they could complement, augment, and amplify one another's efforts. Added Akram: “The big challenge that is ahead of us is how to turn these seeds or 'scattered' elements into comprehensive, stable, 'settled' organizations that are connected with our Movement and which fly in our orbit and take orders from our guidance.” The ultimate objective was not only an enlarged Muslim presence, p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }but also implementation of the Brotherhood objectives of transforming pluralistic societies, particularly America, into Islamic states, and sweeping away Western notions of legal equality, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech.
Akram and the Brotherhood understood that in order to succeed in this endeavor, they needed to appeal to different strata of the American population in different ways; that whereas some people could be influenced by messages delivered from a religious perspective, others would be more responsive to messages delivered by educators, or bankers, or political figures, or journalists, etc. Thus, Akram's blueprint for the advancement of the Islamic movement stressed the need to form a coalition of groups coming from the worlds of education; religious proselytization; political activism; audio and video production; print media; banking and finance; the physical sciences; the social sciences; professional and business networking; cultural affairs; the publishing and distribution of books; children and teenagers; women's rights; vocational concerns; and jurisprudence.
By promoting the Islamic movement on such a wide variety of fronts, the Brotherhood and its allies could multiply exponentially their influence. Toward that end, the Akram/Brotherhood “Explanatory Memorandum” named the following 29 groups as the organizations they believed could collaborate effectively to destroy America from within – “if they all march according to one plan”:
-
ISNA Fiqh Committee (now known as the Fiqh Council of North America)
-
Islamic Medical Association (of North America)
-
Association of Muslim Social Scientists (of North America)
-
Occupied Land Fund (later known as the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development)
Islamic Information Center (of America)
18 February 2011
Muhammad the Liar
In the following hadiths, we see that Muhammad admits he's a liar when it suits him and he advises its acceptable for Muslims to do likewise:
Narrated Zahdam:
We were in the company of Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari and there were friendly relations between us and this tribe of Jarm. Abu Musa was presented with a dish containing chicken. Among the people there was sitting a red-faced man who did not come near the food. Abu Musa said (to him), "Come on (and eat), for I have seen Allah's Apostle eating of it (i.e. chicken)." He said, "I have seen it eating something (dirty) and since then I have disliked it, and have taken an oath that I shall not eat it ' Abu Musa said, "Come on, I will tell you (or narrate to you).Once I went to Allah s Apostle with a group of Al-Ash'ariyin, and met him while he was angry, distributing some camels of Rakat. We asked for mounts but he took an oath that he would not give us any mounts, and added, 'I have nothing to mount you on' In the meantime some camels of booty were brought to Allah's Apostle and he asked twice, 'Where are Al-Ash'ariyin?" So he gave us five white camels with big humps.
We stayed for a short while (after we had covered a little distance), and then I said to my companions, "Allah's Apostle has forgotten his oath. By Allah, if we do not remind Allah's Apostle of his oath, we will never be successful."
So we returned to the Prophet and said, "O Allah's Apostle! We asked you for mounts, but you took an oath that you would not give us any mounts; we think that you have forgotten your oath.' He said, 'It is Allah Who has given you mounts.
By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else better than that. then I do what is better and expiate my oath.' "
Narrated 'Abdur-Rahman bin Samura:
The Prophet said, "O 'Abdur-Rahman! Do not seek to be a ruler, for if you are given authority on your demand then you will be held responsible for it, but if you are given it without asking (for it), then you will be helped (by Allah) in it. If you ever take an oath to do something and later on you find that something else is better, then you should expiate your oath and do what is better." Abu Musa al-Ash'ari reported: I came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) along with a group of Ash'arites requesting to give us a mount. He (the Holy Prophet) said: By Allah, I cannot provide you with a mount, and there is nothing with me which I should give you as a ride.
He (the narrator) said: We stayed there as long as Allah willed. Then there were brought to him (to the Holy Prophet) camels. He (the Holy Prophet) then ordered to give us three white humped camels, We started and said (or some of us said to the others): Allah will not bless us.
We came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) begging him to provide us with riding camels. He swore that he could not provide us with a mount, but later on he provided us with that. They (some of the Prophet's Companions) came and informed him about this (rankling of theirs), whereupon he said: It was not I who provided you with a mount, but Allah has provided you with that.
So far as I am concerned, by Allah, if He so wills, I would not swear, but if, later on, I would see better than it, I (would break the vow) and expiate it and do that which is better.
Abu Huraira reported: A person sat late in the night with Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him), and then came to his family and found that his children had gone to sleep. His wife brought food for him. but he took an oath that he would not eat because of his children (having gone to sleep without food) He then gave precedence (of breaking the vow and then expiating it) and ate the food He then came to Allah s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and made mention of that to him, whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace he upon him) said: He who took an oath and (later on) found something better than that should do that, and expiate for (breaking) his vow.
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who took an oath and then found another thing better than (this) should expiate for the oath (broken) by him and do (the better thing).
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who took an oath and (later on) found another thing better than that, he should do that which is better, and expiate for the vow (broken by him).
This hadith is narrated on the authority of Suhail with the same chain of transmitters (with these words): "He should expiate for (breaking) the vow and do that which is better."
'Adi reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: When anyone amongst you takes an oath, but he finds (something) better than that he should expiate (the breaking of the oath), and do that which is better.
Abd al-Rahman b. Samura reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to me: Abd al-Rahman b. Samura, don't ask for authority for if it is granted to you for asking for it, you would be commissioned for it (without having the support of Allah), but if you are granted it without your asking for it.
You would be helped (by Allah) in it. And when you take an oath and find something else better than that, expiate for (breaking) your oath, and do that which is better. This hadith has also been transmitted on the authority of Ibn Farrukh.
Muslims often claim lying in Islam is restricted to its use in war, but in the following hadiths, Muhammad permits a Muslim to lie in order to kill Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf, a Jewish poet who wrote an anti-Muslim poem which offended him.
"Narrated Jabir : The Prophet said, ‘Who is ready to kill Ka’b bin Ashraf (i.e. a Jew).’ Muhammad bin Maslama replied, ‘Do you like me to kill him?’ The Prophet replied in the affirmative. Muhammad bin Maslama said, ‘Then allow me to say what I like.’ [i.e. to lie]. The Prophet replied ‘I do (i.e. allow you).’"
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: Allah's Apostle said, "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?" The Prophet said, "Yes," Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab).
"The Prophet said, "You may say it." Then Muhammad bin Maslama went to Kab and said, "That man (i.e. Muhammad demands Sadaqa (i.e. Zakat) from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you." On that, Kab said, "By Allah, you will get tired of him!" Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Now as we have followed him, we do not want to leave him unless and until we see how his end is going to be.
Now we want you to lend us a camel load or two of food." (Some difference between narrators about a camel load or two.) Kab said, "Yes, (I will lend you), but you should mortgage something to me."
Muhammad bin Mas-lama and his companion said, "What do you want?" Ka'b replied, "Mortgage your women to me." They said, "How can we mortgage our women to you and you are the most handsome of the 'Arabs?" Ka'b said, "Then mortgage your sons to me." They said, "How can we mortgage our sons to you? Later they would be abused by the people's saying that so-and-so has been mortgaged for a camel load of food. That would cause us great disgrace, but we will mortgage our arms to you."
Muhammad bin Maslama and his companion promised Kab that Muhammad would return to him. He came to Kab at night along with Kab's foster brother, Abu Na'ila. Kab invited them to come into his fort, and then he went down to them. His wife asked him, "Where are you going at this time?" Kab replied, "None but Muhammad bin Maslama and my (foster) brother Abu Na'ila have come." His wife said, "I hear a voice as if dropping blood is from him, Ka'b said. "They are none but my brother Muhammad bin Maslama and my foster brother Abu Naila. A generous man should respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed." Muhammad bin Maslama went with two men.
(Some narrators mention the men as 'Abu bin Jabr. Al Harith bin Aus and Abbad bin Bishr).
So Muhammad bin Maslama went in together with two men, and sail to them, "When Ka'b comes, I will touch his hair and smell it, and when you see that I have got hold of his head, strip him. I will let you smell his head." Kab bin Al-Ashraf came down to them wrapped in his clothes, and diffusing perfume. Muhammad bin Maslama said. " have never smelt a better scent than this.
Ka'b replied. "I have got the best 'Arab women who know how to use the high class of perfume." Muhammad bin Maslama requested Ka'b "Will you allow me to smell your head?" Ka'b said, "Yes." Muhammad smelt it and made his companions smell it as well.
Then he requested Ka'b again, "Will you let me (smell your head)?" Ka'b said, "Yes." When Muhammad got a strong hold of him, he said (to his companions), "Get at him!" So they killed him and went to the Prophet and informed him. (Abu Rafi) was killed after Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf."
This is a clear case of Lying endorsed by the prophet in order to achieve the objectives of Islam, therefore Muslims are permitted to lie (and kill) in defence of Muhammad and his character.
17 February 2011
20 Quick Facts About Jerusalem and The Arab-Israeli Conflict
1. Nationhood and Jerusalem: Israel became a nation in 1312 B.C.E., two thousand years before the rise of Islam.2. Arab refugees in Israel began identifying themselves as part of a Palestinian people in 1967, two decades after the establishment of the modern State of Israel.
3. Since the Jewish conquest in 1272 B.C.E; the Jews have had dominion over the land for one thousand years with a continuous presence in the land for the past 3,300 years.
4. The only Arab dominion since the conquest in 635 C.E. lasted no more than 22 years.
5. For over 3,300 years, Jerusalem has been the Jewish capital. Jerusalem has never been the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. Even when the Jordanians occupied Jerusalem, they never sought to make it their capital, and Arab leaders did not come to visit.
6. Jerusalem is mentioned over 700 times in Tanach, the Jewish Holy Scriptures. Jerusalem is not mentioned once in the Koran.
7. King David founded the city of Jerusalem. Mohammed never came to Jerusalem.
8. Jews pray facing Jerusalem. Muslims pray with their backs toward Jerusalem.
9. Arab and Jewish Refugees In 1948 the Arab refugees were encouraged to leave Israel by Arab leaders promising to purge the land of Jews. Sixty-eight percent left without ever seeing an Israeli soldier.
10. The Jewish refugees were forced to flee from Arab lands due to Arab brutality, persecution and pogroms.
11. The number of Arab refugees who left Israel in 1948 is estimated to be around 630,000. The number of Jewish refugees from Arab lands is estimated to be the same.
12. Arab refugees were INTENTIONALLY not absorbed or integrated into the Arab lands to which they fled, despite the vast Arab territory. Out of the 100,000,000 refugees since World War II, theirs is the only refugee group in the world that has never been absorbed or integrated into their own peoples' lands. Jewish refugees were completely absorbed into Israel, a country no larger than the state of New Jersey.
13. The Arab - Israeli Conflict; The Arabs are represented by eight separate nations, not including the Palestinians. There is only one Jewish nation. The Arab nations initiated all five wars and lost. Israel defended itself each time and won.
14. The P.L.O.'s Charter still calls for the destruction of the State of Israel. Israel has given the Palestinians most of the West Bank land. Autonomy under the Palestinian Authority has supplied them with weapons.
15. Under Jordanian rule, Jewish holy sites were desecrated and the Jews were denied access to places of worship. Under Israeli rule, all Muslim and Christian sites have been preserved and made accessible to people of all faiths.
16. The U.N. Record on Israel and the Arabs: Of the 175 Security Council resolutions passed before 1990, 97 were directed against Israel.
17. Of the 690 General Assembly resolutions voted on before 1990, 429 were directed against Israel.
18. The U.N was silent while 58 Jerusalem Synagogues were destroyed by the Jordanians.
19. The U.N. was silent while the Jordanians systematically desecrated the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives.
20. The U.N. was silent while the Jordanians enforced an apartheid-like policy of preventing Jews from visiting the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.
14 February 2011
Secret Videos Taken at Muslim Hate Schools in Great Britain: Pupils Beaten and Taught “Hindus Drink Cow Piss”
Source
The true face of Islam…
(Daily Mail) — It is an assembly hall of the sort found in any ordinary school. Boys aged 11 and upwards sit cross-legged on the floor in straight rows.
They face the front of the room and listen carefully. But this is no ordinary assembly. Holding the children’s attention is a man in Islamic dress wearing a skullcap and stroking his long dark beard as he talks.
‘You’re not like the non-Muslims out there,’ the teacher says, gesturing towards the window. ‘All that evil you see in the streets, people not wearing the hijab properly, people smoking . . . you should hate it, you should hate walking down that street.’
He refers to the ‘non-Muslims’ as the ‘Kuffar’, an often derogatory term that means disbeliever or infidel.
Welcome to one of Britain’s most influential Islamic faith schools, one of at least 2,000 such schools in Britain, some full-time, others part-time.
They represent a growing, parallel education system.
The school is the Darul Uloom Islamic High School in Birmingham, an oversubscribed independent secondary school.
Darul Ulooms are world-renowned Islamic institutions and their aim is to produce the next generation of Muslim leaders.
In fact, these schools have been described as the ‘Etons of Islam’.
This school is required by its inspectors to teach tolerance and respect for other faiths. But the Channel 4 current affairs programme Dispatches filmed secretly inside it — and instead discovered that Muslim children are being taught religious apartheid and social segregation.
We recorded a number of speakers giving deeply disturbing talks about Jews, Christians and atheists.
We found children as young as 11 learning that Hindus have ‘no intellect’ and that they ‘drink cow p***’.
And we came across pupils being told that the ‘disbelievers’ are ‘the worst creatures’ and that Muslims who adopt supposedly non-Muslim ways, such as shaving, dancing, listening to music and — in the case of women — removing their headscarves, would be tortured with a forked iron rod in the afterlife.
03 February 2011
Bangladesh: 14-Year-old Rape Victim Lashed to Death by Sharia Court for “Immoral Sexuality"
Sickening.
(HNY) — A girl named Hena, age 14, was murdered by local Sharia Committee at Shariatpur in the southern part of Bangladesh. The daughter of poor farmer named Darbesh Kha, Hena was forcefully abducted and raped on January 30, 2011 during late at night by Mahbub, age 40.
During this abuse, villagers arrived in response to the cries of Hena. At the same time, the imam of the local mosque, a man named Mofiz Uddin, and a few teachers of Madrassa [Koranic School] led by Saiful Islam, also arrived; instead of taking any action against the rapist, the Muslim clergymen took Hena inside the Madrassa and locked her in a room.
The following day, the same imam and some of members of the Sharia Committee in the village sat for a trial of Hena on charges of “immoral sexuality” before marriage. Later the committee decided to punish Hena with 200 lashes, and took financial penalty of only TK. 10,000 [US$ 150] from the rapist.
During the lashing, Hena became unconscious; when she was rushed to the nearby village hospital, the attending doctors declared her dead.
After lodging a murder case with the local police station, a few influential members of the local mosque committee, as well as Sharia Law Committee, are telling members of media that Hena was involved in “immoral activities,” and the villagers caught her red-handed while she was having physical relations with a villager; and that later the Sharia Law Committee punished Hena for such anti-Islamic and immoral activities.
They denied admitting that Hena died during being lashed. Further, a few political leaders in the area are frantically trying to save the rapist and the members of the Sharia Law Committee.
02 February 2011
EU Foreign Minister Just Can't Quite Bring Herself to Admit that Christians Were Attacked
—Gabriel Malor
I bring this up only because it echoes President Obama's statement, wherein he had to make up fictitious Muslim victims because he couldn't just admit that the New Years attacks were against Christians.
As I wrote then, it doesn't fit within the warped worldview of leftists to admit that Christians are being murdered by members of the Religion of PeaceTM.
Talks ended angrily when Italy accused Lady Ashton, the EU's foreign minister, of "excessive" political correctness because she refused to name any specific religious group as a victim of attacks.Franco Frattini, the Italian foreign minister, demanded an EU response on the persecution of Christians after a New Year suicide bombing at a Coptic church in northern Egypt in which 23 people were killed.
The Egyptian bombing followed attacks in Baghdad and fears, expressed by the Vatican, of persecution leading to a Christian exodus from the Middle East.
Mr Frattini, backed by France, said it pointless to issue statements defending religious tolerance without any references to the specific minority, Christians, that was under attack.
I can hardly believe it; Italy and France are the bulwarks of Western Civilization in the EU, defenders of Christendom? Maybe Western Europe is actually waking up after all.
The EU foreign minister's response:
The EU high representative said she would have to "reflect" further about how to "make sure we recognise individual communities of whatever religion who find themselves being harassed or worse."
"Harassed"? They were blown up while celebrating midnight vigil Mass before a holy day. This dhimmi would simply lay down for the sword.
Posted by Gabriel Malor
