Colossal and Premeditated Abuse of Women in America by Muslims

By Cassandra (USA)
Author of Escape! From An Arab Marriage:
Horror Stories of Women Who Fled From Abusive Muslim Husbands

What is normal for one culture is not necessarily normal for another. Neither is what might be considered “normal” the equivalent of “sameness”. So, while any given culture promulgates practices that are “normal” for that specific culture, those same practices will not necessarily be the “same” or “normal” from culture to culture.

Individuals within a given culture are presented with, and conditioned from the time they are children to use, the societally preferred way to think, to do things, to manage their environment, and to perceive the world around them by their parents, by the schools they attend, by the religious precepts they are taught, and by the culture’s governing bodies. This conditioning is usually lifelong and consistently reinforced. As a result, these preferred ways seem “right”, especially when an individual finds himself in an environment unlike the one in which he grew up. To follow the ways of the culture he came from, to the extent that it is possible, helps him to feel that he is in control of his own situation and to maintain his own self-image. While he may make an effort to adapt to his new environment in order to wend his way successfully in society and will often fit in quite well as a result, he will always find the way in which he was brought up to be “the way it should be” and to be the most comfortable manner in which to live life. The traditional way to do things is considered the best way simply because it is the most familiar.

The above is especially true where relations with the opposite sex are concerned, especially in cultures with a long history. The Muslim male’s behavior patterns, no matter where the individual may be living, are prime examples.

* * * * *
The practices of degradation, exploitation, humiliation, subjugation, and physical abuse of women by Muslim men have been, and still are, time-honored traditions since the 7th century.

Muslims’ abominable treatment of the fairer sex was established by Muhammad and copied by his Beduoin Arab followers. They swept across Arabia and into neighboring countries, butchering the male inhabitants, looting and stealing their belongings, and taking their women and children captive to be raped, sodomized, forced into slavery, and shipped off on in droves to the harems and households of the wealthy men of the day.

Muhammad based his “right” to the above behavior on conveniently timed justifications which he passed off as “revelations” on the subject. Because he was ruthless in eliminating anyone who disagreed with him, his followers let him get away with this practice.

After Muhammad died, the bits of bone and leaf and other materials upon which Othman wrote his utterances (Muhammad was an illiterate trader), were organized by him into what are today called the suras of the Qur’an. They were arranged by length, the longest being first, rather than by chronology.

It is the suras concerning women in this collection of statements, and in the thousands of comments and analyses called the Hadith by Muslim jurists and philosophers based on the words of Muhammad, which began the institutionalization of relegating women to the status of non-persons to be used and exploited in any way Muslim males chose. Those jurists and philosophers who hated women took every opportunity to craft ever more limitations on how women were to be thought of, how they were to be treated, and what they were and were not allowed to do.

The following are “authorities” of that express the prevailing opinion of Muslim males from Muhammad’s time until today. Because it is forbidden to question or analyze the Qur’an and the Hadith, these statements, set forth 14 centuries ago, remain unchanged and written in stone to this day.

Sura al-Baqarah 2:23: Your women are a tilth to you to cultivate so go to your tilth as ye will, and send good deeds before you for your souls, and fear Allah, and know that ye will one day meet Him.

Sura an-Nisa 4:34: As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them, refuse to share their beds, and beat them.

Sura an-Nisa 4:24: And all married women are forbidden to you save those whom your right hand possesses (captives).

Sura al-Baqarah 2:222: They question thee concerning menstruation. Say it is an illness, so let women alone at such times and go not unto them till they are cleansed.

These are called in Islam the “golden rights and provisions for all Muslim women:”

The right to be treated as diseased and as sex toys
The Qur’an – 2:222; Sahahi Bukhari -3.31.172

The right to be used as a sowing field
The Qur’an – 2:223

The right to enjoy another husband after the third divorce from the previous husband (hilla marriage)
The Qur’an – 2:230; Sahih Bukhari – 8.73.107; Sahih Bukhari - 7.63.187

The right to engage in Islamic prostitution through Mut’a marriage
The Qur’an – 4:24;Sahih Bukhari – 8.3246, 3247, 3248;
Sahih Muslim – 8:3252, 8:3253, 8:3258

The right to be treated as impure or as a drunkard
The Qur’an – 4:32; The Qur’an – 16:92

To uphold the inalienable superiority of men over women and the right to be beaten by husbands—no questions asked
The Qur’an - 16:92; Sunaan Abu Dawad - 11.2142; Abdur Rahman – 1 DOI, the recognized authority on Sharia in his book, Women in Society”

To uphold the right of the husband to have four wives at any time and any number sex-slaves for all times; in case of objection by any wife, the husband can beat her
The Qur’an – 4:3; Sunan Abu Dawad – 30.2.13; The Qur’an – 23:5-6, 70:29-30

The right to be treated as a dog, a pig, a monkey, or an ass
Sahih Bukhari – 1.9.490, 493, 498 Sahih Muslim – 4.1039;
Sunaan Abu Dawad – 11.2155; Mishkat ul-Masabih – vol 2, p.114, Hadis no. 789

The right of ordinary women to be treated as crows
Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34

The right of a Muslimah to be stupid and to become a servant
Sahih Bukhari – 1.6.301; Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34

Muslim women forfeit their right to travel alone
Sahih Bukhari – 2.20.192, 193; Sahih Bukhari – 3.29.85, 4.52.250
Abdur Rahman 1 Doi, the recognized authority on Sharia in his book, “Women in Society

Women must keep their sexual organs ready at all times for the husband to enjoy them unhindered at any time—night or day
Sahih Bukhari – 4.54.460, 7.62.81; Sahih Muslim – 8.3367, 3368;
Ghazali – vol 2, p. 43

Women have the right to breast-feed an unrelated bearded man to make him haram (forbidden to her in marriage)
Sahih Muslim – 8.3424, 3425, 3426, 3427, 3428

Women are slaves (prisoners) and men are their masters (owners)
Ghazali – vol 2, p. 33; Hedaya – p. 47

Islamic marriage is about sex for money (prostitution)
Sunaan Abu Dawud – 11.2105, 2.11,2106; Milik’s Muwatta – 28.4.12;
Sunaan Abu Dawud – 11.2126; Hedaya – p. 44

If a woman wishes to get rid of her tyrannical husband she must refund the ‘sex money’ (Mahr) she received from him during marriage
Sahih Muslim – 7.63.197, 198, 199; Sunaan Abu Dawud – 12,2220;
Malik’s Muwatta – 29.10.32

Women have the right to undergo female circumcision (FGM)
Sunaan Abu Dawud – 41.5251

Women are slaves and infidels—they are not fit to join the moral police force
Ghazali – vol 2, p.186

A husband has the right to have sex with his wife by force (the right to rape)
Hedaya – p. 141

Women are cheap—you can have sex with a woman by simply teaching her how to recite a few verses from the Qur’an
Sahih Buhkari – 6.61.547, 548; Ghazali – vol 2, 31

Barren women should be confined at home—they are fit only to be in the house-prison
Ghazali – vol 2, p. 24; Sunaan Abu Dawud – 3.29.3911

A woman has no say when her husband decides to add more wives in his harem; she can’t even ask her husband to divorce her
Sahih Bukhari – p. 141

A wife has the right to decorate her husband when he goes out to have sex with his other wives
Sahih Bukhari – 1.5.270

A woman should never be selected or elected as a ruler
Sahih Bukhari – 5.59.709; Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34

Muslim women uphold the right of Islamic Jihadists to rape captive women right in front of their vanquished husbands
The Qur’an – 4:24; Sahih Muslim – 8.3371, 3373, 3374, 3377;
Sunaan Abu Dawud – 2.11.2150, 8.77.598

Women are devils; they are as dirty and filthy as private parts are
Sahih Muslim – 8.3240, 3242; Ghazali – vol 2, p. 26, vol 2, p. 43

Fear the company of women—they bring bad luck
Sahih Bukhari – 7.62.30, 31; Bukhari – 4.52.110, 111;
Malik’s Muwatta – 54.821, 22; Sahih Muslim – 36.6603. 6604;
Ghazali – vol 3, p. 86, 87

Women have very little intelligence—their own testimony is inadmissible in rape cases; in other matters their testimony is half to that of a man
The Qur’an – 4:14, 2:282; Sunaan Abu Dawud – 3.40.4662

Women are less human—they get one-third of blood money, no booty (for Jihad) for them
Malik’s Muwatta – 43.64b; Sahih Muslim – 19.4458

Women are worse than dead persons—they cannot follow a bier
Sahih Muslim – 4.2039

Men should always oppose women
Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34

Women are easily expendable—a divorced woman gets no maintenance or alimony from her ex-husband
Sahih Muslim – 9.3519, 3522

A woman has the right to stay at home solely to provide sex to her husband
Hedaya – p. 54

A woman becomes a harlot when she wears perfume
Mishkat al-Masabih – vol 2, p. 255

Muslims grow up with these unchallenged opinions which have engendered, for 1,400 years, the attitude that men are ordained to be “superior” and treated as ‘gods” in their own households. Women are considered “inferior” from birth.

It is drilled into the women that their bodies are shameful to the family, that the family honor rests on the purity of those shameful bodies, and they are to be obediently submissive to and subjugated by their male relatives at all times. Even the slightest suspicion of a woman’s contact with any unrelated male will earn her a death sentence in order to save the family “honor”.

Is it any wonder that Muslim men feel free to subject American women to the same depraved treatment? After all, abuse, degradation, and the killing of women are the “manly” things to do.

When you and I look as an American woman or girl, we see a person with beauty, intelligence, an open and lively expression which shows a joy of living on her face, and a sense of self-respect and dignity in the way that she carries herself. And we rejoice at what we see.

When a Muslim male looks at an American woman or girl, he sees an inferior being dressed in jeans and a color-coordinated top that reveals her figure and very likely bare arms, a mass of uncovered bright hair, and that she walks with pride, joy of living, self-respect, and self-assurance. He also observes that she has the nerve to look him straight in the eye, speak to him as though he is her equal, and that she does not hesitate to contradict him or tell him “No.” if she feels like it. And he hates her and her freedom deep inside even while all he can think about is raping her on the spot to “teach her a lesson about the proper place of women”. He also considers her a slut and a “whore” because she doesn’t scuttle around in a black shroud with nothing showing but her eyes.

Muslim males hate American women or any other women who have self-respect and are accomplished in their own right because they are anathema to Muslim males who desire to have all women degraded, terrified, psychologically traumatized, available for sex on command, and endlessly pregnant with their babies—that is, when they are not cooking or cleaning.

There is very little that gives Muslim males more pleasure than taking out their frustrations, inadequacies (which includes very small penises, according to a nurse), and lack of competence at just about everything on the women in their household who are not allowed to defend themselves. It makes the males feel like they are “in control” and that they are “real men”.

This would be especially true in the case of American women who would not hesitate to snicker and point the instant they observed the undersized fungus between the Muslims’ legs.

There is an added political element that makes abuse of American women by Muslims of even wider civilizational significance than was originally perceived because . . . Everything jihadi Muslims in particular do in the United States is to further the successful destruction of American freedoms and the replacement of our Constitution with their detestable, backward, woman-hating Sharia (Islamic law).

A key point in the Muslim war strategy to overthrow America by the year 2020 is Point 9 which states,

“Accelerate Islamic demographic growth. Muslim men must marry American women and Islamize them (10,000 annually). Then divorce them and remarry every five years—since one cannot have the Muslim legal permission to marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America”.

In other words, Muslim men coming to the United Sates are to be on the prowl for naïve and therefore gullible American women who haven’t a clue about what Muslim men normally do to women they have under their control (because the women are terrorized on a daily basis). When they find these women, they charm them and tell them everything every woman wants to hear about being the most wonderful creature in existence until the women finally believe them. At that point, the males pressure their prey every day to marry them and live happily ever after as soon as possible.

Only there is no “happily ever after”.

The instant the women become wives of these Muslims, their new husbands pressure them to sign citizenship and permanent residence papers for them so these guys can stay indefinitely, set up terrorist cells, and possibly bring their endlessly extended families here to become citizens as well. But they never tell their wives all of this.

The new husbands also begin criticizing the way their wives dress, think, and act. The wives are told that because they are now wives of Muslims, they need to convert to Islam, cover themselves in shrouds from head to foot (no hair can show!), obey their husbands from morning ‘till night and beyond, stop associating with their ‘infidel” families and friends, quit their jobs if they are working, stay home, and have babies. And if the wives tell their husbands where they can go, the husbands proceed to beat them up within an inch of their lives, threaten to kill them if they tell anyone what has been done to them, and then repeat the process almost on a daily basis until the wives are so terrified they cannot think straight, much less summon the courage to leave and go home to their birth families.

Somewhat later, the husbands will have all joint bank accounts put in their names only so that their wives have no operating funds. If their wives own property, these “flowers of Muslim society” will also terrorize them until the wives either sell their property or take out huge mortgages on it and hand the money over to their husbands which leaves the wives with nothing—no home, no money, and no assets to fall back on.

When they have children, a new chapter in the lives of American wives of Muslims begins. Once the children are no longer nursing and can get around on their own somewhat, the mothers of these children are at risk at any time of having their children abducted without warning and taken back to the Middle East where they will have no chance of ever seeing their mothers again, much less of ever being returned to them. Their mothers are left high and dry, desolate and bereft of their children for as long as they live.

And, to add even more misery to already abused lives, if any of these wives were forced to convert to Islam and leave it to return to their own religion, they will have to live in fear of being killed for their return to their original faith. Islamic law requires that anyone who leaves or rejects it is considered apostate and must be killed at the first opportunity by any ‘good Muslim’ at any time.

The Muslim husbands will return to the United States under other names, move to other parts of the country, establish new identities, and repeat the process at least five times as directed. If the husbands do not leave the States, they will demand that all children they father be raised as Muslim since this helps swell the Muslim population in this country, and they will fight the mothers for custody of these children for years until the children are 18 and free of such coercion.

Muslims figure that they are going to gain control of the United States one way or another. If they cannot do it by force of arms, they will try to do so by overwhelming population numbers accomplished by forced conversions and by breeding little Muslims.

American women do not matter to them except as tools to be used to gain citizenship, steal other people’s property, and to increase the Muslim population.

The solution? Stay as far away form Muslim men as possible and warn all your friends to do the same. Spread the word everywhere, as far and wide as possible. If they want to hear it from someone with personal experience, send them to me.

And, apparently, the largest cyberwarfare army as well

From China, With Love: Cyberwar the Next Big Threat to the U.S.?

THE BLOTTER : The White House is preparing a new initiative to protect against what it fears could be a crippling attack against the U.S. by computer, from overseas, and in particular, from China.

After a series of cabinet-level meetings this month at the White House, computer security analysts say the Bush administration is considering creating a new agency or cyberwar center to better protect the federal government's computers and find ways to help private companies and public utilities fend off computer attacks.

Those attacks, which could be just a few key strokes away, could shut down U.S. power grids and communication and banking systems, security analysts warn.

How could such a thing come to pass?

Oh and btw,

Chinese, US citizens charged with espionage in San Francisco

A Chinese national and a US citizen have been charged with conspiring to steal sensitive microchip designs capable of use in military technology, justice officials said Wednesday.

The US Attorney's office in northern California said Lee Lan and Ge Yuefei had been indicted on multiple charges of conspiracy to commit economic espionage and to steal trade secrets.

Lee, 42, a US citizen, and Ge, 34, a Chinese national, had sought to steal secrets from their employer, NetLogics Microsystems, and from the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation, a statement said.

The two men had set up a company for the purpose of developing and marketing products related to the stolen trade secrets, and had attempted to secure funding from the Chinese government, it added.

"The vigorous enforcement of intellectual property statutes increases the economic vitality of this region, and adds to the security of our nation as a whole," US attorney Scott Schools said

AND ANOTHER...

US Video Shows Hacker Hit on Power Grid

TED BRIDIS and EILEEN SULLIVAN

WASHINGTON (AP) - A government video shows the potential destruction caused by hackers seizing control of a crucial part of the U.S. electrical grid: an industrial turbine spinning wildly out of control until it becomes a smoking hulk and power shuts down.

The video, produced for the Homeland Security Department and obtained by The Associated Press on Wednesday, was marked "Official Use Only." It shows commands quietly triggered by simulated hackers having such a violent reaction that the enormous turbine shudders as pieces fly apart and it belches black-and-white smoke.

The video was produced for top U.S. policy makers by the Idaho National Laboratory, which has studied the little-understood risks to the specialized electronic equipment that operates power, water and chemical plants. Vice President Dick Cheney is among those who have watched the video, said one U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity because this official was not authorized to publicly discuss such high-level briefings.

"They've taken a theoretical attack and they've shown in a very demonstrable way the impact you can have using cyber means and cyber techniques against this type of infrastructure," said Amit Yoran, former U.S. cybersecurity chief for the Bush administration. Yoran is chief executive for NetWitness Corp., which sells sophisticated network monitoring software.

BACK TO MAIN STORY

Continue reading And, apparently, the largest cyberwarfare army as well.

An Observation And Some Speculation

Yesterday, LA Sunsett made the following comment, related to this posting about Ahmadinejad's appearance at Columbia University:

Although I applauded the castigating introduction by the President of the University, I found it interesting that the lectern had Columbia University covered up. Normally, they would have proudly displayed this emblem, but this time they did not.

Did anyone else notice this?

Check the podium in this video.

Because of LA Sunsett's comment, last night I took a look at Columbia University's logo. Click directly on the image below to enlarge it:


Do you see what I see? Three crosses. Could the presence of those crosses be the reason that Columbia University's logo was shrouded when Ahmadinejad spoke there?

Or maybe the usual logo on the podium is the following one:

The motto reads In lumine Tuo videbimus lumen, which is a paraphrase of "In Thy light shall we see light" (Psalm 36:9b).

Psalm 36:9 reads as follows in its entirety: "For with thee is the fountain of life: in thy light shall we see light."

You can read all of Psalm 36 HERE.

Now, perhaps I'm way off base with my suspicions as to why that podium at Columbia University was covered up a few days ago. Or maybe I'm not. You decide.

Women's Abuse Under Shari'a

THE FOLLOWING NEWS STORIES demonstrate the kind of world Islamic fundamentalists want to create for everyone. It is a world of limited freedoms, especially for women, and a world of strict codes of behavior (Shari'a law), enforced by the government.

Shari'a law mandates unbelievable abuse toward women, and because today, September 27th, bloggers around the world are blogging to end abuse, I thought I'd point out the biggest source of women's abuse in the world.

___________________________________________

Honor Killings In The Islamic States
Over 5000 women and girls are killed every year by family members in so-called 'honor killings', according to the UN. These crimes occur where cultures believe that a woman's unsanctioned sexual behavior brings such shame on the family that any female accused or suspected must be murdered. Reasons for these murders can be as trivial as talking to a man, or as innocent as suffering rape.

Syria: Two 16 Year-Olds Killed By Family In "Honor Killings"
And all perfectly legal, according to Syrian law, which states, "He who catches his wife, or one of his ascendents, descendents, or sister committing adultery or illegitimate sex acts with another" or in a "suspicious state" is exempt from penalty.

Women Burned Alive By Their Own Husbands
In the past few months 30 women have been victims of 'honour' killings in Iraqi Kurdistan, it is claimed. Many of the murders are disguised as suicides or accidents with burning oil. Numbers from local hospitals have been made public on April 5th and these show that some 246 women have been objects of these "fire accidents" in the first three months of 2007.

Rape Case In Saudi Arabia
When the teenager went to the police a few months ago to report she was gang-raped by seven men, she never imagined the judge would punish her — and that she would be sentenced to more lashes than one of her alleged rapists received.

Iran, July 2007: Woman Sentenced To Be Stoned To Death
She committed adultery, and her lover has already been stoned to death. She is supposed to be next, a legal sentence under the country's Islamic Penal Code.

The Women Of Islam
Women's rights are compromised the Koran, sura 4:34, that says men are the "overseers" of women. The verse goes on to say that the husband of an insubordinate wife should first admonish her, then leave her to sleep alone and finally beat her. Wife beating is so prevalent in the Muslim world that social workers who assist battered women in Egypt, for example, spend much of their time trying to convince victims that their husbands' violent acts are unacceptable. Beatings are not the worst of female suffering. Each year hundreds of Muslim women die in "honor killings" — murders by husbands or male relatives of women suspected of disobedience, usually a sexual indiscretion or marriage against the family's wishes.

Domestic Violence In Islamic States
In the Islamic world, women don't usually get treated fairly. In the Palestinian territories, for example, rapists are not prosecuted, while victims are forced to marry their assailants to "protect" the family's reputation. In Iran, women are stoned to death for adultery, while men can enter into legal "temporary marriages" if they want to have extra-marital sex.

Sidewalks Segregated By Sex
Saudi Arabia's religious police are insisting that authorities of Medina, one of Islam's holiest cities, should build separate sidewalks for women, the Kuwaiti Al-Qabas newspaper said Friday. The country's Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (CPVPV), tasked with enforcing Sharia law, believes men and women should not be allowed to mix on the streets of the Islam's second holiest place, where the Prophet Muhammad is buried.

May 17, 2007, Iran: Arrests on Immorality Charges
Police arrested 87 people in one raid and accused them of wearing clothes of the opposite sex. The police led those arrested into the street, stripped them to the waist and beat them until their backs and faces were bloody. Several suffered broken bones.

read more >>

Find out what an ordinary citizen can do to halt the spread of Shari'a.

Messages for Useful Infidels

Raymond Ibrahim: The Two Faces of Al Qaeda.

Soon after relocating to Washington in order to attend Georgetown, I landed an internship, which later evolved into a full-time position, at the Near East Section of the African and Middle Eastern Division of the Library of Congress, where thousands of new books, serials, and microfilms arrive yearly from the Arab world.

Numerous Arabic books dealing with Al Qaeda passed through my hands in this privileged position. A good number contained not only excerpts or quotes by Al Qaeda but entire treatises written by its members. Surprisingly, I came to discover that most of these had never been translated into English. Most significantly, however, the documents struck me as markedly different from the messages directed to the West, in both tone and (especially) content.

Why would Al Qaeda target the West and the umma in such a way?

They were theological treatises, revolving around what Islam commands Muslims to do vis-à-vis non-Muslims. The documents rarely made mention of all those things — Zionism, Bush's "Crusade," malnourished Iraqi children — that formed the core of Al Qaeda's messages to the West. Instead, they were filled with countless Koranic verses, hadiths (traditions attributed to the Prophet Muhammad), and the consensus and verdicts of Islam's most authoritative voices. The temporal and emotive language directed at the West was exchanged for the eternal language of Islam when directed at Muslims. Or, put another way, the language of "reciprocity" was exchanged for that of intolerant religious fanaticism. There was, in fact, scant mention of the words "West," "U.S.," or "Israel." All of those were encompassed by that one Arabic-Islamic word, "kufr" — "infidelity" — the regrettable state of being non-Muslim that must always be fought through "tongue and teeth."

One has to admit that Osama is politically shrewd in this matter. He knows that ignorant Westerners will agree with him on the Kyoto treaty, the "victim" status of the "other", and all such grievances of the month. He's also fully aware that most Muslims don't give a fig about the environment. So, he reels them in with the vile theological core of Islam: Jihad is the glorious duty of the umma.

All one has to do is to carefully read what he has said and realize that they hate us for who we are -- not for something we might have done.

Link via Done with Mirrors.

The answer Mr. WaPo Editorial Writer is : NOTHING. We can do nothing.

The Iranian president, who is not his country's principal leader, has managed to distract attention from a question more urgent than his rhetoric about the Holocaust and Israel. That is, what can now be done by the U.N. Security Council or Western governments to revive the flagging diplomatic campaign to stop Iran's nuclear program?

NADA, NOTHING, RIEN CHOSES, baby.

The USA, the West can do nothing.

The Iranians are convinced we will do nothing forceful, and that if we do we will lose since god is on their side. After all we are the enemy of the godly, Islam, peace, justice and the Iranian way. Say, isn't that what George Soros (and therefore Moveon, the Open Society Institute, and perhaps even their captive larger major national party) says?

The Mullahs have no interest in stopping. I don't know how this can be any more obvious.

Three Security Council resolutions and two rounds of sanctions have failed to prevent Iran from installing and testing thousands of centrifuges to enrich uranium. As France's new foreign minister has recognized, the danger is growing that the United States and its allies could face a choice between allowing Iran to acquire the capacity to build a nuclear weapon and going to war to prevent it.The only way to avoid facing that terrible decision is effective diplomacy -- that is, a mix of sanctions and incentives that will induce Mr. Ahmadinejad's superiors to suspend their race for a bomb. Yet the governments that claim to be most opposed to war are also standing in the way of more effective sanctions. Russia and China are resisting another U.N. resolution and instead have seized on a diversion supplied by the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei. Mr. El Baradei struck a separate deal to obtain by year's end Iran's answers to questions about its nuclear work.

The Iranians have complete control. In 1979 they claimed the USA can't do a damned thing (unless we were willing to killemall). Convenient when you can depend civility by your enemy, eh? And today, unless we are willing to go to war, there IS nothing we can do as well. War is questionable as well. But there are ways.

Maybe we can point out the last two homosexuals in Iran.

Worse, the Russians and Chinese have no intention of letting the UN act in the way of preventing nuclear proliferation, since they have OBVIOUSLY come to the galactically erroneous conclusion that what is bad for us is good for them. As I have pointed out many times, this means that clouds of Cesium 137 and Strontium 90 coming to ground over Siberia and Sinkiang must mean little to them.

I am sorry that WaPo is to be frustrated on this, truly. But so long as the Mullahs have decided it is more important to get nuclear weapons than avoid war, war cannot be avoided

Against Sharia

Reply from Edward Cline:

Sirs/Mesdames:

Thank you for replying to my “Islamophobia is Justified” commentary on Rule of Reason. It quite startled me that you not only praised the Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks and his colleagues, but also countered with your own bounty on the head of Abu Omar Al Baghdadi (obviously an alias of the contrivance of the coward who hides behind it).

I printed out your Muslims against Sharia Manifesto to read more closely and to compose some commentary on it. You are to be commended for taking the position on Sharia law that you have – that it must be completely abolished – and I agree with many of the points in the Manifesto, if not entirely with their style of expression, then in spirit, especially in regard to religious privacy, outdated practices, words and phrases, and especially with your endorsement of free expression of in terms of depicting Mohammad. I particularly liked your characterization of terrorists as “homicidal zombies’; a more accurate description of them I have not encountered elsewhere.

All that, together with your condemnation of Muslims who murder Muslims and non-Muslims in the name of Islam, certainly deserves recognition of your courage and honesty, and you have mine.

You posed a very interesting question in the Manifesto. After citing the possible (and likely) corruption of the Bible over the centuries (if not expedient inventions of great parts of it by the Church), you ask: “Could it be possible that the Koran itself was corrupted by Muslims over the last thirteen centuries?”

I’m sure you are aware of the abrogation issue concerning the Koran, and if you or Muslim scholars attempt to reform Islam, this will be a major and I think insurmountable hurdle. It is my understanding that the earlier sections of the Koran and Hadith reveal a sort of “kinder, gentler” Mohammad who did not call for war against all unbelievers. I would probably agree with some historians who aver that these sections were calculated merely to win him allies among non-Muslims during his campaign to conquer the Arabian Peninsula. There is no other accounting for their content other than that they are a form of taqiya. Later sections of the Koran abrogate or supplant the earlier ones, however, and these contain the homicidal and belligerent injunctions that fundamentalists cite to sanction jihad.

Another issue I think you or your scholars would face would be retaining Islam’s purported “peaceful” identity, so reforming it would prove to be a daunting but nevertheless insoluble and impossible task.

If you performed a theological and textual vivisection on the written corpus of the religion – that is, managed to “reform” it by excising all its objectionable injunctions, leaving only its more “benign” aspects – could you could still call it “Islam”? What would be left would be a collection of unconnected, disparate rules and sentiments with no system at all. It might be a more pacific creed, akin to the Amish or Quaker, but would it still retain the identity you wanted to preserve? I don’t think it would. You would need to call it by another name.

My final remarks concern faith. Muslims, like Christians, Jews and other religionists, have “faith” in the existence of a supreme being, and that what such a being commands or prescribes as moral is true and right. Of this, all religionists are “certain.”

Now, there is a crucial difference between faith and certainty. You exhibit certainty about the existence, for example, of your car keys, that the laws of cause and effect will enable you to unlock the car door with them, and that the laws of physics will cause them to start the engine. Your certainty is grounded in reality. You don’t even think about it, or need to think about it. Reality and your certainty about it are the given.

You exhibit faith when you believe, without so much as an iota of proof, in the existence of a supernatural being who has never appeared to anyone in history, but whose existence is merely asserted by priests, mullahs or other professional mystics. Apocryphal anecdotes about this being comprise all the sacred texts of all the religions, all of them claiming at some point that this being spoke to or appeared before or somehow manifested his existence to a variety of prophets, seers, saints and so on.

But all of these assertions are merely legends that offer no supporting evidence to substantiate them other than what long-dead, shadowy monks and the like recorded. A pile of unsubstantiated written assertions does not make a truth, no matter how many millions of words or thousands of pages are devoted to “proving” it. Nor do millions of people believing in a thing make it a fact or a truth.

But, you are asked (or told) to accept this “truth” on faith. In short, you are expected to treat the unreal as real. Further, you are not permitted to think about or doubt or question what you are expected to believe. You are not to apply reason to the subject. Even further, you are expected, under pain of sin or punishment, to conduct your life according to a chaos of arbitrary rules and injunctions – pacific or not – purportedly authored by a being – call him Allah, God, Siva, Brahma, Vishnu, or Wontonka – evidence of whose existence you have not a shred, except for the assertions or say-so of a hierarchy of witch doctors.

As you have probably concluded, I am an atheist. I was raised in the Catholic faith, but I could never take it seriously, because every one of its tenets contradicted the evidence of my senses and my nature as a thinking, volitional being, and my senses and my mind and my nature are engineered to deal with reality, not with some fictive other-worldly realm. Every human being is so engineered, without exception, and nature did the engineering or “designing,” not a ghost. If reason cannot be applied to an issue, in this instance, the existence of a supreme being, call him what you will, if it is excluded from any discussion of the subject, then I see no reason to concern myself with the question.

But, you might ask, as so many Christians and Jews do, what about the “first cause”? What about the “beginning”? The cosmologies of the various religions, including Islam’s, are ludicrous, fantastic and metaphysically impossible. I think that most men suffer from a kind of mental block, or absorb it from our semi-rational culture, that stops them from accepting the axiom that existence exists. Period. So they become nominally “faithful” or agnostic.

The concept of a “first cause” or “beginning” is a logical fallacy that beggars metaphysical validation, and is subject to an endless reductio ad absurdum argument. Did existence come into existence when Allah or God or Vishnu snapped his fingers or just “wished” it, and if existence didn’t exist before that, where did this being reside if matter and nothingness did not exist before he did, and where did he come from, and why is his supernatural realm always beyond human perception and comprehension? And so on. It is a matter deserving an essay far longer than my remarks here. Aristotle and Ayn Rand have done a better job of exploding that concept than I could ever attempt.

As a primitive form of philosophy, I do not think any religion is “great.” It has caused so much misery, suffering, horror and destruction in man’s history. And because it has attracted so much attention lately, I find Islam especially repellent for its degrading rituals, prohibitions and virulent anti-mindedness. I don’t like seeing men bowing to a ghost or throwing pebbles at a rock in defiance of another ghost.

Faith and reason are incompatible and antithetical means of living, but most men commit the error of compartmentalizing them to avoid facing the issue. They know that doing the hokey-pokey while reciting a doggerel won’t cause their car keys to work, but they’ll do much the same thing believing it will make a morality work.

Because your Manifesto exhibited a quantum of reason, as did your response to my Islamophobia commentary, I thought it earned a reciprocal reply, which is the best kind of respect I can offer. However, I do not wish to debate this subject at any length, but hope you accept my observations in the spirit in which they are offered.

Crossposted at The Dougout

Infidel Bloggers Alliance Babe Of The Week

Resurrecting a proud tradition here at IBA, I present to you this week's Babe of the Week. Truth of the matter is the lovely Gina Elise was Babe of the Year here last year.

Gina does a annual calendar called Pin-Ups For Vets. Not too naught, but naughty enough to set the imagination aflame on one of those long, hot Arabian nights over there in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Kuwait.

She can play with my ... uh, forget it.

She can squeeze my le ... Ah, like I said, forget it.

She can slide down my ... Uh, I forgot what I was gonna say. All the blood has suddenly rushed from my brain to my ...

Yeah, yeah, who am I kidding? I'm a married man.

Anyway, click here to buy Gina Elise's calender, and/or to donate some to Vets across America.

Hope to have her on the radio show again soon.

Breath Of The Beast: Bollinger And Ahmadinejad

From the great blog Breath of the Beast:


Columbia University’s invitation, uninvitation, reinvitation absurd appearance of Ahmadinejad, and the show of refreshing but futile hostility toward him by Lee Bollinger the president of the university, has now passed into history. I've been trying to give my thoughts shape for a few days now. The whole thing was so ill considered from the beginning and has come to such a chaotic and inconclusive end that I was originally going to call this post The Ghost of “Wrong Way” Corrigan, as a reference to the epic reversals of direction and Lee Bollinger’s blind launch into a foggy night and his journey in a direction opposite to his intention. But then I read about the original “wrong way” guy, Douglas Corrigan, and I realized that the comparison was invalid.

Douglas Wrong Way Corrigan
Thanks to Wikipedia I learned that it was most likely that Mr. Corrigan had gone exactly where he had intended to go. Corrigan, it seems, had been an accomplished flyer, aviation mechanic and navigator on that foggy day that he took off from New York city headed for California and wound up a few dozen hours later in Ireland. Although he never admitted it publicly, the probable real story was that there was no chance that his diversion was an accident. In fact, he was one of the crew who had helped prepare Lindbergh's Spirit of St. Louis for the flight to Paris. It seems that Corrigan had applied for permission to make a trans-Atlantic flight and been denied. So, although to end of his life he never admitted it, most knowledgable observers are of the opinion that when he left New York with a flight plan for California and ended up in Ireland, he was just doing what he wanted to do and daring anyone to punish him.

Columbia University President, Lee Bollinger
I was pretty surprised that Lee Bollinger put on a good account of his promised “sharp remarks” when he addressed them to Ahmadinejad this past Monday afternoon. Having heard his address at this past spring’s graduation ceremonies, I was expecting something far more equivocal. It is not news to me that his guy can thread the ideological needle. He is smart and he is good at what he does. I just didn’t expect hat he would come out as strongly.

I have to confess that when he began his remarks to the Iranian President by saying, “Today, I feel all the weight of the modern civilized world yearning to express the revulsion at what you stand for,” I was initially impressed and relieved. As I listened, though, it dawned on me that, satisfying as it was to have the well, spoken and charismatic Bollinger give this tin-pot despot a tongue lashing was, as I had myself predicted, not a victory at all.


Read the whole thing at Breath of the Beast.

Morning In America

Your Homeland Security Dept. at work. (Thanks to Michael):

Taken in Romulus, Michigan (See more photos here)
42°13' 19" N, 83°20' 58" W 42.221986-83.34958

From the photograher, Dean Shaddock:

This was captured as I collected my things from airport security (Detroit Metro Concourse A). I think of it as something like a Rorschach test. Is an elderly Catholic nun being frisked by a Muslim security agent the celebration of blind justice? Or is it simply an admission of absurdity?

Storm Track Infiltration: Islamism and Turkey – The First Shoe Drops?

Ever since a party with deep Islamic roots has won a landslide victory in Turkey's elections we’ve wondered if the Islamists would try to re-establish a fundamentalist Islamic culture in Turkey’s secular society. Are we starting to see the first shoe to drop?

Read the rest at The Gathering Storm.

China building world's largest navy as U.S. sea power is in 'absolute decline' - the USA's huge strategic challenges

WORLD TRIBUNE:TONY KORN -World War IV As Fourth Generation Warfare- a non military war ?Did you know that China could become the world's leading naval power by 2020? That's the verdict of military analyst Tony Corn. This may help explain why the U.S. Navy thinks a piece of paper called the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty provides some sort of protection for American forces on the high seas. It offers no such protection, of course, but it creates the impression that Navy leaders are doing something about our increasing weakness and vulnerability. However, like so many other U.N. treaties, including the 19 anti-terrorism treaties in effect on 9/11, this one offers a false sense of security. It will mask a dramatic decline in our military power.

Would it be boring of me to point out the Kellogg Briand Pact of 1928?

The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) will be the subject of a September 27 hearing before Senator Joe Biden's Foreign Relations Committee. All of the witnesses are pro-treaty. Another hearing is scheduled to follow and a quick Senate vote on the pact is then predicted. This process is better known as a railroad. Like the illegal alien amnesty bill, our Senate leaders, in cahoots with Bush Administration officials, are trying to rush it through. It remains to be seen whether the American people will wake up in time. Can we count on the media to blow the whistle? The betting here is that talk radio and the Internet will have to carry the load.

Angry white men on the radio again? I wonder how the ciritcal progressives will portray it this time?

Before the Senate rushes into an embrace of this treaty, it might be advisable for our media to tell the complete story of the decline of the U.S. Navy and attempt to explain how and why this has happened. But that would require that major news organizations pay less attention to O.J. and Britney. And that may be too much to ask.

Continue reading China building world's largest navy as U.S. sea power is in 'absolute decline' - the USA's huge strategic challenges.

These people have NO BUSINESS anchoring the news. Ernie Pyle is spinning in his grave

Katie Couric, on post 9/11 America, over Afghanistan:

"The whole culture of wearing flags on our lapel and saying 'we' when referring to the United States and, even the 'shock and awe' of the initial stages, it was just too jubilant and just a little uncomfortable.

And I remember feeling, when I was anchoring the 'Today' show, this inevitable march towards war and kind of feeling like,

'Will anybody put the brakes on this?'

And is this really being properly challenged by the right people? And I think, at the time, anyone who questioned the administration was considered unpatriotic and it was a very difficult position to be in."
__________________________________________________________

Deaths at Pearl Harbor: 2117
Deaths on 9/11: 2974

No doubt Ms. Couric feels a war of revenge and violence over 2100 deaths which killed 45 million people, a majority of whom were civilians, was uncalled for, and the parades and kisses in Times Squares in 1945, unjustified triumphalism

I am filled with disgust at this breathtaking and real revelation of what I had thought to be a gross exaggeration by doctrinaire 'rightists'

White Slavery In Europe: Then And Now?

The history of Islam is a history of imperialistic conquest. Clearly, Islamic civilization is not the only civilization in history which has resorted to outright imperialism, but they are the only major civilization who are doing so to this day.

Islamic conquest (imperialism) includes the treating of human beings as "booty". In other words, when Muslims take over, they do not merely take the land, they do not merely exploit the material resources of the people's whom they have conquered, but they also use the human beings as material resourses.

This includes the enslavement and subsequent rape of women and little girls and boys, and it includes using the men as labor. The history of the Islamic enslavement is well-established, and it continues to this day in the Sudan, where women and men are still being enslaved, raped, and used as labor by Muslim overlords.

History also tells us that Muslims actually made inroads into Europe which included the enslavement of white Europeans. Let me be clear that I do not consider the enslavement of whites to be any worse than the enslavement of blacks.

However, I do acknowledge the reality that many white people would be shocked by the facts of history with regards to white slavery. So, I present them here, hoping to shock people into the realization that Muslims can and will force this situation again, if we allow them to do so.

(With thanks to Najistani and Anonymous)

From The Guardian:


New book reopens old arguments about slave raids on Europe
US scholar claims more than 1m people were captured by African pirates
Rory Carroll, Africa correspondent
Thursday March 11, 2004

North African pirates abducted and enslaved more than 1 million Europeans between 1530 and 1780 in a series of raids which depopulated coastal towns from Sicily to Cornwall, according to new research.

Thousands of white Christians were seized every year to work as galley slaves, labourers and concubines for Muslim overlords in what is today Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria and Libya, it is claimed.

Scholars have long known of the slave raids on Europe. But American historian Robert Davis has calculated that the total number captured - although small compared with the 12 million Africans shipped to the Americas in later years - was far higher than previously recognised.

His new book, Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800, concluded that 1 million to 1.25 million ended up in bondage.

Prof Davis's unorthodox methodology split historians over whether his estimates were plausible but they welcomed any attempt to fill a gap in the little-known story of Africans subjugating Europeans.

By collating different sources of information from Europe over three centuries, the University of Ohio professor has painted a picture of a continent at the mercy of pirates from the Barbary Coast, known as corsairs, who sailed in lateen-rigged xebecs and oared galleys.

Villages and towns on the coast of Italy, Spain, Portugal and France were hardest hit but the raiders also seized people in Britain, Ireland and Iceland. According to one account they even captured 130 American seamen from ships that they boarded in the Atlantic and Mediterranean between 1785 and 1793.


Read the whole thing.

Now, the question this post poses is, what reason do we have to believe that this could happen again?

The answer is simple: It is happening again.

Muslims are enslaving blacks in the Sudan. So, what would make any sane, decent, and reasonable human being believe that Muslims would not, in turn, also and once again enslave white Europeans.

The only thing that could lead one to deny this reality is a strange kind of ethnocentric denial; as in, we're simply too good for that.

Do not believe such thoughts for a second. Either we fight for our freedom, or our freedom will surely be taken away from us.

If history shows something can happen, there is never reason to believe that it can not happen again. And, if current history shows that it is happening to one race of people, then there is no reason, other than racist thinking itself, to believe that it can not happen to another race of people.

So, what do you say, my friends? Are you up for becoming a slave, or are we all going to band together and make sure this doesn't happen again?

Oh, by the way, I believe it is happening again. Witness the photo and the story of the little girl Madeleine McCann:


A photo has surfaced of a little blonde girl incongruously perched on the back of some Moroccan woman (in straw hat) in the town of Zinat near Tangiers. Interpol believe that the child could be missing four-year-old Madeleine McCann who disappeared back in May on a family in Portugal. (Read more here)

Why would someone go to all the trouble to abduct a high profile child like little Maddie with all the publicity it was bound to attract? As stories begin to emerge of torture allegations against the Portuguese police to extract confessions from other mothers in similar cases, you have to wonder if there is a racket going on involving the Portuguese police and perhaps a white slave trade ring.

Slavery is alive and kicking in the modern world. This is real slavery where people are abducted and used against their will.


So, I ask again, what do you say, my friends? Are you up for becoming a slave, or are we all going to band together and make sure that history does not repeat itself?

Rewriting History

According to an article in the September 26, 2007 edition of Telegraph.co.uk, other races and cultures should be included in historical accounts, starting with the role played by the Turks in the defeat of the Spanish Armada.

Read the rest at Always On Watch.