“Last week, four Southern Baptists were arrested for plotting to blow up St Patrick’s Cathedral. The men, who became born-again Christians in prison, wanted to kill and terrorize Catholics.”

If that was the opening paragraph in a newspaper story you were reading, your gut reaction would be – huh? Baptists don’t do things like that in the name of their faith. Neither do Catholics, Presbyterians, Seventh Day Adventists or Mormons.

But when we read the headline in a May 21^st New York Times’ story — “4 Accused of Bombing Plot at Bronx Synagogues” — it was ho-hum stuff.

It wasn’t exactly a revelation when The Times informed us, in the 9^th paragraph, “They are all Muslims, a law enforcement official said” – just in case you thought the conspiracy involved Episcopalians, Rotarians or the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks.

If you hear about a hijacking, suicide bombing, sniper attack or the beheading of a hostage anywhere in the world, your first reaction is: a Muslim did it. Why? Because 9 times out of 10 a Muslim did do it.

In the case of The Newburgh Four, here’s what we know:

• Their names are David “Daoud” Williams, James “Abdul Rahman” Cromitie, Onta “Hamza” Williams and Laguerre “Amin” Payen.  At least two were prison-converts to the Big Peaceful.
• They planned to blow up two synagogues with what they thought was C-4 explosives, supplied by the FBI.
• They wanted to obtain Stinger missiles to shoot down military aircraft.
• As Assistant US Attorney Eric Snyder stated when the defendants were arraigned in federal court, “These are people who were eager to bring death to Jews and the Jewish community.”
• According to an informant, Cromitie said of the Jewish people: “I hate those motherf—–s, those f—ing Jewish bastards. I would like to get a synagogue.” Also, while scoping out a Jewish community center as a potential target, Cromitie is alleged to have said of nearby pedestrians that if he had a gun at the time, he would “shoot each one in the head.”

If Islam is such a “religion of peace,” why do they have to keep reminding us? Nobody’s running around saying “Christianity is a religion of peace” or “Judaism is a religion of peace” – because neither proposition is in doubt.

Yet, George W. Bush felt compelled to regularly reassure us (especially after 9/11) that Islam was about as peaceful as a religion can get.

Speaking at a 2005 dinner marking the end of Ramadan, Bush’s Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, said Mohammedanism was “the religion of love and peace.” For Condi, being peaceful wasn’t enough. Islam had to be warm and cuddly too. “We in America know the benevolence that is at the heart of Islam,” Rice absurdly remarked. “We’ve seen it in many ways” –including in glorious Technicolor, in the video of the decapitation of Daniel Pearl.

President Obama boasts of his Muslim relations and his upbringing in Jakarta. In a speech to the Turkish parliament during his first trip abroad  as president, Barack Hussein Obama assured the Muslin world that America “will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country.”

When was the last time a U.S. president conveyed deep appreciation for the Christian faith?

So, Islam is a religion of peace and love, as well as a benefactor of humanity. If this is intuitively obvious, why do they have to keep saying it? Perhaps because the vision of a compassionate Islam is so often obscured by explosions, flying body parts, collapsing skyscrapers, rolling heads, and rabid imams preaching hate the Jews, hate the Christians, hate America, hate the West, etc.

If Islam is so gentle and kindly, why does it have such appeal for the most savage and sadistic element in our society – those filled with resentment and rage, who like to hurt people (a lot)?

Question: Under what circumstances is an infidel most likely to convert to Islam:

1. While volunteering at a hospice or homeless shelter?

2. While working at a day-care center?

3.While planting flowers and singing Kumbaya at a peace rally? or

4. While incarcerated at a state or federal prison?

What’s that? Someone told you, didn’t they?

Conversions behind bars are so common that Mitch Silber, chief NYPD intelligence analyst, says cops have a name for it “Prislam.” Chuck Colson of The Prison Fellowship Ministries was warning us of the coming jailhouse jihad almost a decade ago.

More than 2 million are imprisoned in the United States, of which an estimated 6% are members of the religion of rest-in-peace. Sometimes their real-world experience at hurting people (a lot) is put to good use as newly-minted Muslims.

Have you ever noticed how converts to a faith, or those with a newfound commitment to the religion of their birth, tend to be, well – nicer. Born-again Christians – including those who come from dysfunctional backgrounds – often exemplify the New Testament admonition to be “salt and light,” likewise committed Catholics and those who’ve moved from a secular Jewish identity to orthodoxy.

Islam is the exception.

By all accounts, John Walker Lindh, born into an upper-middle class family, was as normal as a child of broken home in Marin County, California can get.  Then, at age 16, he converted to Islam and began calling himself Suleyman al-Faris.

In 1998, at age 17, John/Suleyman traveled to Yemen, to study Arabic so he could read the Koran in its original language. From there, the religion-of-peacenik went to Pakistan to study at a madrassa. The spring of 2001 found him at an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan.

When captured by U.S. forces in November 2001, Lindh was fighting for the blissful rule of the Taliban. Now, he’s serving a 20-year sentence at the Federal Correctional Institution in Terre Haute, Indiana, and probably proselytizing the other inmates, when he isn’t studying his peace-manual.

Other converts to Islam, unlikely to be mistaken for Mister Rogers, include:

• John Muhammad – Born John Allen Williams, he converted to Islam in 1987. Mr. Prophet  was a member of the Nation of Islam for a time and reportedly provided security for Farrakhan’s 1995 “Million Man March.” Along with his boy companion, Lee Boyd Malvo, Muhammad shot and killed 16 people in 7 states in the fall of 2002. In custody, Muhammad told authorities that he was following in the footsteps of his idol, Osama bin Laden. He’s currently on death row in Virginia.
• Jose Padilla (AKA: Abdullah Al Muhajir) – Joining a Puerto Rican street gang as a teen, Padilla compiled an impressive  juvenile and adult rap sheet, including attempted theft, aggravated assault and unlawful weapons possession. In 1998, Padilla became a jihadi tourist, traveling to Egypt, Pakistan and Afghanistan in search of the peace only Islam can bring. Padilla was trained at the camp of an al Qaeda affiliate in Afghanistan in 2000. Bin Laden deputy Abu Zubaydah sent Padilla back to the United States with $20,000 and an elaborate scheme to set off a radioactive “dirty bomb.” Apprehended, he’s now serving the remainder of a 17-year sentence.
• Richard Reid (Aka: Abdul Raheem, AKA: the Thom McAnn of terrorists) – Born in London the son of a Jamaican immigrant, he spent time in a number of British prisons, where he converted to the ROP. As a member of al Qaeda, Reid was assigned to blow up American Airlines Flight 63, en route from Paris to Miami, by igniting explosives hidden in his shoes. In this religious duty, Reid/Raheem failed, and is now serving a life sentence in the U.S.
• Sgt. Hasan Akbar – While stationed at Camp Pennsylvania in Kuwait (preparing to deploy to Iraq), on March 23, 2003, Akbar attacked other soldiers with grenades and a rifle, killing two officers and wounding 14 servicemen. His diary revealed a man of all-consuming hatred. (“Destroying America is my greatest goal.”) Prior to the murders, Akbar confessed in his journal “I will have to decide to kill my Muslim brothers fighting for Saddam Hussein or my battle buddies.” It didn’t take much thought. A military court convicted Akbar of the murders and sentenced him to death. He temporarily resides at Ft. Leavenworth, on his way to a rendezvous with 72 virgins.

The apologists for Islam (Crescent-kissers) respond that these ex-cons and psychos are no more representative of Islam than Bernie Madoff is of Jewish financiers or Ted Haggard (former president of the National Association of Evangelicals, who had a relationship with a gay hooker) is of Christian leaders.

This is a plausible argument, at first blush. But if the Johnny jihadists, snipers, and homicidal anti-Semites got Islam wrong, who gets it right?

How about the Muslim-American groups which, in a rare show of empathy, rushed to condemn the Newburgh Four, including the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Islamic Society of North America and the Council on American –Islamic Relations?

Putting aside the fact that each of these groups has questionable connections, other than paying lip-service, what are they actually doing to fight terrorism?

Robert Spencer, the editor of Jihad Watch, muses: “One might wonder why Muslim groups don’t become more proactive, and institute programs in mosques and Islamic schools in the West (as well as in the Islamic world) to teach Muslims why the views of Osama bin Laden et al are wrong, and how true Islam eschews violence against and hatred of unbelievers. Yet CAIR, ISNA, MPAC and the rest have never instituted or even called for such a program. They are ready with the condemnations after arrests or explosions, but why wait passively? Why not head off jihadist activity by Muslims”? This is a rhetorical question.

Who gets Islam right? How about a Palestinian religious figure who took the bold move of attending the Second Congress of Imams and Rabbis for Peace in 2008? Attendees vowed to “condemn any negative representation” of each others religions.

For Zaid Abu Alhaj that pledge lasted about a year. On April 3, 2009, he gave a sermon on Al-Aqsa TV which included the following prediction: “The time will come, by Allah’s will, when their property will be destroyed and their children will be exterminated, and no Jew or Zionist will be left on the face of the earth.”

Oh, fine, this crazy Palestinian cleric probably also doesn’t understand the religion he’s practiced his entire life either. How about Sheikh Abdul Rahman Al Sudais, who – as imam of Mecca’s Grand Mosque — holds the most prestigious Moslem pulpit in the world?

In a 2003 sermon, Al Sudais prayed that Allah would “terminate” the Jews, who he called “the scum of humanity, the rats of the world, prophet killers … pigs and monkeys,” also “evil,” “tyrannical,” ‘treacherous,” and part of a “continuum of deceit.”

Cairo’s Al-Azhar University is the Vatican of the Muslim world. Is it reasonable to suppose that Sheik Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, grand imam of Al-Azhar since 1996, knows a thing or two about Islam?

The Shriek tells us the Koran condemns Jews for “their own particular degenerate characteristics” including “corrupting” the words of Allah, “consuming the people’s wealth frivolously, refusal to distance themselves from the evil they do, and other ugly characteristics, caused by their deep-rooted lasciviousness.” But, there is hope. “All Jews are not the same. The good ones become Muslims, the bad ones do not.”

You’d think the Muslim chaplain at Harvard could put a happy face on his faith.

According to the April 14 Harvard Crimson, in an e-mail response to a query from a Muslim student, Taha Abdul-Basser wrote that there was “great wisdom (hikma) associated with the established and preserved position (capital punishment (for apostates)) and so, even if it makes some uncomfortable in the face of the hegemonic modern human rights discourse, one should not dismiss it out of hand.” Thankfully, the Islamic world isn’t troubled by that darned hegemonic modern human rights discourse.

Harvard’s official chaplain later explained that he was merely expressing a position that “I do not hold … personally” — but which contains “great wisdom” and which “one should not dismiss out of hand.”

What is the West’s response to the Rampaging Religion of Peace?

As Obama-appointed Director of the Department of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano doesn’t have time to watch the jailhouse jihadists. She’s too busy staking out pro-life demonstrations, NRA conventions and American Legion meetings. This is where the real danger to our national security lies, Nepalitano informed us in the DHS report “Rightwing Extremism: Radicalization and Recruitment,” issued on April 7.

Nepalitano’s counterpart in the United Kingdom, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, focuses on fighting evil Islamaphobes – witness her decision to ban the likes of Dutch parliamentarian and “Fitna” producer Geert Wilders and talk-show host Michael Savage from the shores of Albion.

So PC is she that Smith wants British officials to begin referring to Islamic terrorism as “anti-Islamic activity.” Not only are terrorists’ acts no reflection on Islam, they’re giving the religion of peace a bad name!

Smith knows Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. How? Muslims told her so. “As so many Muslims in the U.K. and across the world have pointed out, there is nothing Islamic about the wish to terrorize, nothing Islamic about plotting terror, pain and grief.” If I was a used-car salesman, I’d pray Smith would wander onto my lot.

In the U.K. each bombing and kill-the-infidels sermon becomes an indoctrination moment to assure the credulous that to call attention to slaughter committed in the name of Islam and condoned by the words of Islam (contained in the Koran), slanders Islam. Oh for the days when Labor governments only wanted to destroy Britain’s economy, not the nation itself.

Nepalitano prefers the designation “man-made disasters” to terrorism.

Obama is too busy fighting a war on capitalism and trying to close down Guantanamo (and mainstream the jihadists into the U.S. prison population) to pay much attention to an ideology backed by guns and bombs and bent on world domination.

The day is approaching when TV and radio broadcasts will be interrupted every 15 minutes with the message “Islam is – you betcha – a religion of peace.” Otherwise, we’re bound to forget.

“The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores. And that includes nearly 7 million American Muslims in our country today who, by the way, enjoy incomes and educational levels that are higher than the American average.” – President Barack Hussein Obama, The University of Cairo, June, 2009

Is President Obama correct in his claim that America is now one of the world’s leading Islamic countries with a population of 7 million Muslims?

Ibrahim Hooper, president of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), believes this figure is correct. He bases this conclusion on data extrapolated from his agency’s study of mosque attendance. This data, he says, supports the President’s contention that Islam has eclipsed Judaism to become America’s second largest religion.

Mr. Hooper maintains he has been an eyewitness to the changing religious landscape. “When I came to the D.C. community ten years ago,” the CAIR director says, “the mosque that I attend in Sterling, Virginia held only one Friday prayer service for a handful of people.” Now, he adds, the mosque has built a large new facility, conducts multiple Friday services, and operates several satellite locations.

However, Mr. Hooper adds, “no one really knows the exact figure.”

The Problem with Projections

Why this lack of pertinent demographic data?

One reason, according to Dr. James Dretke, executive director of the Zwemer Institute, “is the fact that Muslims do not join mosques as Christians join churches, so it is impossible to count them from membership rolls.”

Another reason resides with the U.S. Census Bureau.

For the past 50 years the United States government (unlike some countries) has not included questions about religious affiliation in its census.

In accordance with the new census forms, Americans are required, by law, to state their race; their means of getting to work, their income; their mortgage or rent payments; and their mental and physical condition. They are even compelled to inform Uncle Sam if their homes have a flush toilet and a refrigerator. But they are not asked their religious affiliation, since such an inquiry would violate their civil rights.

And so, the number of Muslims who now reside in the country remains a matter of debate.

Is Obama’s Figure Inflated?

Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, says that the claim that Muslims in the U.S. now number 7 million is grossly inflated.

“Study after study,” Mr. Pipes contends, “has found that demographic figure about three times too high.”

But the studies which Mr. Pipes uses to support his argument were conducted almost a decade ago. His first reference is to The American Religious Identification Survey which was carried out by the Graduate Center of the City University of New York in 2001. It polled more than 50,000 people and estimated the total American Muslim population to be 1.8 million. The second study, sponsored by the American Jewish Committee, placed the Muslim population at 1,886,000 in 2000.

These early studies, which prop up the contentions of Mr. Pipes, were widely contested.

The 2000 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches estimated there were 3,900,000 Muslims in the U.S. at that time, while a Zogby International Survey, released in August 2000, placed the number of American Muslims at 8 million.

What is the right number?

Recent Independent Surveys

Several recent studies show that Muslims may number considerably more than 7 million in the U.S. Surveys conducted by The American Society of Psychiatrists and Cornell University estimate the number of U.S. Muslims somewhere between 8 to 10 million.

These findings have been called into question by the Pew Research Center which holds that Islamic population of America is 2.35 million.

But there is a serious problem with this estimate.

Pew researchers admit that the study does not take into account immigrant and poor black Muslims. What’s more, the Pew telephone survey was conducted strictly with landlines and failed to take into account the fact that nearly 50% of Americans and age 18-35 and nearly 100% of the illegal immigrants use cell phones exclusively.

Many people in the know, including municipal police officers, accept the higher estimates. Detective David Casey of the New York Police Department, for example, states that there are more than a million Muslims within the five boroughs of New York.

The Muslim Presence

If CAIR is correct in its projections based on mosque attendance, then America’s present Islamic population may well exceed 12 million.

In 1990, America housed less than 600 mosques. By 2000, that number had climbed to 1,400. This figure failed to reflect the Muslim houses of worship that had sprouted up in low-rent storefronts, abandoned warehouses, Middle Eastern social clubs, private residences, college campuses, and second story business space.

What’s the exact number of Muslims in America?

No one knows.

New Religious Phenomenon

But no one can doubt the widespread presence of Islam throughout America – a phenomenon that has taken place in a relatively short span of time.

In 1976, Leo Rosten’s published his sixth edition of Religions of America. It represented an exhaustive compilation of statistical information concerning every major and minor body of believers in the country. Entire chapters were devoted to such Protestant denominations as the Disciples of Christ, the 7th Day Adventists, the Unitarian Universalists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the various manifestations of Presbyterianism, Lutheranism, and Methodism.

The study provided abundant data concerning the three forms of Judaism (Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform) and a lengthy discussion about the liturgical and doctrinal differences between Greek Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. It even contained facts and figures concerning the five percent of Americans who claimed to be Agnostic.

But Rosten’s exhaustive work contained no mention of Islam, not even as a footnote. This was not an oversight. The Muslims in America were statistically insignificant, numbering less than 10,000.

As little as a decade ago, Americans could walk through crowded airports without encountering a woman in a burka or a student in a shalwat kameez. Words such as jihad, imam, Sunni, and Shiite were not in common usage. Many major cities contained no Islamic bookstores or clothing shops featuring designer Muslim headdresses. And vendors selling halal hotdogs were non-existent on the street corners of midtown Manhattan.

Now Muslims have managed to infiltrate all aspects of American life, including the prison system, the military, the highest recesses of academia and college administration, and every branch government.

And, no less than their counterparts in Europe, American Muslims are making demands that are being met. Muslim special agents in the FBI insist upon separate potties from “infidel agents;” Muslim teachers in public schools, while denigrating Christianity, promote Islam by having their students recite prayers and verses from the Koran on prayer rugs; and Muslim women call for the expulsion of all men, including male lifeguards, from public pools and parks at certain hours of the day so that they could swim and stroll without fear of any violation to their sense of modesty.

Other developments have been infinitely more disturbing, including the perpetuation of Islamic attacks on American soil – the killings by the Beltway snipers, the “honor killings” in Scottsdale and Louisville, the attack on the Jewish Federation Center in Seattle, the shooting rampage at a mall in Salt Lake City, and the murder this month of an American soldier at an Army recruiting station in Little Rock, Arkansas. The fact that such crimes were accompanied with cries of “Allahu Akhbar” gained scant mention in the press.

Clinton Recognizes Islam’s Sudden Ascent

In recognition that Islam has become the country’s second largest religion, Former President Bill Clinton recently told an Arab-American audience of 1,000 people last Saturday that the U.S. is no longer just a black-white country, nor a country that is dominated by Christians and a powerful Jewish minority, given the growing numbers of Muslims.

Mr. Clinton said that by 2050 America will no longer have a majority of people with European heritage, adding that “this is a very positive thing.”

ONE LAST NOTE

There are currently 5.128 million Jews in America – a substantially lower amount than the President’s estimate of Muslims.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Paul L. Williams is the author of The Day of Islam: The Annihilation of America and the Western World, The Al Qaeda Connection, and other best-selling books. He is a frequent guest on such national news networks as ABC News, CBS News, Fox News, MSNBC, and NPR. Visit his website at http://thelastcrusade.org.

The way in which Iran has disappeared from media view is, although predictable, still dismaying. With the exception of small flurries of interest over the seizure and release of British embassy staff and the tit-for-tat expulsions of diplomats, the people’s revolution has pretty well dropped out of sight. This is for two main reasons, one shocking and the other just, well, dispiriting. The shocking one is that the “progressive” Western intelligentsia, who don’t stop hollering and stamping their feet and marching and petitioning and boycotting over the perceived crimes by America or Israel (“torture,” “settlements,” “rendition,” “checkpoints,” “warmongering,” “repression”) are mute over the brutal crackdown that has been going on in Iran these past three weeks, and totally indifferent to the desperate struggle for freedom that is being waged. Dispiriting because the Western media think the story is over, the revolution has fizzled out, and there wasn’t even a leader or a cause to support anyway because Mousavi just represents more of the same old regime.

Well as far as I can see it has not stopped. Yes, there’s been a crackdown and the enormous demonstrations have stopped. But it is far from over. Protests are still going on and are still being put down with brutality, as these pictures taken three days ago show. Hundreds of people have either been killed or injured or taken into custody. See here and here, for example.

As I have said over and over again, there are two uprisings going on. There’s Mousavi and the internal challenge to the regime amongst the clergy, who remain committed to the Islamic Revolution but differ about the details; and then there are the people being clubbed down on the streets, who want freedom and democracy. Supporting them is surely a no-brainer. Their push for freedom might work – in which case Iran would cease to be a mortal threat to the world. It if didn’t, the world would be no worse off.

The belief that supporting them would exacerbate the problem makes no sense. Who would it make hate us? The regime? They could not hate us more than they already do. Western governments are fearful that if they backed the protesters the regime would say the protests were being orchestrated by the West. But they have been saying precisely that from the get-go anyway. And just who do our fearful leaders think might be incited against the west by such claims? Those who back the regime are driven by deranged conspiracy theories about Western influence anyway; and those who aren’t are the protesters, who are the last people to be taken in by such nonsense.

Then there’s the argument that support is pointless because the regime has won. Those who know the country say this is far from the case. There is now a power struggle going on amongst the ayatollahs and it is far from clear how this will end. According to Amir Taheri, this fight will have one of two outcomes: an end to the pretence of democracy, with the theocratic regime embedding itself as an “imamate;” or else an end to theocracy and its replacement by a true democracy. Taheri also suggests that as a result of the continuing protests even the fearsome security apparatus may be starting to splinter:

The regime has deployed 100,000 men from the paramilitary Basij to control Tehran and eight other major cities. But such a build-up cannot be sustained. There is the risk of the fighters siding with the protesters. Hussein Taleb, the commander-in- chief of the Basij, said yesterday that ‘large numbers of individuals dressed as members of the Basij’ have been arrested after they took part in protest marches. The Basij, mostly teenagers from the provinces, are vulnerable to ‘seduction’: people invite them into their homes, give them food and soft drinks, and ask them to swap sides. ‘Exposed to this kind of brainwashing, some might succumb to temptation,’ Taleb admits.

If the Basij disintegrates, the regime could play its trump card: the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. However, the IRGC is also split, with an unknown portion of it sympathetic to the opposition. Worse still from the regime’s point of view, the IRGC if unleashed may be tempted to grab power for itself rather than protecting the mullahs. The unknown is the intention of the millions who remain angry at the regime. To judge by the continuing sporadic demonstrations, and chants of ‘Death to the dictator!’ shouted from rooftops, the genie appears unwilling to return to the bottle.

Desperate at the refusal by the West to support freedom against tyranny in Iran, the Iranian writer Amil Imani has now launched a petition. Reading it, I was struck by the list of actions Imani wants the West to take against the regime. Those who wring their hands and suggest that there is no alternative to war other than appeasement should read this list:

* Enforce the UN sanctions by inspecting every vessel headed for Iranian ports to make sure they are not ferrying prohibited material. Other than vessels known to be carrying foodstuff and medicine, each ship should be subjected to elaborate inspection.

* Establish an Iran Assistance Fund, from Iran’s frozen assets as well as contributions from peace-loving individuals and organizations, to assist Iranian families during the hardship that the sanctions may create.

* Persuade Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, and other Persian Gulf oil producers to significantly increase their output and drastically cut the price. It is what they must do to help forestall the emergence of a nuclear clerical Iran bent on ruling the region.

* Obtain court orders to freeze the overseas assets of Iranian leaders, since they are clearly ill-begotten funds that rightfully belong to the nation.

* Shut down, or severely restrict the operation of the Mullahs’ businesses in Dubai and other Persian Gulf states.

* Reduce the staff or completely shut down Iranian missions. Severely restrict Iranian officials and nuclear scientists from foreign travel. Recall your ambassadors from Iran.

* Deny the Iranian airlines operation and encourage non-Iranian airlines to cease serving the country. Provide for flights that serve emergency medical and other health needs of the Iranians.

* File legal charges against the leaders of the Islamic Republic’s wanton violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; for their crimes against humanity, genocidal actions against religious and political groups; for support of international terrorism; for demolition of religious sites and cemeteries; for rape, torture, and summary execution of prisoners of conscience; for forgery of documents, for acts of blackmail and fraud, and much more.

* Declare and treat the clerical regime as illegitimate.

* Stop or slow down Iran’s import of refined petroleum products.

* Shut down the Islamic Republic’s web sites and block their television and radio broadcasts.

* Locate and seize the regime’s front organizations such as Alavi Foundation in New York City.

* Identify the agents of the Islamic Republic and prosecute them as promoters of international terrorism.

* Investigate individuals and organizations that lobby or front for the Islamic Republic.

* Take all necessary steps to stop investments in Iran. Persuade banks to refrain from dealing with Iran and the issuance of letters of credit.

* Pressure businesses to stop dealing with Iran.

* Pressure governments to stop doing business with Iran. Warn countries such as China and Russia against circumventing the U.N. resolution and engaging in commercial adventurism.

If America, Britain and Europe were serious about trying to stop the Iranian regime from getting the bomb, that’s precisely what they should have been doing. The fact that they have not shows they are not in the slightest bit serious about stopping it. So who can be surprised that they should have abandoned the Iranian people in their own struggle against this tyranny?

People say the crumbling of the Soviet Union is not comparable because the situation in the Muslim world is very different. So it is. But certain things are not so different – indeed, they are constant the world over. Such as the fact that the yearning for freedom is a human given and it is unstoppable. And the fact that appeasement of tyranny always leads to worse; and that if those who are fighting for freedom are properly supported, they have a much better chance of winning.

As the former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar has written:

If there hadn’t been dissidents in the Soviet Union, the Communist regime never would have crumbled. And if the West hadn’t been concerned about their fate, Soviet leaders would have ruthlessly done away with them. They didn’t because the Kremlin feared the response of the Free World. Just like the Soviet dissidents who resisted communism, those who dare to march through the streets of Tehran and stand up against the Islamic regime founded by the Ayatollah Khomeini 30 years ago represent the greatest hope for change in a country built on the repression of its people.

… This is no time for hesitation on the part of the West. If, as part of an attempt to reach an agreement on the Iranian nuclear program, the leaders of democratic nations turn their backs on the dissidents they will be making a terrible mistake. President Obama has said he refuses to ‘meddle’ in Iran’s internal affairs, but this is a poor excuse for passivity. If the international community is not able to stop, or at least set limits on, the repressive violence of the Islamic regime, the protesters will end up as so many have in the past — in exile, in prison, or in the cemetery. And with them, all hope for change will be gone.

One of the greatest explosions of the desire for freedom by a subject people in our time, and all the West did was to sit on its hands while making eyes at the oppressors.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributor Melanie Phillips is the author of the powerful and frightening Londonistan, and she blogs at The Spectator

How al-Banna’s anti-West Islamist movement succeeded in inspiring Muslims to rejecting Western liberalism, and spawned the emergence of global imperialist Islamic movements like al-Qaeda…

The First World War had finally come to an end. The European victors could now turn their attention to the Middle Eastern vacuum. Muslims from Cairo to Jeddah to Jerusalem to Damascus were facing the harsh reality of the end of a seventh century dream. Their Ottoman Empire had slowly disintegrated from within and was now powerless to hold back the European advance. Islam’s core belief in its manifest destiny to dominate all of human civilization was at an end.

It was supremely naïve of the Europeans to think that the words of the Prophet Muhammad would die so easily. Weren’t they words that had come directly from God Himself? In their momentary hubris, they never imagined that these words would once again take hold and would then spread like a contagion and even begin to eat away at their own European society. 

The year 1927 marked the first challenge to this Western naïveté. In Islam’s darkest hour there suddenly rose a voice. It was calling for Muslims to abandon the secular and decadent Western encroachment that was destroying them and return to the purity of Islam. It was the voice of a highly gifted and charismatic individual, an Egyptian orator schoolteacher/clock repairer named Hassan al-Banna. He appeared out of nowhere onto the streets corners of Cairo, as well as other Egyptian cities, dressed in a flaming red robe preaching his message. Like the early American Christian evangelists, he mesmerized his audiences with vivid descriptions of hell for those who had abandoned the purity of Islam. Like the American Christian evangelists he too warned of the Day of Judgment and Hell’s torments.

There was, however, a difference between Hassan al-Banna and these Christian Americans. Islam is a political/military religion. Muslims do not render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars’.  Muhammad had joined religion, governance and military conquest and made it one. Al-Banna’s mission was first to take over the Egyptian government and then the world.  In 1928 he established the Society of Muslim Brothers. By the late 1940’s the Muslim Brothers had some two thousand branches throughout Egypt and it was threatening the Egyptian government itself. 

Its objectives were “‘individual moral purification and collective political and social regeneration through the establishment of a truly Islamic government in Egypt, as a springboard for universal expansion’”; and as Banna described it, “‘until the entire world will chant the name of the Prophet (Muhammad), Allah’s prayers and blessings be upon him.’” (Efraim Karsh, Islamic Imperialism, A History. New Haven & London, Yale University Press, 2006, p. 208-9)

But there was a chilling side to these objectives. As Efraim Karsh further describes it in his book:

“In Banna’s view, the Qur’an commanded its believers to love death as much as others love life. As long as Muslim society failed to abide by this sacred philosophy, they were destined to remain in their current dismal position. “‘There is no escape from death and it happens only once’, he (Banna) claimed. ‘Should death come down the path of Allah, it will be a gain in this world and a reward in the other.’ This reasoning was duly incorporated into the Muslim Brother’s Credo: ”‘Allah is our goal; the Qur’an is our constitution; the Prophet is our leader; Struggle is our way; and death in the path of Allah is our highest aspiration.’”

On February 12, 1949 al-Banna was murdered by Egyptian government agents, apparently in revenge for the assassination of Prime Minister Nuqrashi Oasha a few weeks earlier.

The scene was now set for the intellectual hero of all Islamic terrorists, Sayyid Qutb (pronounced KUH-tahb). From the agony and horror of an Egyptian prison he wrote his vast, many-volume commentary, In the Shade of the Qur’an. In 1966 Qutb was also executed by the Egyptian government, but by that time it was too late to stop the contagion that was to follow. His was a work that would inspire future generations of Muslim terrorists, including the wealthy Saudi Arabian, Osama bin Laden and his Egyptian deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri. Cast under their spell, many thousands of young Muslims would follow them and accept Islam in the pure seventh century form as Qutb had so defined it. 

The idea of a utopian society coming about by way of the righteous destroying the unrighteous was not a new one. It had existed throughout Jewish history, and with Muhammad it became an important part of the Koran. An example of the Hebraic roots is found in a comment by the author John J. Collins in his book, “The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature.” He writes about the expectations in the Qumran community (140’s B.C.– 68 A.D.) of the coming Messiah:

He is the scepter who will smite the nations, slay the wicked with the breath of his lips, and restore the Davidic dynasty…. He is also the Messiah of righteousness, who will usher in an era of peace and justice.

The members of the Qumran community believed in a God who can be righteous on the one hand and a destroyer of the wicked on the other. This was both the Hebraic and Koranic interpretation of the nature of their Yahweh and their Allah.

Qutb believed in this kind of God. Allah would be the destroyer of the unrighteous. The movement that he spawned would do the destroying. And those who participated and died for the cause of Allah would have fast entry into Paradise.

Qutb saw a world corrupted by Christianity and by Zionism. He would brush off Judaism as “a system of rigid and lifeless ritual.” He saw Christianity as a two faced religion that had lost its direction. One part of it was secular and the other religious. Its biggest mistake according to Qutb lay in the words of Jesus when he said:

Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars’ and to God the things that are Gods.

Biographers say that Qutb as a young man, before his acceptance of al-Banna’s call, was not at all religious. He was not a devout Muslim. They say he had an open view of religion. But, then he took a trip the United States. There he saw what he considered the depravation of American society with its emphasis on sex and its use of alcohol. He had also observed this same depravation in his own country with the spread of European colonialism. Upon his return to Cairo, he had a religious experience. It would mark his destiny. The pure and unadulterated form of Islam as al-Banna had described it would become his answer.

How could his perfect world come about? It would not be by way of Christianity. The Christian idea of a direct connection with a loving redemptive God made no sense. Under Christianity there was no way to make people subservient to a God who would smite the nations, slay the wicked with the breath of his lips. Besides, Christianity had been polluted by Greek philosophy with all of its dangerous personal freedom and creative introspection. Like Muhammad, he would choose the distant and fearful Hebraic/Koranic God. Servitude to this God meant strict obedience. This would open a path to absolute purity for every human being willing to follow Allah’s will.

Like the Apostle Paul many generations before him, Qutb saw the world overtaken by wanton sexual expression and undisciplined excess. Where Paul pointed his finger at Roman society, Qutb blamed the secular Christians and Jews who had turned their backs on God for the pleasures of this world. He viewed western society as being consumed by human passions and therefore fallen. For Qutb, the Western world had become a den of moral degeneration. 

To bring about his New World, the modern Christian/Jewish world would be destroyed and replaced with an Islamic world. It would be a utopian world living by the revelations of the prophet Muhammad, the true messenger of God. It would be a world where every human being would live a Sharia life under Islamic law. The entire world would become an Islamic Caliphate living in fear of Allah and waiting for the final Day of Judgment.

Qutb and al-Banna could not acknowledge any God other than the Hebraic God Muhammad had described in the seventh century. Nor could they acknowledge any other reality for human existence. Over an often painful two thousand years, the West had discovered an alternative reality to this existence and an alternative vision of the God power behind it. That God was not the God described by Muhammad. This other God did not limit His presence to any one tribe or religious group. He was a God centered in every person on this earth. He was a God who valued every person by one and only one measure; his or her contribution to all of huma(e)nity.

Over a period of two thousand years this alternative vision had released an enormous surge of human creativity not seen before in human history. How to reconcile Qutb’s and al-Banna’s Allah to this modern world with its new reality? Herein lay their dilemma.

As Western values moved into the Middle Eastern vacuum, they came with an invitation open to all that cut to the core of the Hebraic/Islamic conundrum. It was an invitation without distinction: Jesus of Nazareth had given the world the aphorism; the leavened and the unleavened bread are one. His meaning was that God makes no distinction between the “impure” and the “pure”, between the “unclean” and the “clean”, as viewed in the Hebraic/Islamic sense. But; Islam refused. It saw everyone in the West as “unclean”, as Infidel. Islam would not abandon the words of the Prophet Muhammad.

The view of “Infidels” as unclean and al-Quaeda as the scepter who will smite the nations, slay the wicked with the breath of his lips, and restore the Davidic (Islamic) dynasty…. who will usher in an era of peace and justice goes beyond any sense of 21st century rationality. Like all the other self destructive psychotic religious views from our past, it too will end in the dust bin of human history.

We hear so much talk about “world opinion” and “universal values,” concepts that may deceive us into thinking these things are real. They are not real. There is no “world opinion” other than the views of the General Assembly of the UN, an assembly that gives all member nations an equal vote. The problem is that the representatives of such nations work in a United Nations that operates under western democratic rules, although most members are the elites of countries not at all democratic. Furthermore, their views do not even represent those of their less privileged countrymen, who mostly get their news coverage from the propaganda ministries of their countries.

On December 10, 1948, the General Assembly of the UN adopted and proclaimed the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” They then called upon all member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and “to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read, and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories.”

Can you imagine such member states as Saudi Arabia or the raft of dictatorships then (and still) members of the UN preaching “basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled?” Could “right to life and liberty; freedom of expression; equality before the law; social, cultural, and economic rights be promoted in countries that routinely enslave women, execute homosexuals, and torture and execute political or religious dissidents? They didn’t then, and they do not now promote such values. Today they argue that these values are not theirs, and they have come out with a new set of “human rights” that they prefer.

What the UN promoted as “entitlements and rights” are really ideals. There are no international rights. Dictatorships (political and religious) do not believe that civil and political rights are anything other than disloyalty to the state, for which there is severe punishment.

There is no agreement on what “freedom” is. Marxists claimed that the important freedoms were freedom from hunger and joblessness, or freedom from anarchy and lawlessness. All other freedoms are a danger to “the people.”

What kind of entitlement is the right to education? Even such developing countries as India and Pakistan have little to no public education, and what passes for education in many countries is little more than memorized religious indoctrination (the Madrassas in Pakistan and Afghanistan). Girls do not have “entitlement” to education is such places.

In promoting “equality before the law,” what law? Many countries do not have written law codes, but are governed by edicts or clerical “law,” which certainly does not give women or minorities equal access to protection. And what constitutes “minority” protection? What kind of minority? Are women, homosexuals, religious or political dissidents minorities?

How do you enforce “the right to food,” when Sudan, Burma, or Somali warlords prevent food aid for their starving? Burma would not even permit food aid to come in after their country was devastated by a tsunami.

How do you have “humanitarian intervention” when the UN must recognize the sovereignty of nation states? And who will intervene? There is no international army – nor would such a force be a force for good.

Protection from genocide, one of the most important ideals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, has only been executed under U.S. intervention (with NATO cooperation). The UN has never been effective in this issue. It cannot be, considering how it is organized.

The best we can do is recognize that the Universal Declaration is an ideal, and only those countries sufficiently developed to have these values enshrined in their laws care about them. We must not pretend that these values are universal, but we certainly can use the bully pulpit of such popular media as soap operas, comic books, and free radio to promote and educate the world. These are ideals badly needed in the world, but we have a long way to go.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman is an historian, lecturer, and author who also writes for the Santa Cruz Sentinel. You may contact her at Lfarhat102@aol.com or http://www.globalthink.net/.

Neda, the young and beautiful freedom-loving Iranian student was slain in cold-blood by the current Islamic regime in Iran. Almost instantly, Neda became, not only the divine call of the Iranian uprising, but, she symbolized the call for liberty around the globe. Here’s the video of Richard Roth’s report which contained the image of Neda.

If either President Ronald Reagan or President John F. Kennedy were alive today, they would stand in solidarity with the Iranian people. In fact, they would declare “Today we all are Iranians.” It appears the Iranian people are showing the world what a revolution looks like and some Americans have started paying close attention and taking notes.

Neda knew the value of freedom. She died for it. Her blood was not wasted and she did not die in vain. Headlines have heralded the young woman as a martyr and some even dubbed her Iran’s Joan of Arc. Not only has she become a “symbol of goodness” battling against her brutal oppressor, her story has laid open a much larger issue, freedom and liberty. There is a site dedicated to Neda proclaiming, “We are all Neda.”

Each year, on the fourth of July, we celebrate America’s birth and independence. This is a day that the heart of every American must glow with pride and appreciation. On this special occasion, the Iranian martyr, Neda, has a special message for all freedom-loving Americans: “Do not take your liberty for granted” “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure,” said Thomas Jefferson. I think Neda would have said, “I have given my blood for the cause of liberty for my country and I hope you don’t have to give yours once again.”

We are going through some troubled times in America. We Americans need to wake up and realize that our liberties and freedoms that we are taking for granted are slowly and inexorably being taken from us. Once we lose it, it is very hard to get it back. Let the blood of the Persian freedom-fighter, Neda, inspires all of us to cherish our liberty. “We are fighting and dying on the streets of Tehran to have what you have had for more than two centuries. You, America, have been an inspiration to millions of us in Iran to become free, free to roam, free to grow, and free to bloom” Neda would have said.

As we celebrate the 4th of July, it is my hope that all freedom-loving Americans remain mindful of how precious that day is to our country’s storied history. On July 4, 1776, America declared its independence from England, the old white grandfather across the sea.  The miracle of America happened, and its dynamic birth rapidly changed the entire world. Neda would have wished her blood would cause the Iranians to gain their freedom and our two countries once again become the staunchest friends.

America is a nation and an ideal, birthed by a group of visionaries that gave it the constitution to nurture it and protect it. What makes America, “America the Beautiful,” more than just a blessed land is your legacy, the constitution. Sadly, the constitution also makes for “America the vulnerable” by enshrining freedom that enables the malevolent to subvert and destroy America from within. You are the guardian of the constitution. You and only you determine the health and survival of America.

Democracy, by its accommodating and benign nature is susceptible to corruption and even destruction by forces from within and from without. With this realization in mind, the founding fathers of your country enshrined the constitution to safeguard and protect the rule of the people.

America is defined by the last phrase of our national anthem: The land of the free and the home of the brave. Freedom, in all its forms, is our greatest legacy, for which our nation has bravely fought many wars on many fronts to preserve against the unceasing assaults of totalitarianism of all stripes. Time and again, the flowers of our nation bravely sacrificed their lives to protect freedom and liberty.

I am reminded by the words of our great President Abraham Lincoln when he, in 1863, described our nation as “a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” Is this still the case, or how much government stealing from us? In 1776, our Founders stood up, put their lives and fortunes on the line and declared their freedom and independence from the chains and shackles of the King of England. I hope all Americans once again, unite for the love of freedom and are willing to stand up and declare their Freedom and Independence, not from the King of Britain, but from the chains and shackles of our own government and their lackeys.

First things first. Our highest priority is the preservation of this nation of the free. We have done what it took in the past and we must do what it takes now and in the future to safeguard our precious liberty. America is not perfect. Yet, it is the very best hope for a humanity struggling to find its humanness. America is worth defending.

For the past 30 years, an illegitimate government of the Islamic Republic has been waging a brutal war against the entire population of Iran. For 30 years Iranians have been fighting for individual and religious freedom. Iranians, have suffered so much, and they are risking their lives and ready to die so that the next Iranian generation does not have to live in the nightmare of a backward Islamic barbarity.

As Iranians have started the fight for their freedom and liberty, we must strive to keep ours. We must put aside our minor differences that have divided us in the past and unite as one strong political force to restore our fading Freedom and Liberty. “The history of liberty is a history of resistance.”

In conclusion, I would like to thank all Americans who wrote songs and poems in remembrance of a freedom-loving Iranian patriot, Neda. My special thanks goes out to United States Senator McCain who spoke on the floor of the U.S. Senate, remembering the champion of freedom, Neda, and to the honorable congressman McCotter’s beautiful eulogy about Neda’s assassination by the direct order of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. I am eternally grateful for millions of people who have kept Neda’s memory alive. Regrettably, President Obama has stated he wants to make a deal with Neda’s murderers. America, now it is up to you to object to any negotiations with those who murdered our freedom-loving and innocent human being, Neda.

Happy Independence Day, America!

]]> http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/07/04/what-is-neda%e2%80%99s-fourth-of-july-messageoh-walking/feed/ 3 http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/07/03/madam-ayeshah-married-prophet-muhammad-when-she-was-19-years-old-and-not-9/ http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/07/03/madam-ayeshah-married-prophet-muhammad-when-she-was-19-years-old-and-not-9/#comments Fri, 03 Jul 2009 01:06:52 +0000 admin http://www.faithfreedom.org/?p=8342

FFI received this email from Zaid, a lover of Zakir Naik – a top contestants for “Idiot of the year” award. Here is his email:

Hello all

I would like to inform you about this research, which will lead you to remove the misinformed historical notes from your website.

Madam Ayeshah married Prophet Muhammad when she was 19 years old and not 9.

This investigation shows that the nikah of Aishah to the Prophet of Islam took place when she was around 16-17 years old, and not 6; and her marriage was solemnized when she was 19 and not 9. The Prophet died when she was 28, not 18; and she became one of the leading scholars and teachers of Islam, giving aid and advice to the subsequent Caliphs. Read this investigation: http://www.ilovezakirnaik.com/madamayeshah

This book/investigation is authored by an ex-Chrisitian Muslim, Dr Ruqayyah from United Kingdom.

Zaid

www.ilovezakirnaik.com

We invite our readers to look at this study by Dr. Ruqayyah. She is a westerner who became Muslim. Yet, she found the Hadiths where Ayesha is saying that she was six years old when the old geezer, Muhammad, married her. This piece of information does not sit well with any human being. Muhammad was a pedophile, yet this lady is head over heel in Islam. So, she tries to do acrobatics with the different hadiths, till she thinks that she proved that Ayesha was older than that when the shameful old thug married her.

Here is the reply that one of our editors sent to Mr. Zaid:

Dear Sir,

Thank you for letting us know. Here is what my quick search of Sahih Hadith produced. Can you please read below, and tell me why I need to reject such authentic hadiths. If Aisha herself is telling you that she was six year old, why do we need to do any research acrobatics to deny that. :

Bukhari

Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234:

Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236:

Narrated Hisham’s father:

Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina.. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married ‘Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 118:

Narrated ‘Ursa:

Aisha said, “While the Ethiopians were playing with their small spears, Allah’s Apostle screened me behind him and I watched (that display) and kept on watching till I left on my own.” So you may estimate of what age a little girl may listen to amusement.

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 163:

Narrated ‘Aisha:

The Prophet was screening me with his Rida’ (garment covering the upper part of the body) while I was looking at the Ethiopians who were playing in the courtyard of the mosque. (I continued watching) till I was satisfied. So you may deduce from this event how a little girl (who has not reached the age of puberty) who is eager to enjoy amusement should be treated in this respect..

Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151:

Narrated ‘Aisha:

I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for ‘Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)

Sir,

As you see, we are not misinformed. We rely on multiplicity of hadiths that are all in agreement in deducing what we believe the age of Ayesha when Muhammad married her.

Have a good day

Editor

As the readers can see, there are plenty of hadiths that are damaging to Muhammad’s prophethood. He was a pedophile. Yet, Dr. Ruqayyah tries to save Muhammad’s pedophilia by doing acrobatics with the hadiths.

In short, something stinks about Muhammad, and its not the litter box.

Here is the response we got back from Mr. Zaid:

True, some Hadiths contradict each other. However, when you have multiplicity of hadiths corroborating the same story, it must be so. This is the case with Muhammad’s pedophilia. There are many Hadiths repeating the same story and showing that Ayesha was indeed very young when Muhammad married her. The reader can see that in the above hadiths quoted.

Here is the response to Mr. Zaid by one of our editors:

So, what makes us trust your analysis and not those Hadiths? Is there a criterion we should adopt? Or is it just that when you hear a bad story about Muhammad, you want to rush and look for hadith analysis that makes him beyond reproach? Look at the following analysis with multiplicity of evidence:

http://www.faithfreedom.org/challenge/pedophile.htm

We have a saying in Arabic: “The letter can be read from its Title.” Do you know what that means? When you have Sahih Hadiths about Muhammad that he pracitced Pedophilia, assassinated people, Mass murdered people, looted, pilaged, attacked innocent victims just because they did not agree with him, enslaved, raped, ..etc..we can’t just try to rush to defend him. There is multiplicity of evidence to the contrary. A decent human being should say “Yes, I was mistaken in thinking he is a prophet. He was a thug” and that will be the end of that. Think about it: All Muhammad did is curse people, and when he became strong enough, he was a war monger and a bandit thief. In 10 years he had more than a hundred attacks against other groups of people.. The guy thrived on blood. Yet, you are trying to defend his holiness from pedophilia.

Can you please tell me if Jesus or Buddha made wars to advance their cause? Yet what did Muhammad do? Did he not say “I was made victorious with terror”? We had good Muslims destroy the great Statues of Buddha in Afghanistan. Those statues were a treasure for all humanity. Yet, what did the good Muslims do? and after the incident, did you hear about any Buddhist attack any Muslim? Compare that to some silly cartoons made about Muhammad.

Like I said: “A letter can be read from its Title.?” Muhammad is only worthy of trashing. He was not a nice man. If he was, I would tell you so.

Editor

We wanted Mr. Zaid to read Dr. Sina’s analysis regarding Muhammad’s pedophilia. There is more hadith evidence there showing that Muhammad was indeed a pedophile, no matter how you look at it.

The other important point we wanted to stress is what criterion Mr. Zaid wanted us to use to choose between hadiths. The fact is he has no criterion, and Dr. Ruqayyah’s work is just a sham. It is very weak to say the least, and does not establish as to which criterion she wanted to rely on in accepting hadiths. She did not like our claim of pedophilia, and so, her holy prophet should be proved above that. What a shame. This is a shameful way of doing genuine research.

]]> http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/07/03/madam-ayeshah-married-prophet-muhammad-when-she-was-19-years-old-and-not-9/feed/ 40 http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/07/03/the-search-for-yaser-abdel-said-part-15/ http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/07/03/the-search-for-yaser-abdel-said-part-15/#comments Fri, 03 Jul 2009 01:02:24 +0000 Denis Schulz http://www.faithfreedom.org/?p=8593 If only he had been Mike Hammer or Hulk Hogan or even George Costanza, he might have had a chance, but he was Bernard Piffy—worse yet, a ten-year-old Bernard Piffy, a puny little kid who would have had trouble handling Shirley Temple on the deck of the Good Ship Lollipop, and here he was in the clutches of King Kong’s Siamese twin, the notorious Yaser Abdel Said. At least he thought it was Said. And it was all thanks to Asma bint Marwan and the latest of her hair-brained schemes. He would be lucky if he got out of this alive!

And then he got angry—very angry. This behemoth was Said—the notorious Yaser Abdel Said, the SOB he had come all the way to England to corral for the boys at Joe’s Bar and Grille and Gun Club, the rat-bag who had murdered his daughters, Sarah and Amina Said, in a fit of Islamic rage. He didn’t have to take this crap from him! He was Bernard Piffy!

As he came out from under the bed, he rolled over, got one leg free and drove it into Said’s groin. It felt good! Said screamed, grabbed for Piffy, lost his balance and fell. His head struck the edge of the bed. It went thunk—a good solid thunk, like a blackjack hitting the back of a drunk’s head. It was music to Piffy’s ears. Said was incapacitated—at least temporarily.

It must have been self-preservation that took over. Piffy yanked an extension cord from a wall socket. His mind was racing madly. He knew what he had to do but did he remember how to do it? Of course, he did—it was something he would never forget! In less than ten seconds, using the extension cord as a pigging string, he had tied one of Said’s wrists to his ankles! Then he found a scarf and tied the other wrist to the extension cord! Gosh, it was easy. He stuffed a stocking into Said’s mouth and the job was done.

Aisha was dumbfounded. She could not believe her eyes. A trickle of blood was coming from the corner of her mouth. “How—how—“ she began.

Piffy grinned. He was tempted to take a bow. “I was Mayberry Junior Calf-tying Champion two years in a row,” he said proudly.

Aisha looked at her father and then at Piffy. “What do we do now?” she whispered hoarsely.

It was a good question, one the Judges at the Mayberry Junior Calf-tying Championships had never asked. There was no Plan B and Said—he was sure it was Said—was beginning to stir. If he didn’t vacate the premises muy pronto there would be hell to pay and it wouldn’t be on the installment plan. “Is there any way out of here but downstairs?” he asked.

“No,” she said.

Well, that took care of Plan C…and D and E and F. If this were Murder She Wrote or Mission Impossible…maybe, but this was reality—damn stinking reality. How in the hell was he to get his butt past Mohammed Atta and Hani Hanjour in the lobby before Said began to make a scene?

How? If only he had a gun! Yeah…a gun! Ah, who was he kidding—he wasn’t Mike Hammer; he wasn’t even Maxwell Smart. He was doomed!

“I know!’ said Aisha. She went to a dresser and pulled open a drawer. “Put these on!” she said, tossing one garment after another in Piffy’s direction.

Like any normal 10-year-old boy, Piffy was aghast. “A dress?” he said, poking at the clothes piling up in front of him. “And pantyhose?”

“Hurry!” she urged. “Hurry! They could come up here any minute!”

Piffy scowled. But who was he to argue? He didn’t have any macho reputation to uphold. He was ten years old—nobody would know. “Are you going to turn your back?” he asked.

She smiled and turned away.

He stripped off his clothes. He was sweating profusely. He was terribly excited. Pantyhose! Ten-year-olds didn’t wear pantyhose—not ten-year old boys. The very idea! They didn’t have to be this authentic, did they? He wasn’t going to the Senior Prom! But there wasn’t much time. He slipped on a dress and pulled a pair of panties up over his legs—maybe he should have done it in the reverse order but what the heck did he know. He could try the pantyhose the next time.

Then it occurred to him—what about his head? He would have to do something about his head! He couldn’t go strutting past Atta and Hanjour looking like Yul Brynner!

Fortunately, Aisha was ahead of him. She had a wig—one of her mother’s wigs—and in a few seconds he was appropriately coiffed. Okay, so he wasn’t Shirley Temple, but he could have passed for Carl ‘Alfalfa’ Switzer’s twin sister.

“Let me do the talking,” said Aisha

They went down the stairs to the lobby. Hanjour was sprawled in a leather chair studying the Qur’an. Atta was pacing back and forth. He scowled at Piffy, then at Aisha. “Who’s your friend?” he said, nodding at Piffy.

Aisha panicked. Her mind went blank. “Martina Navratilova?” she said hesitantly.

“A Kuffar!” grumbled Atta. He looked at his watch. “What’s keeping your father?” he demanded.

Piffy smirked. “He’s all tied up,” he said. Oh, yes, a wise guy to the very end.

Atta glared at Piffy. “Little Kuffar bitch,” he mumbled. “We’ll take that out of you one of these days.”

Aisha swallowed. She had regained her composure. “Papa will be with you in about ten minutes,” she said.

It would be sooner than that—a lot sooner. A bellow of rage came from Aisha’s room. Then something hit the floor, something heavy and the building seemed to shake. Atta and Hanjour exchanged glances and Atta started immediately up the stairs. Hanjour put aside the Qur’an, smiled at the ‘girls’ and followed Atta. Aisha and Piffy slipped though the door and out into the street. They would have two or three minutes at most.

“Where do we go?” whispered Aisha. If she wasn’t terrified, she was close to it.

Piffy shrugged. “To McDonalds?” he suggested. Where else would a ten-year-old on the lam go…to Countdown with Keith Olbermann? He might as well go to the Twilight Zone—there wasn’t that much difference.

“Do you have any money?” she asked.

And that was another thing. His money was in his pants and his pants were in Aisha’s room with the rest of his boy clothes. It was fast becoming apparent he hadn’t thought this thing through but he hadn’t expected to make his debut as London’s newest drag queen for at least another twenty or thirty years. Boy, was Asma bint Marwan going to get an earful!

“It’s okay,” she said. “I’ve got some.”

He looked at her. “Are you going to be okay?” he asked. “Your—ah, dad is gonna be awful mad.”

“I will stay with my sister for a few days,” she said. She was close to tears.

They walked in silence for a while. It was getting dark. They were nearing a McDonalds. It was easy enough to do, start out in any direction and in ten blocks there would be a McDonalds.

“Do you have anyone?” she asked.

Piffy grimaced. It was not an easy question. He was an old man in the body of a ten-year-old boy, but he had someone. Oh, he had someone all right! “Yes,” he said slowly, almost harshly. “ My mommy—Asthma—she will come and get me.” And she had damn well better!

Aisha ordered the Chicken McNuggets; Piffy had the fish fingers. They found a table near the entrance.

“So your mother’s gong to come and get you?” said Aisha. She was making conversion.

“Yes,” he said. He couldn’t tell her the truth.

“You act so grownup,” she said.

Grownup? He wanted to scream—boy, did he ever want to scream! That would be grownup! He felt as naked as a porno queen in Aisha’s dress and her panties were riding up like a seaman climbing the rigging of a sailing ship that had just hit an iceberg. Good grief, what if he had to go to the bathroom? Or the loo or whatever it was they called it? He glanced toward the window. It was getting darker by the minute. Maybe that would help. He could go back to his apartment. It would be a long walk. Maybe he could take a bus. Maybe Aisha would lend him a few squid. Or was it quid? Why didn’t they just use nickels and dimes and be done with it. He stood up. “Aisha,” he began, “could you…”

She was looking right past him at someone who had just come in through the door. Piffy wasn’t prepared for what happened next.

A voice boomed in his ear. “Who’s your friend, Aisha?” it said.

The words cut through Piffy like a knife! It was Goober—Goober from the Madrassas! What was he doing here? Of all the rotten luck! He was afraid to turn around but if he wanted to get out of McDonalds in the next ten seconds he had no choice.

“Hey, you’re cute!” said Goober. “What’s your name?”

Piffy looked at the floor. Maybe the wretch wouldn’t recognize him in his disguise. “I’m Martina Navritalova,” he mumbled.

“No, you’re not,” smiled Goober. “Navritalova is an old-maid tennis player. You’re not a tennis player If you were a tennis player you would be wearing a short skirt.”

“He does too play tennis!” said Aisha. “Don’t you, Martina?” Okay, she was trying to be helpful.

Goober scowled. He looked Piffy straight in the face. Something wasn’t right here. He could sense it. “You don’t even look like a girl,” he said.

“I am too a girl!” said Piffy. He didn’t think he would ever say that.

“He is too a girl!’ said Aisha.

“Prove it!” said Goober. “Show me your underwear!”

“I don’t have to show you anything!” said Piffy.

Now Goober was having second thoughts. Maybe she was a girl. She acted like a girl. She looked like a girl. He would find out! It was his duty as a Muslim. No girl dared talk to a future Mujahideen like this little snip was walking to him!

Goober moved so quickly he caught Piffy by surprise. He grabbed Piffy where no decent girl wants to be grabbed in public by so despicable a creature. It was then that Goober realized with whom he was dealing. “Allahu akbar!” he shrieked. “It’s Piffy!”

That was when Piffy hit his assailant a blow any ten-year-old would have been proud of. Goober went down like the Titanic—only quicker and with a lot less noise. He was unconscious before he hit the floor. There were shouts and cries of alarm and then Piffy was out the door and down the street into the glowering dark, dressed as a girl, without a cent to his name and not the slightest idea of where he was going.

(To be continued)