---

Islam: An Awakening for the Infidel World


Part 1 - An ideology:

In September of 2001 the President addresses the nation, identifies the
enemy as the particular people involved in the attacks, and defines them by
the tactics they used. He makes no declaration of war, but pledges to lead
us to victory in the war he intends to wage, which, he says, will be long.
He defines victory as democracy for the nations behind the attacks. A week
later, he reminds us that those who practice the religion of the attackers
"must feel comfortable" in America. Two months later, he invites leaders of
the religion to the White House, for a prayer meeting.

The President recognized a problem, deplored it, but did not relate it to
the meaning, and permanent menace, of the religion of the attackers.

---

To use terms such as "Terrorist", "Extremist", "Islamist", "Islamofascist"
and "Islamic radical" is pure folly. These terms carry no information; they
don't identify the enemy this war is against nor their ideals and goals.
These terms also mislead by implying that there is some theological or
ideological split within Islam over Islam's basic principles and
regulations. THERE IS NO SPLIT. Islam is and always has been a blueprint
which seeks to assimilate all cultures and religions into the Arab/Islamic
fold:

"These descriptions are very ugly; it is offensive and an insult to our
religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and
that's
it": Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey, August, 2007.

"The choices for non-Muslims delineated by Islamic law and Muhammad are
conversion, subjugation, or death": Qur'an 9:29 (Primary) and the hadith
recorded at Sahih Muslim 4294 (secondary).

---

It's a rather sad state of affairs that we still, years after U.S. embassy
attacks in Kuwait (1983); Beirut (1983 & 1984); Kenya, Nairobi, and Tanzania
(1998); Pakistan (2002); Saudi Arabia (2004); Syria (2006); Greece (2007);
Yemen (2008); are trying to decide what to call the community and the
stratagem that have targeted us:

The dispassionate term for this unity is "Mujahideen"; the armed wing of
Islam; the Muslim guerrillas; Allah's troops. Whether Arab (Sunni) or
Persian (Shi'a) the fact is that Mujahideen, (also known as Fidaai;
martyrdom warriors,) are in strict accordance with Islam's Qur'an and the
words and deeds of the Prophet Muhammad as defined in the hadiths. In other
words, these people, young and old, male and female, are Sharia
supremacists.

The dispassionate term for the tactics they use is "Jihad"; the religious
commandment imposed upon Muslims. Jihad describes fully developed and
clearly defined theories of war that are substantially more sophisticated
than many seem to want to understand. This militaristic,
religious-political-juridical ideology values war as a demonstration of
loyalty to a deity; demands obedience to its spokesmen; and imposes death
penalty edicts over millions of people.

---

Muslims, both Mujahideen (violent) and non-Mujahideen (non-violent), are
after the same goal; their only difference is tactical. The non-Mujahideen
Muslims believe that infiltration and subversion are more effective than
direct, armed attacks in conquering the Infidel (non-Muslims). Ultimately it
matters little that they are "not violent", for they are pursuing through
non-violent means the same desire that bin Laden and others are pursuing
through violence. On the one hand look at today's Islamic situation in
Europe and then consider the statements of Algerian leader Houari
Boumédienne made at the United Nations in 1974:

"One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the
Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends: Because they
will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The
wombs of our women will give us victory."

When Muslims migrate to an Infidel land, they do not enter a foreign land:
They are actually occupying a land which Allah has reserved for them. Any
Muslim will say that the entire earth belongs to Allah; therefore, every
Muslim has the inalienable right to move to an Infidel land that Allah has
held in trust for them, and then appropriate it, for the sake of Allah:

Qur'an 28:58: "Allah grabs the land of the unbelievers."

Sahih Bukhari 4.53.392: "If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You
should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to
expel you from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he
is permitted to sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to
Allah and His Apostle."

Then, on the coercive side, consider what Mustafa Abu al-Yazid, al Qaeda's
commander in Afghanistan said as regards the December 2007 murder of
opposition leader Benazir Bhutto:

"We terminated the most precious American asset which vowed to defeat
Mujahideen." (Reflecting Qur'an 9:123: "The believers must make war on
Infidels around them and let the Infidels find firmness in them.")

---

ISLAM, the global totalitarian ideology disguised as a religion, is the
enemy. It is ISLAM that propels the styled insurgent groups operating in
Uzbekistan, Iraq, Somalia, Lebanon, Palestine, Pakistan, Chechnya, the
Philippines, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Africa, and Asia.


1.2 The willful blindness of today's "free societies"

Today, "free societies" have put themselves in the peculiar position of
penalizing non-Muslims who make legitimate associations that reveal the
unpleasant realities of Islam, as if these comments somehow are acts
encouraging "hatred and contempt". You see, these associations do not
reflect our government's decision to abandon the "aggressive rhetoric" as
regards the "war on terror". The fact that Mujahideen routinely commit
violent acts and justify them with reference to Islamic teachings is a fact
we are not supposed to, indeed, not allowed to notice.

Consider:

a) Is it not interesting that no Islamic religious authority has
"pronounced takfir", the practice of declaring unbeliever an individual or a
group previously considered Muslim, on Mujahideen such as Osama bin Laden
(9/11), Abu Bakar Bashir (2002 Bali) and others who have made it clear that
they are fighting for Islam, thereby "declaring them apostates" for their
terrorism? This is not from fear of retaliation by those people, but
recognition of the fact that they are not violating Islamic principles:
Indeed, leading Islamic Clerics repeatedly establish the legitimacy of their
actions.

b) On December 18, 2007 the U.N. passed by a 108-51 margin, with 25
abstentions, the "Defamation of Religions" resolution. Although the
resolution refers to defamation of "religions", Islam is the only religion
named in the text. It expresses alarm about "discrimination" and laws that
stigmatize groups of people belonging to certain religions and faiths under
a variety of pretexts "relating to security and illegal immigration."
Translated into straight language it means that, as far as the UN is
concerned, "free societies" are required to stand by as mute witnesses to
their own conquest and Islamization.

c) On January 4, 2008, the Pentagon "fired" Major Stephen Coughlin, its
most knowledgeable specialist on Islamic Law. Major Coughlin demonstrated
meticulously that "Jihad fi Sabil Allah-Jihad in the cause of Allah," is the
animating principle of Mujahideen and how this understanding should form the
basis for rational, effective threat development assessment, and war
planning. That Major Coughlin's analyses would even be considered
"controversial", and lead eventually to his contract not being renewed, is
symptomatic of today's intellectual and moral rot plaguing efforts to combat
Islam's monstrous behavior (re: Friedrich Nietzsche's book "The will to
power").

---

This curious behavior began shortly after 9/11 with "Islam is a religion of
peace", which soothed ideological sentiments of many, but has failed the
"free societies" strategically. This short-sighted and Fantasy Based
Analysis has short-stopped the objective, systemic evaluation of Islam.
"Islam is a religion of peace" is fine for public policy statements, but is
not and cannot be the point of departure for competent analysis: It is, in
fact, a major flaw under any research methodology. In other words, you have
stated the conclusion before you have done the analysis. This behavior has
brought us to an "Orwellian" junction where presenting a straightforward
evaluation of Islamic supremacist ideology becomes the new blasphemy: How
perversely backwards this is. We cannot pretend that the Islamic texts do
not say what they say, or that Mujahideen have no case to make on Islamic
grounds; rather, we must confront Islam for what it really is.


1.3 Sharia Law

Sharia Law is readily obtainable in English. In applying Sharia law, or
Islamic law, or Doctrinal Islam, or Muslim jurisprudence: NO Muslim can
reject ANY part of Qur'an or the hadiths and remain Muslim (the alternative
is becoming an apostate). Sharia is the EXCLUSIVE SOURCE of law for both
Muslims and non-Muslims (the Infidel), and embraces ALL human activities -
both personal and communal.

Sharia is understood as a series of duties and obligations; is not severable
from Islamic theology; and as such it does not tolerate parties of differing
opinion in its application. It exercises absolute and centralized control
over ALL aspects of life. Islam does not consider itself to be the third
Abrahamic faith, contrary to fond imaginings. It considers itself to be the
only Abrahamic faith, the true faith of all the patriarchs and prophets,
including Joseph and Abraham, and of which Judaism and Christianity are but
falsifications and perversions. (Qur'an: 12:40; 48:28; 61:9; 16.52; 5:3;
9:33.) In other words, Islam is "the last religion".

---

As in all religious traditions there is a spectrum of belief, knowledge,
fervor and emphasis. One certainly cannot disagree with the thought that all
who today call themselves Muslims may not be "good" Muslims according to
Allah, Qur'an and Mohammed. Also, one certainly cannot say that today there
exists a "unitary plan and project" driving ALL Muslims to world conquest
even though this is Islam's primary objective. But consider young Muslim
women who start wearing appropriate hide-all clothing: Their clothes are
both a sign of their values, and of their family's values. Those clothes
say:

"We are not merely Muslims, but are true-blue believers and as true-blue
believers, you may hold us to knowledge of, and submission to, the dictates
of Qur'an and the hadiths."

Now, how can you take seriously individuals who claim to be "good" Muslims
and while looking at the floor, imply that they really are ignorant of what
they are claiming to be? This would be most presumptuous on our part. Muslim
ignorance of their ideology does not create the reality. If a person claims
to be a Muslim they are also laying claim to the social order that ideology
professes whether from the Shafi'i, Maliki, Hanafi, Hanbali, (Sunni) or
Ja'fari,
(Shi'a) schools of jurisprudence. Islam is not a race, ethnicity, or skin
color. Adherence to Islam is not accidental or involuntary. You have to
CHOOSE to believe in Islam and you MUST APPLY that ideology, exclusively, to
be Muslim. After all, where exactly is there a sect or school of Islam that
teaches that Muslims and non-Muslims should coexist peacefully as equals
before the law on an indefinite basis? Answer: There is none.


Part 2 - A military campaign:

Let's be clear. When Arab Muslims appeared on the world scene in 630 A.D.
and when the armies of Mohammed began their conquest of the World, a
military campaign ensued, not a missionary enterprise. Through the use of
both force and imposed subjugation (see the book DHIMMI, by Bat Ye'Or)
against Infidels, Muslims have been able to, for generations, forcibly
convert or assimilate non-Muslims into their body of Islamic religious
doctrine, Sharia.

Islam's animosity toward America is certainly nothing new. In 1786, Thomas
Jefferson and John Adams (then serving as American ambassadors to France and
Britain, respectively,) met in London with the Tripolitan Ambassador to
Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja. These future American presidents were
attempting to negotiate a peace treaty which would spare the United States
the ravages of Mujahideen emanating from the Barbary States belonging to the
Ottoman Caliphate (modern Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya).

During their discussions they questioned Ambassador Adja as to the source of
this unprovoked animus (concealed by the euphemism "piracy") directed at the
nascent United States republic. Jefferson and Adams, in their subsequent
report to the Continental Congress, recorded the Tripolitan Ambassador's
justification:

". that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written
in their Qur'an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their
authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon
them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take
as Prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in Battle was
sure to go to Paradise".

History shows that the negotiations failed and the First Barbary War
(1801-1805) caused Mujahideen to recede:

"The Senate ratified the Tripoli treaty in April 1806 by a vote of 21 to 8
and Jefferson declared 'victory,' but the 'peace' proved rather political."
(See the book Victory in Tripoli, by Joshua London.)

However, by May, 1815, President Madison had to commission two naval
squadrons and dispatch them to the Barbary States to again confront
Mujahideen:

"By June/July 1815, the U.S. naval forces had dealt Mujahideen a quick
series of crushing defeats" (ref: The Second Barbary War, also known as the
Algerian War).

Again, my point is that today's "free societies" seem to be unwilling to
decipher clearly the history and character of Islam. Do we not have an
affirmative, personal duty to know ALL the knowable facts associated with
the enemy?


2.1 It's not that we haven't been forewarned

In 1967, John Ralph Willis (see the book The Journal of African History)
observed:

"The jihad.is essentially an instrument of revival, employed for the
purpose of extending the frontiers of Islam and leading the faithful back to
roots. And it is not insignificant that the faithful, being in essence
conservative, have been as susceptible to the summons of revivalists as they
have been insensitive to the activity of reformists".

In the (1995) book: "Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Qur'an in
the English Language, Appendix III -- The Call to Jihad" written by Saudi
Arabia's Chief Justice, one can read:

"The Verses of Qur'an and the hadiths (the Prophet's legal ways, orders)
exhort Muslims greatly to take part in Jihad and have made quite clear its
rewards, and praised greatly those who perform Jihad (the holy fighting in
Allah's Cause) and explained to them various kinds of honors which they will
receive from their Lord (Allah). This is because they - Mujahideen are
Allah's troops. Allah will establish His religion (Islam), through them
(Mujahideen). He will repel the might of His enemies, and through them He
will protect Islam and guard the religion safely. And it is they
(Mujahideen) who fight against the enemies of Allah in order that the
worship should be all for Allah (Alone and not for any other deity) and that
the Word of Allah (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and His
religion Islam) should be superior."

In 2006 Jeff Stein, national security editor for Congressional Quarterly
wrote:

"It's hard to say what's worse: Ignorance of jihad, for which there's no
excuse at this advanced stage of war, or indifference to it, for which
there's
never an excuse. Both attitudes deeply imbue U.S. war policy."

---

Today, thousands of individuals, indoctrinated as youths, are eager to
engage in suicidal jihad, and many more are willing to die through
acquiescence and submission, should the Islamic state so demand. The enemy
soldier is highly motivated, thoroughly brainwashed, and willing to die for
their God and their cause. The enemy's children and soldiers memorize words
such as these:

"Fight and slay the unbelievers wherever you find them, seize them,
beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war; but if
they repent, and practice our way, then accept them. . ."

"You shall fight back against those who do not believe in God, or in the
Last Day, nor do they prohibit what God and His messenger have prohibited,
nor do they abide by the religion of truth..."


Part 3 - A Constitutional Issue:

If it is not yet clear to you, Islam is in diametrical opposition to the
U.S. Constitution and Americas' way of life: Separating jurisprudence from
religion is an in-your-face denial of Mohammed teachings. This is the basic
reason Islam is warring against the U.S. as the "Great Satan". In other
words, from day one, we "Infidels" have been thumbing our collective noses
at Allah and Qur'an: Muslims discern everything American stands for as "an
insult to Islam". Indeed: Any sampling of the constitutions of Muslim
Nations will reveal that Muslim Nations FORMALLY RECOGNIZE the absolute and
centralized role of Sharia duties and obligations.

Our dilemma, as in the past, is not whether we have the "capacity" to defend
"our" constitutional lifestyle; it is whether we have the "self-confidence",
and the "will" to do so today. These Islamic tribes-with-a-flag are
assaulting us via several differing aspects:

a. Direct Islam

Ask yourself the following:

In which Nation is Islam:

1. Most solidly linked with political power.

2. Dedicated to the violent spread of Sharia Law.

3. Infused with hatred of America.

4. Is founded on these ideas.

5. And their practice is a matter of principle.

There is a clear answer, which is known, admittedly or not, by almost
everyone today. The political centerpiece of Islamic Totalitarianism today;
the state in which Sharia is welded to political power and contempt for
America; the world leader in the spread of violent jihad: Iran. The Iranian
Islamic Nation was born in an act of war against America - the seizure of
the American embassy in 1979 - and has chanted "Death to America" ever
since. It is Iran that addresses the U.N. as a world leader; it is Iran that
is openly committed to acquiring the weapons needed to take control of the
Middle East; it is Iran that poses as the defender of Islam against the
West; and it is Iran that has gained the most power since the U.S. removed
its strongest regional opponent in Iraq.


b. Subversive Islam

But, let's not ignore another Islamic aspect demonstrated by Saudi Arabia.
The Saudi Arabian Constitution is perhaps the most systematic in its tying
Saudi governance to Islamic law. In keeping with its Hanbali jurisprudence,
the Saudi Constitution states that Qur'an and the hadiths are to serve as
the basis of all law for the Saudi state and, moreover, that Saudi
government itself derives all of its governing authority from Qur'an and the
hadiths. In looking for guidance when seeking out concepts of justice,
equality and consultation, the Saudi Constitution limits such inquiries only
to what is found in Sharia.

The Saudi Constitution "strives for the achievement of the Arab and Islamic
nation" and looks to the safeguarding of "Islamic and Arab heritage."
However, Saudi Mujahideen (Sunni) have risen above the petty squabbles with
Persian Shi'ite (Iran) and joined together against the "Great Satan" America
(both the 1993 and 2001 World Trade Center attacks were undeniably Saudi
Mujahideen operations).

The Saudi charity the International Islamic Relief Organization, in 2003,
claimed to have dug 1,615 wells throughout the Middle East - but, it also
established 4,400 mosques and distributed millions of Sharia books and
pamphlets. The result has been the display, on television, of "good" young
Muslim children trained to see Jews as pigs and apes, screaming "Allah
Akbar" and dedicating themselves to jihad. Such "charitable organizations"
are cleverly spreading the ideals and tactics of Sharia via infiltration and
subversion.


c. Freelance Islam

Another formidable Islamic aspect is demonstrated by Egypt. The Egyptian
Constitution is straight-forward in stating that Islam is the official
religion of the state and that Sharia is the principal source of all law.
Egypt's Constitution also gives specific recognition to the "Arab Nation"
and goes so far as to proclaim that the government is to work to realize the
"comprehensive unity" of that Arab Nation. Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood
(founded by Hassan al-Banna in 1928) was once thought of as nothing more
than a fringe group. However, in recent years (with Saudi backing) the
Muslim Brotherhood's "takfir" ideology has undergone a surprising evolution
with member groups involved in both criminal activities and financial
institutions. The Muslim Brotherhood groups are dedicated to the motto:

"Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law.
Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."

An article in the Middle East Quarterly (Winter 2005) talks about their
advance on Europe:

Since the early 1960s, Muslim Brotherhood members and sympathizers have
slowly but steadily established a wide and well-organized network of
mosques, charities, and financial regulatory organizations such as the
AAIOFI. Their ultimate goal is not simply "to help Muslims be the best
citizens they can be", but rather to extend Islamic law throughout Europe
and the United States.

Dr. Ahmad Al-Rab'i, former Kuwaiti minister of education defines their
tactics:

"The beginnings of all of the religious terrorism that we are witnessing
today were in the Muslim Brotherhood's ideology of takfir [accusing other
Muslims of apostasy]. Sayyid Qutb's book 'Milestones' was the inspiration
and the guide for all of the takfir movements that came afterwards. The
founders of these violent groups were raised on the Muslim Brotherhood, and
those who worked with bin Laden and Al-Qa'ida went out under the mantle of
the Muslim Brotherhood."

Takfiri can be viewed as semi-aligned "free agents" who collaborate with
other jihad groups on an ad hoc basis, working toward the same overreaching
goal. Their doctrine postulates that not only the "secular leaders and their
entourage" are apostates, but so also is "the society as a whole" because it
was not fighting the "secular" government and had thus accepted rule by
non-Muslims: It has been interpreted to allow the worst imaginable
deviancies.

Takfiri, world-wide, are able to legitimize criminal activities, justifying
these activities, by appropriating the goods and property of "Infidels and
Apostates". Criminal activities like thievery, kidnapping and drug
trafficking are thus encouraged if one-fifth of the proceeds (Khums: Qur'an
8:41) are used to fund jihad (the path of Allah). Take for example:

"Mosul, 29 Feb. (AKI) - Paulos Faraj Rahho, the Chaldean bishop of the
northern Iraqi city of Mosul was kidnapped on Friday after he finished
celebrating the rite of the Via Crucis at a local church. Eyewitnesses said
that a group of armed men stopped the bishop as he was traveling in his car
and took him by force. The extravagant demand for $2.5 million appears to
indicate that their motives are political and religious, rather than only
financial." (Re: Adnkronos International, 2008.)

Takfir are also involved in theft from both private homes and mosques; they
are heavily engaged in drugs; armed robbery; in the theft, trafficking and
forging of documents; and in all aspects of logistical support for
Mujahideen (purchasing/smuggling weapons and sheltering/moving operatives
from conflict to conflict). The al-Qaeda/Takfir alliance is another example
of keeping with the current drive to put doctrinal differences aside and
federating and uniting all of Islam to fight the West.


d. National Islam

The term "National Islam" should be understood as an attempt to use Western
nation-state language to describe the Islamic concept of Ummah: A concept
that has no a real equivalent in the West. Discussions of Ummah, in Islamic
terms, end up opaque and are prone to be characterized in cultural mythology
or utopian terms.

The book "What Islam Is All About", by the widely regarded children's
educationalist Yahiya Emerick, gives a Junior High School level reality
check of the Ummah:

"The law of the land is the Sharia of Allah. The leader, or Khalifa, of
the Islamic nation implements Sharia in society. In the Islamic political
system, the leader of the political community, the Khalifa, is the head of
the whole Ummah".

Or, if you prefer:

"Oh ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger and those charged
with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer
it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day:
That is best, and most suitable for final determination." (Qur'an 4:59)

All Muslim nations, the Ummah, remain CONSTITUTIONALLY COMMITTED to BOTH the
Islamic requirement to recognize Sharia as the pre-eminent basis of all law,
and the authority of the Khalifa.

---

To comprehend today's Ummah, one need look no further than currently
existing Ummah-level organizations like the Arab League, the Supreme Islamic
Counsel, The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and the Muslim
World League - all of which have demonstrated an ability to speak with
authority. These organizations speak dogmatically of "extreme responses,"
and "grave consequences," and of events being "an insult to Islam," knowing
full well that they are speaking to, AND ORCHESTRATING, an understood
standard. Being attentive to their words, we have to acknowledge that they
know exactly what they are doing in light of the Islamic system that defines
their Islamic way of life. In other words, Ummah actions are not culturally
neutral.

On February 18, 2008, in Dakar (West Africa), at the opening of the OIC
Senior Officials Meeting, the Secretary General of the OIC, Prof. Ekmeleddin
Ihsanoglu, said the following:

".a very important event took place yesterday. Kosovo has finally declared
its independence after a long and determined struggle by its people. As we
rejoice this happy result, we declare our solidarity with and support to our
brothers and sisters there. The Islamic Ummah wishes them success in their
new battle awaiting them which is the building of a strong and prosperous
state capable of satisfying its people. There is no doubt that the
independence of Kosovo will be
an asset to the Muslim world by further enhancing the joint Islamic
action."

"The Islamic Ummah wishes them success", "building of a strong and
prosperous state," and "enhancing the joint Islamic action", clearly speak
to an understood standard.

---

Consider just one example of Ummah influence today: Sharia is quite clear
that any communication of information about Islam that would cause ANYONE,
Muslim or Infidel, to "question" Islam violates strict rules of "slander"
(Qur'an: 5:33). Ummah-level organizations (beholden to such a standard) have
earnestly insisted that "Islam has nothing to do with it" - even in the face
of evidence that would argue otherwise (hundreds of Mujahideen violently
reacting to silly cartoons for example). Because a slander concerning Islam
can easily amplify to an "insult" to Islam, those consequences can be
severe, again, even if the "insult" was factually accurate (re: the 2004
BRUTAL MURDER and VIOLENT MUSLIM INDICTMENT of Theo Van Gogh after his film
"Submission", which portrayed the violence against women in Islamic sects,
was shown on Dutch TV). You see, to outlaw "insults to Islam" amounts to an
attempt to place Mujahideen actions above scrutiny, for any study of their
motives and goals, insofar as they are rooted in Islamic texts and
teachings, will be ruled offensive and hence forbidden.

Orchestrating events to discredit ANY disclosure of legitimate associations
that lie beneath the surface of Islam is, indeed, a point of paramount
importance as regards Islam's infallibility.

Muslims, by coming together, world-wide, for common actions (and refraining
from noticing questionable associations,) are at the same time both
acknowledging, and submitting to, Ummah: In other words their common actions
are announcing publicly and officially their devotion to Islam.

"Islamabad, Pakistan, March 7, 2008: Hundreds of activists of
Jamaat-i-Islami and Imamia Students Organisation on Friday held protest
demonstrations against the re-production of sacrilegious caricatures in a
Danish newspaper and release of an 'anti-Islam' film in Holland. The
protesters were chanting slogans like 'Down with Danish and Dutch
governments' and 'Down with USA and Israel'. The [Pakistani] protesters
also torched the flags of Denmark and Israel." (Re: DAWN, Pakistan's English
language newspaper.)


e. Fanciful Islam

As regards western society's whimsical aspect of Islam, our President
publicly declared that victory will be achieved, not by defending our
constitution and America's way of life, but by levying "democracy for the
nations behind the attacks". Unfortunately, this annunciates an ambiguous
acumen of how Islamic sects really function. Victory, thus defined, requires
that the system-of-rule for Islamic governments (such as Iran, Saudi Arabia,
Egypt, Pakistan, Syria, Jordan, Afghanistan, etc.,) FORMALLY defy, directly
and categorically, their own constitutions and abandon the absolute and
centralized role of Sharia duties and obligations.

The implausibility of this "solution" is that a democratic way of life is
totally incompatible with Mohammad's teachings. Furthermore, has it not been
clearly demonstrated that even though Palestine's Islamic sect has
"democratically elected" Sharia, (i.e., Hamas); "democracy" has had no
affect whatsoever on stopping "terrorism" on western society (i.e., Israel).
The Hamas Charter states as follows: "Israel will exist until Islam will
obliterate it": Not Hamas; Islam.


Part 4 - Conclusion:

For almost 1,400 years a pagan Arab tribe lead by Muhammad ibn Abdullah has
successfully continued to forcibly convert or subjugate generations of human
beings into a primitive cult of politics, religion, and justice that is
literally based simply on what Muhammad ibn Abdullah willed it to be: After
all, he changed it at will and determined whether or not its application in
a particular case was suitable. Those that refuse: Die.

When we understand and acknowledge the expression and product of this
collection of primitive legends which are nevertheless rather infantile, we
understand and acknowledge that it is utterly useless to appeal to reason
and morality in dealing with it. Muslims are convinced that reason and
morality are on their side and are descended to the level of depravity where
they do not view Infidels as human beings whose murder is an inherently
immoral act. The fruits of Muhammad ibnu Abdullah's adage that "only
Muslims' blood is equal" (Qur'an 32.18, 45.21) is Islam's curse that cannot
be eradicated, short of an astonishing radical reform from within - a reform
far exceeding in boldness and scope those of Luther and Calvin. That seems
no more likely today than at any time in the past thirteen centuries. Face
it, fueled by the surge in petrol-dollars, the age-old struggle between
Western Civilization and Islam has again gathered force. We have had a long
period of submitting to Islam (dhimmitude) and our fellow Americans have
come to believe that this happy condition is the natural state of life -- it
is not and it must stop before Islam's final ultimatum.

Americas' liberty has clearly been earned, very often in war. History
demonstrates that negotiation with Islam has succeeded only when our side
exhibited overwhelming advantage and after we have clearly shown ourselves
to be not squeamish about using it. Today, justifying its use to the
electorate (used to thinking of politics as a process of reasonable
negotiation and compromise,) has to involve clearly proclaiming Islam's
moral myopia.

Today's electorate's lack of conviction to fully understand the possibility
of an Islamist-provoked catastrophe putting an end to America's comfortable
political and social order may well lead to the destruction of all of us.
Islam's jihad for world mastery is a traditional, indeed venerable, quest
that is far from over. Make no mistake, if we lose this war, our lives will
undoubtedly be impoverished and endangered.

Finally, it is not the objective of this compendium to get you to
acknowledge every one of the positions asserted but rather to convince you
to submit these assertions to your own intense analysis in furtherance of
generating your own acumen of the bitter foe we face. If you ignore the
ideological language being used to justify the suppression of our liberties,
if you ignore the historical, juridical, and theological structure of jihad
and its subjugation of religious minorities, then you understand nothing
about current events. This compendium will not succeed, however, if you, the
reader, out-source your acumen to "experts" willing to volunteer "their"
information UNDER THE SOLE CONDITION THAT IT BE ACCEPTED BOTH UNCRITICALLY
AND UNCONDITIONALLY. This is not only true because such an approach fails to
meet any intellectual pursuit, but also because it fails for the same reason
that it will lead to our defeat.

http://www.islam-watch.org/Others/Islam-Awakening-for-Infidel-World.htm




--
Give us back our countries: Stop the criminal multiculturalism ideology
enforced upon the white world against the will of its peoples, leading to
mass immigration from the third-world: Mul-cul + pol-corr = lethal mixture
for the white world. And give us back our freedom: Dismantle all
surveillance technology.