SHAMING THE MUSLIMS OUT OF ISLAM

A critical look at the REAL crisis of the 21st century, a crisis which those of us who acknowledge it are mocked and ridiculed by the appeasers for inventing, when the facts reveal that in actuality more and more alert citizens with the passage of time are coming to realize the honest observation that the rising Islamic threat presents a grave and penetrating danger to western civilization and the entire human race.

The moment of truth is now. We must prepare ourselves, tending to the spirit and the body with equal wind. Please read this article, and click the links at the bottom of the page, if you are one of the scoffers. Your own life, or the lives of your children may be saved as a result.

The following Q&A was sent from another concerned patriot on this early front. Please take these words seriously:

When I read MA Khan's new book, Islamic Jihad, I was struck by two things, the high quality of his scholarship and an emerging historical trend.

Khan is firmly in the Foundationalist School of scholarship. He does not indulge opinion, but bases his work on the Islamic doctrine of jihad and its historical effects on civilization, with a focus on the destruction of India. He investigates and documents two little known areas—the Sufis and the enslavement of the Hindus.

The excellence of his book is part of an historic pattern. When Islam attacked us on September 11, 2001 we were unprepared for war. Our intellectuals were spineless dhimmis who have been bought and paid for by the Saudis and the Muslim Brotherhood, and as a result, were apologists and not able to defend our civilization.

However, in one of the more remarkable intellectual events in history, a new type of intellectual was drawn into the study of Islam. Trained critical and scientific thinkers who were amateurs in the field of Islam applied their critical reasoning to this subject and produced a wealth of excellent books and articles. The new Islamic scholarship was fact-driven and took up Islam's challenge of war.

Khan's Islamic Jihad is an excellent intellectual weapon.

BW: Welcome Mr. Khan. Tell us about your motivation behind writing this book.

Khan: Thank you Bill giving me this opportunity to share my thoughts on the kind of danger the progressive world faces from an Islamic resurgence and how we deal with it.

What we are witnessing today in Muslim countries-namely in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan etc-is the Talibanization or Saudization of the society, i.e., the establishment of Sharia in all spheres of life and society. In other Muslim countries, the demand for the same is solidifying; in a few decades, the face of the entire Islamic world will dramatically change.

The Islamic world is heading toward that which it embraces: Islam as a complete code of life, as believed by every Muslim. This transformation seems inescapable at this moment. But our major concern now is the infidel world, particularly the West. The native population in Europe is declining from low birthrate, while Muslims are procreating at unbridled rates. In the UK, Muslim population is increasing 10 times faster than the rest; the trend should be similar in other Western European countries. And where does this lead? By the middle of this century, Muslims will become the largest religious group in Europe.

And what will happen under that circumstance? We can easily make a guess. Take the example of Pakistan: in elections, only 10% of Pakistanis support parties that seek to institute Sharia rule. Now look at Britain: some 40% of the Muslims support Sharia rule, with only 37% opposed. This figure, I believe, is skewed to a good extent as Muslims don't speak the truth. Nonetheless, what these figures mean is that a much greater proportion of Muslims living in the West are Sharia-loving or Taliban minded as compared to those living in Islamic countries like Pakistan or Afghanistan. Therefore, unless the mentality of Western Muslims changes drastically in coming decades, which is unlikely, the Talibanization of Europe would become an inescapable reality by the middle of this century, undoubtedly spreading to North America, Australia, Russia and India.

We know what Sharia means to civilized humanity. We witness it in Saudi Arabia; we witness it in Afghanistan under the Taliban; we witness it in Talibanized areas of Pakistan. We clearly know that the plight of women-Muslim or not-would become worse. Treatment of non-Muslims is horrible and extremely degrading under Sharia rule: it is happening in Taliban-occupied regions in Pakistan. The Hindus and Sikhs are being subjected to humiliating jizya, which is an exorbitant discriminatory tax for the security of the life and property of non-Muslims in Islamic state (see Quran 9:29). The Taliban attacked the Sikh community in Orakzai for failing to pay the demanded jizya, slayed the men, took possession of their homes and properties, and enslaved the women and children, in accordance with the Quranic commands (33:26) and Muhammad's example of dealing with the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza [M.A. Khan, Islamic Jihad, p47-49]. Thousands of Hindus have already relocated to India in recent months in order to escape the Taliban oppression.

What is at stake today is obviously the Talibanization of globe—that is, the establishment of the governance of the Quran and Sunnah (i.e. Sharia) globally—which is a central demand of the Quran (2:193, 8:39), and the ultimate goal of Islam. And that will be the worst disaster ever to befall humankind. Therefore, averting this Talibanization of the world, which seems inescapable at this moment unless something drastic happens, should be the central concern for the civilized humanity as I see it. My book is an effort to make the world, both Muslim and non-Muslim, understand what Jihad, the scourge of our time, truly means for our future and take real measures to defeat it.

BW: How do you think we must fight battle?

Khan: In recent years, many ingenious measures have been tried and are being tried: the global war on terror, regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq for spreading freedom, democracy and modernity, and efforts to engage and work with the so-called moderate Muslims for winning the hearts and minds of the wider Muslim community etc. But nothing is working; since the 9/11 attacks in the U.S., the number of Jihadis, in the form of numerous radical Islamic groups around the world, are increasing exponentially. The overall Muslim mindset is also becoming increasingly radicalized everywhere, including the West.

There are also many initiatives amongst the so-called moderate Muslims to reform Islam. Many of these Muslims are also making rewarding careers in the guise of their phony reform campaigns. But attempts at reformation as occurred in Christianity, which was basically going back to the root, the originality of the religion, makes things worse in the case of Islam. A genuine and successful effort by the brilliant Saudi scholar Abdul Wahhab (1703-91) to reform Islam, in the mold of reformation of Christianity by Martin Luther (1483-1546), gave birth to Wahhabism, the Islamic scourge that we are confronting today. Efforts to reform Islam away from orthodoxy, i.e., along a rational and humanistic line, have been tried by some powerful Islamic rulers, namely the Baghdad caliphs, al-Mamun, al-Mutassim and al-Wathik (813-847), as well as Akbar the Great in India. They were the greatest monarchs in the world of their time and ruthlessly dictatorial. While they effected some positive changes during their rule, soon after their departure, it was all overturned. Islamic orthodoxy struck back with greater brutality and horror in every instance.

Thus, efforts at reformation have worsened the situation or failed. Any new attempt at reforming Islam is meaningless today because Muslims are becoming well-educated and can read the Quran, which has been translated in all major languages, by themselves. They are no less intelligent than the "reformers" and can understand what the verses of the Quran truly mean. Reformation in the age of modern education is a meaningless exercise and is destined to failure.

What might work, something that has not been tried, is what I personally call 'shaming the Muslims out of Islam'. Islam is a horrible and shameful ideology, unfit for the civilized world. But most Muslims, who are average human beings, do not know what is actually in the Quran and Sunnah, or, they have never analyzed the contents of Islam's fundamental texts critically. They have no idea what it means to be a true Muslim and how shameful it is in the modern civilized conscience. If they are made aware of the true nature of Islam, they will leave this barbaric and dehumanizing cult in large numbers. Islam will be condemned to the dustbin of history where it always belonged.

This is the only measure that has not been tried. And I have been trying exactly that in my website, (founded November 2005): "Telling the Truth about Islam". And my book, Islamic Jihad, is also an extension of that effort. I have convincing evidence that it will work.

BW: Would you elaborate on the shaming of Muslims and how it would work?

Khan: If you look closely at the history of Islam, you would realize that Islamic orthodoxy, with its violent underpinnings of Jihad, has tremendous resilience. As elaborated already, every attempt to reform it from within was followed by its resurgence with greater ferocity. From the 19th century onward, the European colonial powers did effect significant changes in the Islamic world like the equality of religions, liberation of slaves, and the ideas of secularism, progressiveness and modernity. But after colonial withdrawal, these positive changes are all being over turned. Humanity is now being threatened by Islamic orthodoxy and its Jihadis, on a scale unprecedented in history.

What these factors tell us is that attempt to reform and secularize Islam is not only doomed to failure, but its survival in any form will turn calamitous to humanity. So those, who care for our progressive and modernist civilization, particularly those in position of power, must understand this critical factor while dealing with Islam. We probably have time, this time round, to save humanity from the ongoing scourge of Islam, albeit sustaining damages of whatsoever scale it may be, we will be left with no such option if Islam has another opportunity to strike.

So the need of the hour is to break the back of Islam once and for all. And here comes into play the idea of 'shaming the Muslims out of Islam'. What we need is to discredit Islam root and branch, to the level of cells and atoms. This is not difficult to achieve. Simply telling the truth about Islam will do.

I have already mentioned: 'Islam is a horrible and shameful ideology, unfit for the civilized world.' The thing is, most Muslims have little idea of what Islam truly is, what it means to be a true Muslim. Most of them, particularly outside the Arab world, are ignorant about Islam; very few of them read the basic texts of Islam with a proper understanding. They know about Islam mainly from hearsay as part of their growing up. And when it comes to living their life, they are under tremendous influence of the kafir world from their surrounding, through the media, through all the goodies the kafir world bring to them.

At the same time, they also remain indoctrinated rather subconsciously with the cardinal thoughts in Islam, namely:
1. Islam is a complete code of life,
2. Islam is the perfect religion and Muhammad was the ideal man for all time; therefore, both are beyond questioning or criticism,
3. Only Muslims are destined to receive God's succor, and
4. Islam will eventually dominate the world, i.e. all people will become Muslim some day.

This subconscious indoctrination of the so-called moderate or liberal majority of Muslims easily plays into the hands of the extremists. When the extremists make noise on the ground that the prophet has been defamed or blasphemed or that Islam has been insulted, both being perfect and beyond finger-pointing in their subconscious mind, they too join the orgasmic frenzy with the extremists. We have seen this in the controversy over Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses, and more recently, over the printing of Prophet Muhammad's cartoons in a Danish paper or Pope Benedict's comment on Muhammad.

I think that this so-called moderate variety of Muslims can easily be dissociated from Islam. What we need to do is to say the truth that Islam is not a "religion of peace" as goes the popular discourse, but a barbaric, inhuman and uncivilized cult; that Muhammad was not a noble, a perfect man for all time, but he was a brutal plunderer and mass-murderer lusting for power, wealth and sex; that he was a sex-maniac with a pedophilic urge for a kid as young as six when he was in his 50s and not far from death; that Islam, as initiated by Prophet Muhammad, is a barbaric institution of imperialism, forced conversion, and slavery and sex-concubinage. Islam, as depicted in its sacred texts, is more horrifying than this.

What we need is to hold the pages of the Quran, prophetic traditions and biographies, and Islamic history bare to Muslims and to the world. This will be enough to shame the Muslims out of Islam.

Why would this work? Let me start with my own example. I was one such liberal/moderate Muslim. When 9/11 occurred, I felt that the attack was rather justified because of the United States' unjust policies toward the Palestinians. I was lucky, I should say, that I was already involved in some internet groups that were critical of Islam. But after the 9/11 attacks, as critical analysis of Islam, the Quran and hadiths flourished dramatically, I became a defender of Islam for quite some time. I continued to resist looking into the basic texts of Islam, the Quran, Sunnah and Muhammad's biographies for 2-3 years. But I eventually read them, and I was shattered and frustrated with myself. I was ashamed because the Quran reads like a manual of unconditional war against non-Muslims, Muhammad was one of the most horrible, if not the worst, human being in the history of mankind. And I had believed that Islam was the most perfect and peaceful religion, a perfect code to human life, for 35+ years of my life.

For a Muslim, living Islam is the most difficult thing in the world, and this was the case with me. Only when I read the basic text of Islam and understood its truth was I able to leave Islam with ease. If I hadn't read these texts, I couldn't have mastered the courage to leave Islam despite the horrible things Muslim Jihadis continued to perpetrate, or howsoever hard the critics would criticize those fanatics.

Similarly, after reading my websites islam-watch.org and faithfreedom.org—websites that focus on the criticisms of Islam based on its foundations: the Quran, the Sunnah, and Prophet Muhammad—many Muslims are leaving Islam, even some potential suicide-bombers and mosque imams amongst them. I have testimonies from Muslims, who considered themselves "Muslims for life" just a couple of months ago, that they would never leave the most fulfilling creed of Islam. But after reading my book, which basically exposes the true nature of Jihad against the popular discourse that it is a peaceful struggle with the self, against vice, for eradication of poverty, for human rights and women's rights etc., they found their whole life based on a lie, and were shattered. Their faith in Islam was shattered.

So the challenge in front of us is to bare the foundation of the Islamic creed in front of these so-called moderate/liberal Muslims and to make them read the foundational texts of Islam. Once they do that, a majority of them will find their faith in Islam shattered. And there it begins: the collapse of Islam like a castle of sands. Humanity will be rescued from its lasting horrors once and for all.

BW: There has been a good deal of truth-telling about Islam since the 9/11. But it is not working so far; we are not winning the battle. What do you think is need to be done?

Khan: That's absolutely true. A lot of literature has been produced, particularly in the form of books, telling the truth about Islam. But you must also take into account that a much greater volume of literature has been produced, selling the lies of Islam. Let me emphasize that for 'shaming the Muslims out of Islam', we need books and literature focusing the Quran, Sunnah and Islamic history, books like Ibn Warraq's Why I Am Not A Muslim, Andrew Bostom's Legacy of Jihad, Dr. Ali Sina's Understanding Muhammad, and probably my Islamic Jihad. Very few penetrative books of this type, except those of Ibn Warraq and Bostom, have been successful. Most books of this type are not picked up by reputed publishers, fearing Muslim backlash; they are often being self-published published and receive little attention. Most important factor of all is that very few Muslims, who in general have a very poor book-buying and reading habit, buy books like these.

Therefore, those books, telling the truth about Islam, have very little impact on Muslims, our prime target. On the other hand, books telling the lies about Islam, which are produced in much larger volumes and the media is eager to promote, are the books that most Muslims and non-Muslims buy. So we have, on the whole, a nullification of the impact of truth-telling books by the lies-telling ones.

And when it comes to the news media, which Muslims read to a large extent: there the truth-telling is largely absent; lies-telling is overwhelmingly prevalent. Our mainstream media (MSM) is based on lies, on falsehood, when it comes to the coverage of Islam. And whatever little truth-telling is done, very little of it is focused on the foundational texts and doctrines of Islam.

The MSM is the biggest culprit, the biggest accomplice, in the success of radical Islam. They are most eager to circulate the messages-audio-tapes and videos et cetera, of Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and other top al-Qaeda and radical Islamic leaders and ideologues as such. And getting these messages to Muslim audience, harboring potential recruits, is crucial to the success, with which the radical Islamic agenda is progressing. At the same time, the MSM rigorously filter out the few voices that are trying to focus their criticism on the foundations of Islam, criticism that will matter in enlightening both Muslims and non-Muslims about Islam and in shaming the Muslims out of it.

The same goes with the Internet. It has played tremendous role in the success of al-Qaeda and like-minded radical Islamic groups in spreading their messages, which is the linchpin of their tremendous success in popularizing their violent mission and recruiting cadres. While the truth-tellers have some success there, where they can spread their messages with relative freedom, but there are only few such websites with limited readership against a deluge of pro-Islam and militant Islamic websites. And most of all, the truth-telling websites are banned in most Islamic countries, and even in the West. For example, most educational institutions in Australia have banned all truth-telling websites, namely Faith Freedom, The Religion of Peace, Jihad Watch , Islam Watch and Islam Monitor amongst others categorizing them as hate-sites.

So, it will become clear why we are not making significant ground in our truth-telling efforts. The outcome of this battle, I think, will be determined by the media. We must recognize that the investment of hundreds of billions of dollars annually in strengthening intelligence apparatus, tightening security and the war of terror is going to waste. Some of these measures are also working counter to their intended objectives, by helping the radicalization of the Muslim mind on various grievances, howsoever unjustified they may be. And of course, it is causing loss of lives in large numbers on both sides.

In the media, we can kill this menace with a small fraction of the investment and with much less loss in life and properties. The battle can be won with ease. Muslims can ignore the noise made by truth-tellers, often discredited as fringe Muslim-hating Islamophobes, in a negligible few and little-known websites, but they cannot ignore the Mainstream Media. When the truth-tellers get the opportunity to bare the fundamental sacred texts of Islam in the pages of the MSM to show how horrible and barbaric the cult of Islam is, Muslims at all levels would be forced to defend their creed by looking into those texts. Every attempt to defend Islam would lead to their enlightenment about the filth and inhumanity that lies at its heart.

We have more than convincing evidence to affirm that the so-called peaceful majority of moderate/liberal Muslims, ashamed, frustrated, and angered of what they have unwittingly believed for their whole life, would start leaving Islam en masse. The West's problem would be solved in a decade or two with the collapse of Islam; I can challenge you on that. From there, the remedy to the Islamic problem in the rest of the world, including Muslim countries, would soon begin.

The fact is that the Islamists have tremendous advantage against the truth-tellers in every aspect of this battle. The truth-tellers are fighting this battle against mountainous odds: their opponents have annual investment of billions of dollars against zero on their own side; the Islamists have almost all the ground in the MSM, the decisive battleground of this struggle.

I realize that there is little chance of this changing at all. The future of this battle remains hugely tilted toward the Islamist side as of now. The Talibanization of the globe remain an inescapable possibility unless circumstances changes drastically, possibly horribly.

BW: Thank you for enlightening us, Mr. Khan.

Bill Warner
Political Islam

Personally, we at the Two-Fisted Quorum do not believe Mr. Khan's solution of shaming will work. There is an incredible swath of humanity's muster aiming for this fight, millions of indoctrinated assassins intoxicated with the pernicious urges of brutality and demonic rage, a disposition that will not take no for an answer. No amount of persuasion will still this Islamic beast as it prepares for war and total control. This particular fight will of necessity take place. There will be unfathomable casualties, but I believe that if Americans, particularly its cowed and dhimmified leadership finally wake up to this monster threat and throw off the chains placed around them by succumbing to the dual seductions of Islamic briberies and liberal progressive mythologies, the West can win this war, albeit at a formidable price of blood, treasure, and lifestyle for several generations.

THE GREAT WALL OF SILENCE

An important series of questions were posited by a concerned US citizen to her elected representatives. The response to her questions were woefully inadequate. One day very soon we will know who among us—standing along the hallowed halls of liberty and freedom, conscience and the rule of law—were on the payroll to look the other way, and who indeed were the best and the brightest and most dedicated patriots of our time. Only then will the appeasers and the slouchers within our leadership ranks and from among the chattering café crowds know the depths of their shameless ignorance concerning the threat that unambiguously approaches.

If you want peace, prepare for war. “Si vis pacem, para bellum” from Flavius Vegetius Renatus circa 375 AD: “If you want peace, prepare for war.” Said another way, when you want something badly enough, you must fight for it. As colonial patriot Patrick Henry once exclaimed, "Give me liberty or give me death!" Our current enemies believe the same. But their version of liberty is not mine.

Watch what people do and you will see their true level of commitment.

Ayn Rand spoke about this kind of bulletproof resolution. “There are two sides to every issue” she said, “one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth.”

Fence sitters and cowards exist in a moral fog where they never really commit to anything but their hatred of success. Achievers are prepared to fight to the death. Sidney Sheldon put it best: “The foolish think the Eagle weak, and easy to bring to heel. The Eagle's wings are silken, but its claws are made of steel.”

Franklin D. Roosevelt said, “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face in marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.” Winners don’t cut and run. They are in the fight until the end. They stay the course. They know that anything worthwhile will take a bit longer and take some doing. They understand that they will face a few detours, disappointments, and distractions.

"When you push a winner, you find out whom you’re really dealing with." They expect the unexpected. They are warriors who realize that war is war. They don’t make excuses or expect the state or mommy to help them. They don’t find the strongest people to blame for their inadequacies, spinelessness and weakness. They bounce back courageously and fight on. They are the “Steel fist in the silken glove”—when you push them, you find out whom you’re really dealing with.

IT’S THE RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS clause in our Constitution that will do us in. Every letter I have ever written to a politician, some of them lengthy and with references, evoked terse replies admonishing me for my intolerance and reminding me that ALL religions are respected and welcomed in America. In my follow-up responses to these idiotic replies, none of which were acknowledged, I asked these so-called representatives how they could condone the practice of a religion by millions of immigrants( who continue to flood America despite hating it) that brazenly teaches its followers to usurp our government and convert, enslave, or kill all non-Muslim Americans.

I painstakingly outlined the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood and listed every orgainization connected to it that operates in America. I demanded to know why these insurgents and fifth columnists were permitted to operate in our country with impunity when they are dedicated to its destruction. No answer. I demanded to know why Muslim supremacists could carry signs predicting the overthrow of our government while they burned U.S. flags on our streets. No answer. I demanded to know why public funds were allocated to seditionist Islamic organizations like the Muslim Student Association and CAIR, our avowed enemies that intend to cut our throats, seize our property and assets, usurp our government, and implement Islamic law in America.

I demanded to know how my government intended to protect me and my family from the radical jihadists inculcated in American mosques by Saudi Wahabbi clerics. I demanded to know why these America-haters were allowed to come here and spread their vile, anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Jew hatred and to explain to me where religious freedom ended and sedition began. I pointed out the explosive, festering situation in Europe with its Muslim supremacists and asked if that was our future. I asked if anyone in Washington had ever studied Islamic history and the doctrine of Islam or if they all relied on the Islamic apologist liars in academia and intelligentsia to provide them with soothing canards so they could ignore the problem of Islam and Muslims.

I listed the terror attacks committed by Muslims in the name of Islam since 9/11 and asked if they really believed that jihad was a marginal problem among a few fanatics. I asked why America stopped limiting immigrants to those who genuinely wanted to become Americans and would contribute to our society and respect our way of life and why we now deliberately and suicidally invite our enemies to invade our country. I concluded by asking them if they were blind and deaf or if maybe they too had been bought by the Saudis.

My representatives are Republicans, except for one. This was a frustrating, infuriating experience that I will never forget and never understand beyond the fact that politicians are shackled by political correctness and fear reprisals from their colleagues and/or the wrath of their constituents if they dare voice valid concerns about Islam. The only thing that will change their attitudes is a flood of complaints and letters of outrage from the people they represent. Someone made the comment in another thread that 9/11 was the best thing that ever happened to Islam and Muslims in America.

Instead of opening the eyes of all Americans to this pernicious scourge, they have been lulled into a false sense of security by lying politicians, politically correct multiculturalists, moral relativists, and well-meaning but ignorant Christian and Jewish clerics. Instead of being isolated and treated with justified suspicion, Muslims have been elevated to victim status and they are the consummate exploiters of genuine good will, a virtue they will never possess or comprehend.

—Susan P.

FUGITIVE AWARDED US DEFENSE CONTRACT

The US military has awarded an $80 million contract to a prominent Saudi financier who has been indicted by the US Justice Department. The contract to supply jet fuel to American bases in Afghanistan was awarded to the Attock Refinery Ltd, a Pakistani-based refinery owned by Gaith Pharaon. Pharaon is wanted in connection with his alleged role at the failed Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), and the CenTrust savings and loan scandal, which cost US tax payers $1.7 billion.

The Saudi businessman was also named in a 2002 French parliamentary report as having links to informal money transfer networks called hawala, known to be used by traders and terrorists, including Al Qaeda.

Interestingly, Pharaon was also an investor in President George W. Bush's first business venture, Arbusto Energy. A spokesman for the FBI said Pharaon was not wanted in connection with the French report, but confirmed he was still sought by the US Justice Department.

"Ghaith Pharaon is an FBI fugitive indicted in both the BCCI and CENTRUST case," said Richard Kolko, a spokesman for the FBI. "If anyone has information on his location, they are requested to contact the FBI or the US Embassy."

IF EVERYONE JUST KNEW

Anybody remember this? Another gem from the sands of duplicitous Saudi Arabia and their thinly veiled plans of Islamic world domination.

"I summon my blue-eyed slaves anytime it pleases me. I command the Americans to send me their bravest soldiers to die for me. Anytime I clap my hands a stupid genie called the American ambassador appears to do my bidding. When the Americans die in my service their bodies are frozen in metal boxes by the US Embassy and American airplanes carry them away, as if they never existed. Truly, America is my favorite slave."

—King Fahd Bin Abdul-Aziz, Jeddeh, 1993

IT'S CALLED JIZYA, FOLKS...

SITTING IN THE DOCTOR'S office for a routine visit, I looked across the waiting room, and there was political pundit Chris Matthews of the NBC news show Hardball dressed casually and in beat-up old white sneakers. After five minutes or so of trying to avoid staring at him, I sauntered over to the magazine table and grabbed up an old issue of Time Magazine. Of course, the first article I find has a sidebar comparing Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's rather similar outlooks in their race to the presidency.

The sidebar had caught my attention by stating in that Obama's big idea found articulation in his foreign policy, and could be summed up by one phrase: more foreign aid. In other words, Time Magazine believes along with Obama that terrorism is the result of poverty, a lack of education, and general non-sense like that, even though doctors and lawyers continue to get nailed in the act of jihad, from blowing up airports to funneling money to terrorist organizations.

The Middle East—thanks to the oil beneath its sand—boasts some of the richest nations on earth, nations that are doing nothing to share their wealth with their own people, but instead spend billions in promoting its diabolical religion from a book which is nothing but a military manual dressed up in pseudo-religious language.

There is nothing sublime or transcendent about Islam. Islam is an "in your face" no-holds barred problem.

So I am confident that Barack Obama believes in jizya, that is to say, the subordination tax that is required by the supremists in sheep's clothing of all infidels. But then again, most leftists and Democrats believe in some sort of shifty financial shenanigans.

Stop this madness! Reading this article was the last straw. I can no longer fathom a vote for this man from the southside of Chicago. I have traveled the gauntlet from being an enthusiastic supporter (I heard that 2004 speech, and called my wife in to hear this orator), to an indifferent bystander hoping for more (Ron Paul, where are you), to a staunch opponent of this man (anybody but Barack). In fact, it is my diligent position that we must stop ALL foreign aid to these enemies who do nothing but buy weapons and funnel funds to the jihadists with our blood monies. We are already in near terminal bankruptcy.

The Saudis own us and they own billions of our petrodollars. The Chinese, Japanese and others are literally killing us with a calculated trade deficit, which continues to grow each passing year. We cannot afford to keeping throwing money on the fire. The housing collapse is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of how fragile our economy is when stacked against the deck of nations who are delighting in their current advantage, while America continues to waltz in with its pompous noblesse oblige throwing national treasure and human capital at those who would not only stab us in the back, they are already stabbing us in the face.

And I haven't even mentioned Obama's declarations of initiating a fireside chat with Amadinejad. Because all he would get for his efforts there would be taqiyya, and that's a camel of an entirely different odor. Although this does beg the question, how much does Obama actually know about Islam? Besides the fact that his Kenyan kinfolk belong to the sect...

LEAVING IRAQ TO ITS OIL AND IRAN

EL PRESIDENTE George W. Bush and his merry band of Americans on both sides of the aisle have been played by the Iraqi ex-pats, pick-pocketing politicians, purple-fingered moms and pops, blood-thirsty tribal chieftans, scowling clerics, and let's not forget the optimistic Iraqi bloggers too. Yes, all those brave Iraqi bloggers and their words of Democracy and Freedom, who instead of joining the Iraqi Army and fighting por liberté et égalité, scooted off to graduate schools in the United States. Taqiyya writ large.

The graft-burdened Americans have been played by the Turks, Saudis, Iranians, and Kurds. And the most maddening aspect of the unruly attempt at regime change and colonialization by another name is, if one were to ask the average Iraqi, as polls show, he and she would state the opposite—in their feverish anti-American, anti-Jewish fervor, they paint the events in Iraq as nothing more than an American Neocon-Zionist plot to attack Islam.

And that being the case, do we fight for oil now, or do we allow Iran to consolidate power with Iraq, Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon. That seems to be the destiny of the region. Leave Iraq now, or let's start really knocking heads over there, dammmit!

ENVIRONMENTALISTS AND THE WAR

In speaking to the global energy question Morgaan Sinclair writes that the Middle East Forum had a Middle East Briefing in New York with Jim Woolsey in November 2005. Woolsey explained the situation this way:

Every time in the past that America has started making noises about environmentalism and getting off oil, the Saudis have flooded the short-term light sweet crude market, which then lulls Americans into a false sense of security about prices, and all the investment capital for alternative energies dries up.

Now that the 4AR IPCC reports have come out—and climate science is no longer based on (really sage) models, but data, the Keeling Curve is absolutely incontrovertible in its implications. There is no longer any serious debate (except among those on the payroll of Big Oil and Coal) about what is going on. There is only debate about whether or not the bullet has left the gun or whether we have a little bit of time to top the Type Climate changes from hitting us hard.

Hansen says the bullet has left the chamber; Holdren, McCarthy et al. claim that we have 5-10 years to reverse course.

Now the Saudis know that the worldwide community is onto the global climate change problem ("global warming" is a very unfortunate misnomer, because it's about climate extremes of both hot and cold triggered by an overly warm general atmospheric condition). So now they're not bothering with playing around with short-term resources.

THEY ARE TRYING TO BANKRUPT THE WEST WHILE SHARI'A COMPLIANT BANKS ARE FUNNELING THE MONEY OUT OF THE USUAL INTERNATIONAL MARKETS INTO ONES THEY CONTROL SO THEY CAN BECOME THE WORLD'S LENDERS.

GET OFF OIL. It's much more serious on both fronts than most people image. Coal is not the answer. Corn is a disaster. But back-end switch grass ethanol is a good solutio. Switch grass grew on the American prairie before the US was settled (except by Indians) and it is what we grow on agricultural fallow years to replenish the soil. So we MUST grow it, and with switch grass ethanol the farmers can make money off something that is usually not productive, and it doesn't interfere with the production of food.

Nix on coal. And liquid coal carbon sequestration is an outright LIE. It's bullshit.

If you feel you need more education on global climate change, click here. This article is a couple of years old, but the situation looks even worse now than it did then. But this is a superlative article to get a TRUE overview of the problem. D. Holdren (immediate past pres of AAAS) explains it extremely well for the non-scientist.

To get a picture of why Woolsey says that Republicans who realize the war on terror is real, and Democrats who realize that the environmental problems are real SHOULD BE NATURAL ALLIES. So we must get off oil for a plethora of reasons:

(1) We are paying our enemies $1 billion a day for oil, and they are making bombs with it.

(2) That kind of balance of payments problem bleeds the jugular of the American economy.

(3) We don't dare tell 'em to shove it.

(4) The Chinese, who bear us no good will, are holding our paper on that debt, as well as selling us cheap goods, which also bleeds the economy of $1 billion a day.

(5) This situation makes it impossible for us to really stop anything. We can't tell the Saudis and Chavez to shove it with any authority. We can't tell the Bangladeshis to take care of their population problems. We can't help the starving of Africa. We can't demand that bad governments and religions stop abusing women.

We invented the light bulb, the airplane, the radio, the television, and nuclear fission. We went to the moon. It's not a matter that we can't. It's a matter that we're too damned soft and lazy and arrogant to fix it.

"No civilization was ever conquered from without that did not first destroy itself from within."
—Will Durant

GEORGE BUSH FUNDS TERRORISTS

Oh, this is rich, absolutely ludicrous, this news that the United States taxpayer should be sending money TO Saudi Arabia, instead of collecting huge sums of dough FROM those scoundrels. With billions of petrodollars carefully counted and stashed in secret vaults, a workforce of foreigners to do the manual and sophisticated work the Saudis won't and can't accomplish for themselves, of course, for a single reason or many, and a military force made up not of Saudi men and women, but of Kansans, Californians, and New Yorkers, these slick-tongued Saudi imposters continue to milk jizya from our Dhimmi-in-chief, and he of course, is delighted to pay it.

How many 9/11 terrorists originated from Arabia? Who funds radical Wahabbi madrassas and mosques all over the planet, including some 1500 built here in the US in the past 25 years? Who threatens to convert oil dollars into oil euros, if a certain bankrupt nation doesn't toe the line? Who oppressively rules its own country with the strongest of iron hands, while jet setting about partaking in big gulps of every vice it refuses its own people, and who continues to traffic in slavery without a hint of shame? Who refuses to allow a school of young girls to escape a burning building because they aren't wearing the proscribed head garb required by the religious police? Who exhibit zero tolerance for any show of religious faith other than their own particularly vile state-mandated form of Islam?

Read on...

Last Friday, President Bush certified Saudi Arabia as a cooperative anti-terrorism ally and released U.S. financial aid to Riyadh. This occurred despite charges leveled against the “Kingdom” by Stuart Levey, the U.S. Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, who one day after the sixth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, declared that Saudi Arabia had failed to prosecute terrorism financiers.

Levey voiced frustration that not a single terrorist supporter identified by Washington had been prosecuted by the Saudis.

“If I could snap my fingers and cut off the funding from one country, it would be Saudi Arabia,” a frustrated Levey told the press. “When the evidence is clear that these individuals have funded terror organizations . . . then that should be prosecuted and treated as real terrorism because it is.”

Levey leads an office which marshals the Treasury Department's policy, enforcement, regulatory and intelligence functions to sever the lines of financial support to international terrorists, weapons of mass destruction proliferators, narcotics traffickers, and other threats to our national security. Yet, the United States blithely ignored the very person with the best information whose job is to help stop terrorism and safeguard our country.

Instead, we are providing U.S. aid to the world’s top oil-producing country which is also coincidentally the main financial and ideological sponsor of Wahhabism or Islamic extremism. This austere form of Islam insists on a literal interpretation of the Koran and spreads the belief that all those who don't practice their form of Islam are heathens and enemies. In effect, we are funding our enemies. Even more outrageous, we are funding wealthy enemies: a resource-rich country that is the largest source of financing for Al Qaeda and Islamic terrorists who have murdered hundreds of Americans and Israelis.

The extent of Saudia Arabia’s wealth frequently makes headlines. Recently, Prince Al-Walid bin Talal, a member of the Saudi royal family, sold a 5% share of the Kingdom Holding Company, one of the largest investment companies in the world, for more than two and a half times its initial public offering valuation. As a member of the Saudi royal family, Al-Walid holds assets estimated at $20.3 billion and is deemed by Forbes Magazine as the 13th wealthiest person in the world. The prince’s major holdings include Citibank, AOL, Apple, Inc., Worldcom, Motorola, News Corp, Planet Hollywood, and numerous other companies. He alone is the largest foreign investor in New York and his extensive real estate holdings including upscale hotel chains and resorts. In July of 2005, Talal donated $20 million to the Louvre in Paris, the largest donation ever received by the museum, for the construction of a wing to house Islamic art.



In recent years, Talal has used his financial clout to influence American foreign policy, shape media portrayals and promote Islamist ideology. Following the 9/11 attacks, in which 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals, Al-Walid offered a $10 million donation to New York City toward relief efforts and suggested that the U.S. should reexamine its allegedly pro-Israel policies in the Middle East as the root cause of the attacks. The donation was turned down.

Prince Talal gave $500,000 to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), an un-indicted co-conspirator in the funding of Hamas, for distribution to American public libraries of books that sanitize Islam and terrorist organization activities. One book declares that terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah were placed on the U.S. government’s terrorist list, not because of their well-documented terrorist operations, but because of the pro-Israel bias of American leaders.

During the 2005 Muslim riots in France, Prince Talal, the fifth largest shareholder of the parent company of Fox News, called network chief Rupert Murdoch and demanded that a screen banner identifying the unrest as “Muslim riots” be changed to “civil riots.” The Prince maintained that the U.S. media is too pro-Israel and he encouraged the Arab world and media to do more to counter this tendency.

Further, Prince Talal has tried to influence U.S. Middle East policy by donating $20 million each to Harvard University and Georgetown University, among the largest university donations in history, to finance Islamic studies and create a pro-Islamic environment among future and current policy leaders. From a country that ironically routinely punishes practitioners of Christianity, he declared that his primary reason for bestowing the gifts was the promotion of “Muslim-Christian” understanding.

Of grave concern is another donation by the Prince to the Saudi Committee for the Support of the al-Quds Intifada for $27 million given in 2002. Although committee leadership attempted to portray the gift as assistance for Arab-Palestinian families resisting the “occupation,” documents captured by the Israel Defense Forces indicated that the funds were payoffs for suicide bombings used as enticements to murder by Hamas. A Saudi-government cleric, Sheikh Saad al-Buraik, stated to television audiences viewing the 2002 fundraising telethon, “I am against America until this life ends…She is the root of all evils and wickedness on Earth…” He further urged listeners to pillage the Jews, enslave their women and wage all-out jihad.

The travesty of U.S. funding for a wealthy terrorist-sponsoring nation is further demonstrated by a 2005 study, “Saudi Publications on Hate Ideology Invade American Mosques” by Freedom House, a non-profit, nonpartisan organization that seeks to advance the worldwide expansion of political and economic freedom. Freedom House researchers found that over 80% of U.S. mosques had been radicalized by Saudi-appointed, Wahhabist imams and ideology. These Saudi-trained clerics, the ideological arm of the royal family, advocate the rejection of Christianity and Judaism, the full application of the Sharia or Islamic law in America, hatred of non-believers, renunciation of allegiance to America and the waging of jihad by all Muslims against infidels.

It is indeed troubling that U.S. leaders overlook the role that the Saudi government plays in supporting terrorism worldwide and the spreading of extremist ideology within America. It is the height of irony that while Saudia Arabia bans churches and arrests Christians praying in private homes, it is also freely funding a fifth column inside America in the form of “religious” instruction. For President Bush to praise Saudi Arabia as an “anti-terrorism” ally while Saudi-funded efforts within our borders are undermining and threatening our very existence as a free nation, nullifies American counter-terrorism measures and ignores the warnings of those charged with protecting us. Such a decision dangerously ignores reality and courts our own destruction.

BURNING BUSH CONSPIRACIES

Despite a recent poll that 12% of Americans defy the functions of ordinary intelligence amidst clear evidence to the contrary in suggesting that the Bush administration had an active hand in the September 11 attacks on American soil, we cannot dismiss all the bad news thrown at us by conspiracy theorists aiming to tear America apart at the seams.

The following scenario, while old news, is almost certainly factual, and continues to point up the hard conclusion that Saudi Arabia is no less a declared enemy against the West and the United States than Iran is, and that the US military is little more than a mercenary force controlled by Saudi interests held in place by the kingdom's subtle threats against our nation's economical best interests.

And it is this realization that compels me to advocate with the most avid anti-war protestor that the US needs to vacate Iraq and Afghanistan, cease all overt military actions until we are attacked once more, close our borders to ALL immigration, begin rebuilding our own infrastructure and fortitude, leaving the ME Islamists (Arabs & Chaldeans) to quarrel among themselves for supremacy in the hopes of weakening the Camp of Islam as it pursues its oft-stated desire to reconstitute its beloved Caliphate, And then we should take a hard look at shutting down the Saudi-financed madrassas springing up all over the West since the 1970s, and deporting or charging with treason all hard line Muslims and sympathizers who would call for jihad and sharia law on American soil. War is a nasty business. And it is rarely won with words. Let the saber-rattling masquerade begin!

Given the impossible task of actually earning or owning its own right of return according to Leftists even those among their own people, Israel can and therefore must protect itself. After all, it has vowed to use the Samson option if pushed to the wall, and will not flinch. Never again!

America, unfortunately, is a house divided, and must be healed, or face our own painful reality check. After all, Ahmadinejad has proclaimed that both Israel and America will perish from among the nations of the earth. I have no reason not to take him at his word (no matter how preposterous), if we in the West don't change our ways and learn to name our enemy, and fight this inevitable war with a strategy based on winning not the hearts and minds of our enemies but those hearts and minds of those who support the enemy from within our own borders, those Americans who may hold dear to cherished ideals but for some reason cannot recognize the true enemies of those ideals.

From Greg Palast of the BBC, a fiendishly far-left outfit I usually avoid:

On November 9, 2001, when you could still choke on the dust in the air near Ground Zero, BBC Television received a call in London from a top-level US intelligence agent. He was not happy. Shortly after George W. Bush took office, he told us reluctantly, the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the FBI, “were told to back off the Saudis.”

We knew that. In the newsroom, we had a document already in hand, marked, “SECRET” across the top and “199-I” - meaning this was a national security matter.

The secret memo released agents to hunt down two members of the bin Laden family operating a “suspected terrorist organization” in the USA. It was dated September 13, 2001—two days too late for too many. What the memo indicates, corroborated by other sources, was that the agents had long wanted to question these characters … but could not until after the attack. By that time, these bin Laden birds had flown their American nest.

Back to the high-level agent. I pressed him to tell me exactly which investigations were spiked. None of this interview dance was easy, requiring switching to untraceable phones. Ultimately, the insider said, “Khan Labs.” At the time, our intelligence agencies were on the trail of Pakistan’s Dr. Strangelove, A.Q. Khan, who built Pakistan’s bomb and was selling its secrets to the Libyans. But once Bush and Condoleeza Rice’s team took over, the source told us, agents were forced to let a hot trail go cold. Specifically, there were limits on tracing the Saudi money behind this “Islamic bomb.”

Then we made another call, this time to an arms dealer in the Mideast. He confirmed that his partner attended a meeting in 1995 at the 5-star Hotel Royale Monceau in Paris where, allegedly, Saudi billionaires agreed to fund Al Qaeda fanatics. We understood it to be protection money, not really a sign of support for their attacks. Nevertheless, rule number one of investigation is “follow the money” — but the sheiks’ piggy banks were effectively off-limits to the US agents during the Bush years. One of the men in the posh hotel’s meeting of vipers happens to have been a Bush family business associate.

Before you jump to the wrong conclusion, let me tell you that we found no evidence — none, zero, no kidding — that George Bush knew about Al Qaeda’s plan to attack on September 11. Indeed, the grim joke at BBC is that anyone accusing George Bush of knowing anything at all must have solid evidence. This is not a story of what George Bush knew but rather of his very-unfunny ignorance. And it was not stupidity, but policy: no asking Saudis uncomfortable questions about their paying off roving packs of killers, especially when those Saudis are so generous to Bush family businesses.

Yes, Bill Clinton was also a bit too tender toward the oil men of Arabia. But this you should know: In his last year in office, Clinton sent two delegations to the Gulf to suggest that the Royal family crack down on “charitable donations” from their kingdom to the guys who blew up our embassies.

But when a failed Texas oil man took over the White House in January 2001, demands on the Saudis to cut off terror funding simply stopped.

And what about the bin Laden “suspected terrorist organization”? Called the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, the group sponsors soccer teams and summer camps in Florida. BBC obtained a video of one camp activity, a speech exhorting kids on the heroism of suicide bombings and hostage takings. While WAMY draws membership with wholesome activities, it has also acted as a cover or front, say the Dutch, Indian and Bosnian governments, for the recruitment of jihadi killers.

Certainly, it was worth asking the bin Laden boys a few questions. But the FBI agents couldn’t, until it was too late.

In November 2001, when BBC ran the report on the spike of investigations of Saudi funding of terror, the Bush defenders whom we’d invited to respond on air dismissed the concerns of lower level FBI agents who’d passed over the WAMY documents. No action was taken on the group headed by the bin Ladens.

Then, in May this year, fifty FBI agents surrounded, invaded and sealed off WAMY’s Virginia office. It was like a bad scene out of the ‘Untouchables.’ The raid took place three years after our report and long after the bin Ladens had waved bye-bye. It is not surprising that the feds seized mostly empty files and a lot of soccer balls.

Why now this belated move on the bin Laden’s former operation? Why not right after the September 11 attack? This year’s FBI raid occurred just days after an Islamist terror assault in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Apparently, messin’ with the oil sheiks gets this Administration’s attention. Falling towers in New York are only for Republican convention photo ops.

The 199-I memo was passed to BBC television by the gumshoes at the National Security News Service in Washington. We authenticated it, added in our own sleuthing, then gave the FBI its say, expecting the usual, “It’s baloney, a fake.” But we didn’t get the usual response. Rather, FBI headquarters said, “There are lots of things the intelligence community knows and other people ought not to know.”

Ought not to know?

What else ought we not to know, Mr. President? And when are we supposed to forget it?

**************

Greg Palast’s reports for BBC Television Newsnight and The Guardian paper of Britain (with David Pallister) on White House interference in the investigation of terrorism won a 2002 California State University Journalism School ‘Project Censored’ Award.

The BBC television reports, expanded and updated, will be released this month in the USA as a DVD, “Bush Family Fortunes,” produced by BBC’s Meirion Jones.

BATTLEFIELD

Once again for emphasis. Islam is not a race. Islam is a pernicious ideology, spoiling for global domination and the total submission of the world to its evil culture of death. Should I mention again its historical links to Old Joe Goebbels and Nazi Germany?

Warning from the homefront. A private Islamic school supported by the Saudi government (that and 1500 others scattered strategically across this sleeping nation) should be shut down until the U.S. government can ensure the school is not fostering radical Islam. This is not news, for anyone reading this blog knows that the particularly virilent strain of Wahabbism is the code of the road for these Saudi financeers, but what is indeed a bit of uplifting good news is that finally a federal panel has recommended such a closing. Amazing grace!

In a report released Thursday, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom broadly criticized what it calls a lack of religious freedom in Saudi society and promotion of religious extremism at Saudi schools. Particular criticism is leveled at the Islamic Saudi Academy, a private school serving nearly 1,000 students in grades K-12 at two campuses in northern Virginia's Fairfax County.

The commission's report says the academy hews closely to the curriculum used at Saudi schools, which they criticize for promoting hatred of and intolerance against Jews, Christians and Shiite Muslims.

"Significant concerns remain about whether what is being taught at the ISA promotes religious intolerance and may adversely affect the interests of the United States," the report states. Again, none of this is news, except perhaps to George Bush and his left-wing cronies, yes, you read this correctly. The Bushies have aided and abetted the vast left-wing conspiracy to deliver this nation unto the Saudi kingdom without even blinking.

Our national forebearance and patience can be noble and wonderful traits in a people, except when they are not. And this report has finally let the cat out of the bag. How long before the "official" denials start rolling heads?

Now imagine the exact inverse of this scenario—an Amero-fascist school set up in a Muslim dominion, Saudi Arabia for instance—financed by hidden sources answering the call to duty. Imagine the 'academy' is filled with over 1,000 transplanted Westerners, operatives and patsies who are flush with the most vicious hatred of any and all Muslims, operatives and patsies who are brainwashed with the official propaganda of hatred-spewing 'teachers' and 'religious high priests' aiming to annihilate that Muslim nation and subject that people to Amero-fascist domination and replace all Islamic laws with the US Constitution...

No, this is not happening, not even in hapless Iraq, no thanks to curious George and his black hand of eager beavers.

Imagine, if you can, the immediate consequences of such an operation by American forces. Not a single head would remain on a single set of shoulders. Tongues would have long ago been pulled from mouths with pliers. Eyes would have been gouged out. Genitals would have been mutilated and fed back to the 'students' and 'faculty' of this 'blasphemous' school.

As part of their plans for global takeover, the Saudis have done exactly this. The Saudis have installed not one, but virtually thousands of such academies in the West. In these madrassahs and schools and mosques they regularly enforce ideas of Islamic supremacy among their students, instilling a hatred and contempt for non-Islamic things right in the midst of the non-Islamic West. They teach their children to despise the West, its people, its culture, and to ponder ways to subvert us and our laws, to convert us to Islam, or to subjugate us under Islam. Failing that—to annihilate us in honor of Islam.

There is no moral equivalency here, folks. Don't even try it.

Now, the bad news. The Commission apparently has no official power, but merely advises the State Department and the President, essentially saying what the former are unable to say openly.

Their annual report is found here.

Saudi Arabia, was named as a CPC, country of particular concern, in 2004 and targeted by the State Department for action, but after a waiver of 180 days, the State Department continued the waiver explaining a dialogue on matters of concern was in play. The Commission, in its frustration, has issued a recommendation that the State Department report to Congress every 120 days on the progress of their discussions with the Saudis. Translation: Saudi cooperation is not forthcoming and the discussion is probably an exercise in futility.

The Commission's report is some 292 pages, but contains summaries on all countries of concern and is a good guide for understanding the intricacies of the religious makeup, differences and policies within countries.

Like I've written many times before in these pages, America is buckling at the knees, and has become the hireling, the paid mercenaries of the Saudi regime. We are owned by those who hold our debt. We have exported our hard industries, crippling our own middle class, and now we must kow tow to our enemies. This must stop. This is the fight we we must fight.

GETTING OUT OF THE RELIGION BUSINESS

With all the recent controversy at George Mason University with regard to prayer rooms and foot basisn to accommodate all students but soon strong-armed by the Muslim population, let's state clearly that GMU should just get out of the religion business altogether. Yeah, outsource it. Convert the space to classrooms or storage and let students return to fending for themselves spiritually. The truly spiritual don't need the damned props. They can be flexible and adjust their own schedules and behavior to meet their needs. Props are only necessary for ritualistic cults.

If this "meditation space" is officially non-denominational, and meant for quiet meditation, contemplation, and prayer, then several things need to happen.

First, definition of the originally intended university policy for the use of the space when it was built needs to be dredged up out of university records, printed, and POSTED in multiple locations there in that space for all to read. If a disagreement arises, the rules can be referred to.

Second, if barely anyone else was using the space except for the MSA, this does NOT mean it becomes the Muslims' de facto prayer space. It does NOT mean it becomes their "on campus mosque" by default. If the intended university policy was for the space to be shared, the Muslims MUST share. Their religion may teach that it supersedes all other religions, but there are lots of different types of people and if they can't or won't share, frankly they need to stop using that space and create one where they won't have to bully everyone else. I doubt they'll do this...it's not part of their demonstrated history. But I hope they'll surprise me.

Third, if in fact the space was intended to be shared equally by original official university policy, it is the duty of non-Muslim students who want to pray, contemplate, meditate, or simply sit quietly there to think by themselves, to point out the posted policy to the Muslim students, and tell them that they don't have a monopoly on the space.

Fourth, the university needs to be taken to task for not having the stones to enforce its own rules.

Fifth, if the Muslims don't like this scenario, they ought to consider leaving this country and moving to a majority Muslim country. In this country, public sites are supposed to be shared by all, equally. If that's an affront to their religion, they should go somewhere where they won't have to face that affront.

In my youth, I would never have thought of arguing against the practice of religion on campus—what I continue to have a problem with is that one religion is basically being given carte blanche to take over a "public" space for their own use, permanently, while all of the other religious organizations on campus are forced to lease their own space. So things are not so simple anymore.

Nobody is forcing any group of students to attend GMU. They can find a school near a mosque or a synagogue or a temple or a church or whatever somewhere. I'm sure there must be schools that meet these criteria. If a college near the desired house of worship doesn't offer the programs or the most favorable tuition—oh well, we all have to figure out what our priorities are going to be. Since when do we all have to be so pampered and catered to? How narcissistic is this expectation?

I do believe private colleges and universities should be free to affiliate themselves with religious organizations (and to not be pressured to accommodate others), as long as they advertise themselves as having these ties. There are too many special interests out there to please them all, so why even try to satisfy any of them? It's not worth it for the friction it creates! Isn't it asking enough of universities to address special educational concerns, without meddling in ancillary crap?

When are “Infidels” going to wise up to the fact that Muslims in the Balad al Kufr (the “lands of the unbelievers” or, another translation would be “the lands of the “unclean””) are here as the scouts and advance troops of Islam and their job is to stake out territory—physical, religious, legal. cultural, political, social—and then constantly expand that territory and advance the Jihad by terror or by intimidation, precisely the methodology the Qur'an dictates!

This is the face of “peaceful” Islam, as it uses intimidation and all the weapons a democracy, political correctness and Infidel weakness hands it to advance the day when Islam will rule all. These university prayer room squabbles are mere baby steps here but unless stopped, and stopped hard, these Muslims will own the school in a few years, the state in a couple of decades or less and, eventually, the whole damn country. To see where denial, good manners, ignorance about Islam and appeasement is leading us, take a look at Europe and what has become of it.

For those who think I exaggerate about Muslim’s mindset, I invite them to look at this recent Washington Post article examining the content of Saudi produced textbooks used to teach Muslim children in the U.S. including those in Virginia.

I suggest that a reading of the Qur’an, Hadiths and Sira will show that rather than being just “hate ideology,” the beliefs and actions taught in these Saudi publications come straight from these three core books of Islam.

FACING DOWN IRAN EYE TO EYE

Mark Steyn writes convincingly:

If we’d understood Iran back in 1979, we’d understand better the challenges we face today. Come to that, we might not even be facing them. But, with hindsight, what strikes you about the birth of the Islamic Republic is the near total lack of interest by analysts in that adjective: Islamic. Iran was only the second Islamist state, after Saudi Arabia—and, in selecting as their own qualifying adjective the family name, the House of Saud at least indicated a conventional sense of priorities, as the legions of Saudi princes whoring and gambling in the fleshpots of the West have demonstrated exhaustively. Hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue—though, as the Royal Family has belatedly discovered vis-à-vis the Islamists, they’re somewhat overdrawn on that front. The difference in Iran is simple: with the mullahs, there are no London escort agencies on retainer to supply blondes only. When they say “Islamic Republic,” they mean it. And refusing to take their words at face value has bedeviled Western strategists for three decades.

Twenty-seven years ago, because Islam didn’t fit into the old cold war template, analysts mostly discounted it. We looked at the map like that Broadway marquee: West and East, the old double act. As with most of the down-page turf, Iran’s significance lay in which half of the act she’d sign on with. To the Left, the shah was a high-profile example of an unsavory U.S. client propped up on traditional he-may-be-a-sonofabitch-but-he’s-our-sonofabitch grounds: in those heady days SAVAK, his secret police, were a household name among Western progressives, and insofar as they took the stern-faced man in the turban seriously, they assured themselves he was a kind of novelty front for the urbane Paris émigré socialists who accompanied him back to Tehran. To the realpolitik Right, the issue was Soviet containment: the shah may be our sonofabitch, but he’d outlived his usefulness, and a weak Iran could prove too tempting an invitation to Moscow to fulfill the oldest of czarist dreams—a warm-water port, not to mention control of the Straits of Hormuz. Very few of us considered the strategic implications of an Islamist victory on its own terms—the notion that Iran was checking the neither-of-the-above box and that that box would prove a far greater threat to the Freeish World than Communism.

But that was always Iran’s plan. In 1989, with the Warsaw Pact disintegrating before his eyes, poor beleaguered Mikhail Gorbachev received a helpful bit of advice from the cocky young upstart on the block: “I strongly urge that in breaking down the walls of Marxist fantasies you do not fall into the prison of the West and the Great Satan,” Ayatollah Khomeini wrote to Moscow. “I openly announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran, as the greatest and most powerful base of the Islamic world, can easily help fill up the ideological vacuum of your system.”

Today many people in the West don’t take that any more seriously than Gorbachev did. But it’s pretty much come to pass. As Communism retreated, radical Islam seeped into Africa and south Asia and the Balkans. Crazy guys holed up in Philippine jungles and the tri-border region of Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay who’d have been “Marxist fantasists” a generation or two back are now Islamists: it’s the ideology du jour. At the point of expiry of the Soviet Union in 1991, the peoples of the central Asian republics were for the most part unaware that Iran had even had an “Islamic revolution”; 15 years on, following the proselytizing of thousands of mullahs dispatched to the region by a specially created Iranian government agency, the Stans’ traditionally moderate and in many cases alcoholically lubricated form of Islam is yielding in all but the most remote areas to a fiercer form imported from the south. As the Pentagon has begun to notice, in Iraq Tehran has been quietly duplicating the strategy that delivered southern Lebanon into its control 20 years ago. The degeneration of Baby Assad’s supposedly “secular” Baathist tyranny into full-blown client status and the replacement of Arafat’s depraved “secular” kleptocrat terrorists by Hamas’s even more depraved Islamist terrorists can also be seen as symptoms of Iranification.

Read more...