Amillennialist

Archive for May, 2008|Monthly archive page

Marking the anniversary of a horrific event

In Constantinople, Jihad, The truth about Islam on May 29, 2008 at 12:41 AM

Five hundred fifty-five years ago, Constantinople fell, an atrocity the responsibility for which lies dead at the feet of the prophet from hell.

And those who seek to imitate Mohammed, that “beautiful pattern of conduct,” labor today so that New Constantinople and many more Infidel kingdoms fall to the armies of Allah.

Here’s your “Religion of Peace.” I guess these Muslims were “misinformed,” too:

“. . . the great church of Hagia Sophia was filled to capacity. Thousands of people were moving towards the church. Inside, Orthodox and Catholic priests were holding liturgy, the last Christian service after almost 1,000 years. People were singing hymns . . . .

“Bands of Ottoman soldiers began now looting. Doors were broken, private homes were looted, their tenants were massacred. Shops in the city markets were looted. Monasteries and Convents were broken in. Their tenants were killed, nuns were raped; many, to avoid dishonor, killed themselves. Killing, raping, looting, burning, enslaving, went on and on . . . .

“The great doors of Hagia Sophia were forced open, and crowds of angry soldiers came in and fell upon the unfortunate worshippers. Pillaging and killing in the holy place went on for hours. Similar was the fate of worshippers in most churches in the city . . . .

“Thousands of civilians were enslaved, soldiers fought over young boys and young women . . . the invaders broke the heads of those women who resisted on the floor of the churches and they raped them dead. The famous icon of Apostole Loukas was totally destroyed.

“The sultan asked for the young sons of Duke Loukas Notaras. Their father refused and Mehmed was ready to take their heads. Notaras asked him to kill him after his sons so that he was sure that they were dead and not disgraced from the . . . sultan.

“And this is what happened.”

Advertisements

Marking the anniversary of a horrific event

In Constantinople, Jihad, The truth about Islam on May 29, 2008 at 12:41 AM

Five hundred fifty-five years ago, Constantinople fell, an atrocity the responsibility for which lies dead at the feet of the prophet from hell.

And those who seek to imitate Mohammed, that “beautiful pattern of conduct,” labor today so that New Constantinople and many more Infidel kingdoms fall to the armies of Allah.

Here’s your “Religion of Peace.” I guess these Muslims were “misinformed,” too:

“. . . the great church of Hagia Sophia was filled to capacity. Thousands of people were moving towards the church. Inside, Orthodox and Catholic priests were holding liturgy, the last Christian service after almost 1,000 years. People were singing hymns . . . .

“Bands of Ottoman soldiers began now looting. Doors were broken, private homes were looted, their tenants were massacred. Shops in the city markets were looted. Monasteries and Convents were broken in. Their tenants were killed, nuns were raped; many, to avoid dishonor, killed themselves. Killing, raping, looting, burning, enslaving, went on and on . . . .

“The great doors of Hagia Sophia were forced open, and crowds of angry soldiers came in and fell upon the unfortunate worshippers. Pillaging and killing in the holy place went on for hours. Similar was the fate of worshippers in most churches in the city . . . .

“Thousands of civilians were enslaved, soldiers fought over young boys and young women . . . the invaders broke the heads of those women who resisted on the floor of the churches and they raped them dead. The famous icon of Apostole Loukas was totally destroyed.

“The sultan asked for the young sons of Duke Loukas Notaras. Their father refused and Mehmed was ready to take their heads. Notaras asked him to kill him after his sons so that he was sure that they were dead and not disgraced from the . . . sultan.

“And this is what happened.”

Government is the problem, not the solution

In Government is the problem, Liberals aid jihad, Oil on May 28, 2008 at 11:28 PM

Actually, politicians are the problem. Still, Reagan was right.

An accident of geology has led to the greatest transfer of wealth in human history over the last forty years, and this from non-Muslims to Allah. The demand for oil has financed the resurgence of traditional, Qur’anic Islam and its concomitant global jihad against us.

In other words, we are financing our own slaughter.

Our politicians’ decades-old refusal to discover and develop our own traditional and alternative sources of energy (especially nuclear) has kept us dependent on Muslim oil. And certainly — as demonstrated by Saudi Arabia’s recent blow to President Bush’s face when he asked for more oil to flow (why are we aiding their nuclear program, exactly?) — the global jihad uses more than just suicide belts, rockets, and civilian airliners to “fight in the cause of Allah.”

There is another way in which American politicians harm their employers, keeping us busy just treading water (after all, citizens who have to spend all their energy working just to survive don’t have time to hold politicians accountable for their decisions, and people struggling to get by must be a bit more susceptible to the influence of election-year promises from someone “fighting for them”), and our Republican in the White House has been as guilty as any big-government liberal of it.

With one hand, the President and Congress reduced taxes, but with the other, they continue to print money as needed to buy votes.

What is the effect of increasing the supply of something? Its value lessens. As everything becomes more expensive, the American people become poorer. I have not received recently a thirty-percent raise to cover inflation, and I know no one who has.

In other words, 0ur politicians are impoverishing slowly and subtly all but the wealthiest.

If the American people allow this to continue, a young person saving today for their retirement will find when they get there — just as everyone who’s ever told a story about ten-cent hamburgers when they were a kid has found — that the dollar they saved will be worth only pennies.

On our own politicians increasing the cost of oil, from here:

“a recent analysis of oil prices over the past 50 years adjusted for the increase in the money supply as measured by a gauge known as M3 lays the blame for surging petro prices squarely at the feet of Uncle Sam particularly the Federal Reserve. ‘By rapidly increasing the money supply and thereby decreasing the value of the dollar the government is solely responsible for the increase in the oil price ‘ writes Paul van Eeden president of Toronto-based Cranberry Capital a private investment company”

Government is the problem, not the solution

In Government is the problem, Liberals aid jihad, Oil on May 28, 2008 at 11:28 PM

Actually, politicians are the problem. Still, Reagan was right.

An accident of geology has led to the greatest transfer of wealth in human history over the last forty years, and this from non-Muslims to Allah. The demand for oil has financed the resurgence of traditional, Qur’anic Islam and its concomitant global jihad against us.

In other words, we are financing our own slaughter.

Our politicians’ decades-old refusal to discover and develop our own traditional and alternative sources of energy (especially nuclear) has kept us dependent on Muslim oil. And certainly — as demonstrated by Saudi Arabia’s recent blow to President Bush’s face when he asked for more oil to flow (why are we aiding their nuclear program, exactly?) — the global jihad uses more than just suicide belts, rockets, and civilian airliners to “fight in the cause of Allah.”

There is another way in which American politicians harm their employers, keeping us busy just treading water (after all, citizens who have to spend all their energy working just to survive don’t have time to hold politicians accountable for their decisions, and people struggling to get by must be a bit more susceptible to the influence of election-year promises from someone “fighting for them”), and our Republican in the White House has been as guilty as any big-government liberal of it.

With one hand, the President and Congress reduced taxes, but with the other, they continue to print money as needed to buy votes.

What is the effect of increasing the supply of something? Its value lessens. As everything becomes more expensive, the American people become poorer. I have not received recently a thirty-percent raise to cover inflation, and I know no one who has.

In other words, 0ur politicians are impoverishing slowly and subtly all but the wealthiest.

If the American people allow this to continue, a young person saving today for their retirement will find when they get there — just as everyone who’s ever told a story about ten-cent hamburgers when they were a kid has found — that the dollar they saved will be worth only pennies.

On our own politicians increasing the cost of oil, from here:

“a recent analysis of oil prices over the past 50 years adjusted for the increase in the money supply as measured by a gauge known as M3 lays the blame for surging petro prices squarely at the feet of Uncle Sam particularly the Federal Reserve. ‘By rapidly increasing the money supply and thereby decreasing the value of the dollar the government is solely responsible for the increase in the oil price ‘ writes Paul van Eeden president of Toronto-based Cranberry Capital a private investment company”

Winston Churchill was a misinformed Islamophobe

In Appeasers and Useful Idiot Dhimmis, Islamophobia, The truth about Islam, Winston Churchill on May 27, 2008 at 10:19 PM

He was also a Naziphobe.

In both cases, he was right.

Churchill recognized his people’s submission to tyranny in creeping self-censorship. Whether yesteryear’s Nazis or today’s Muslims, the effect is the same.

Do not be intimidated into silence. Expose evil. Tell the truth.

Those who love darkness rather than light do so because their deeds are evil. If what they do is of God, why do they lie?

From Jihad Watch:

“In a very few years, perhaps in a very few months, we shall be confronted with demands with which we shall no doubt be invited to comply. Those demands may affect the surrender of territory or the surrender of liberty. I foresee and foretell that the policy of submission will carry with it restrictions upon the freedom of speech and debate in Parliament, on public platforms, and discussions in the press, for it will be said–indeed, I hear it said sometimes now – that we cannot allow the Nazi system of dictatorship to be criticized by ordinary, common English politicians. Then, with a press under control, in part direct but more potently indirect, with every organ of public opinion doped and chloroformed into acquiescence, we shall be conducted along further stages of our journey.”

Here is Churchill on the heresy and bloodlust of Mahomet:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

“A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property — either as a child, a wife, or a concubine — must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

“Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science — the science against which it had vainly struggled — the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

Winston Churchill was a misinformed Islamophobe

In Appeasers and Useful Idiot Dhimmis, Islamophobia, The truth about Islam, Winston Churchill on May 27, 2008 at 10:19 PM

He was also a Naziphobe.

In both cases, he was right.

Churchill recognized his people’s submission to tyranny in creeping self-censorship. Whether yesteryear’s Nazis or today’s Muslims, the effect is the same.

Do not be intimidated into silence. Expose evil. Tell the truth.

Those who love darkness rather than light do so because their deeds are evil. If what they do is of God, why do they lie?

From Jihad Watch:

“In a very few years, perhaps in a very few months, we shall be confronted with demands with which we shall no doubt be invited to comply. Those demands may affect the surrender of territory or the surrender of liberty. I foresee and foretell that the policy of submission will carry with it restrictions upon the freedom of speech and debate in Parliament, on public platforms, and discussions in the press, for it will be said–indeed, I hear it said sometimes now – that we cannot allow the Nazi system of dictatorship to be criticized by ordinary, common English politicians. Then, with a press under control, in part direct but more potently indirect, with every organ of public opinion doped and chloroformed into acquiescence, we shall be conducted along further stages of our journey.”

Here is Churchill on the heresy and bloodlust of Mahomet:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

“A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property — either as a child, a wife, or a concubine — must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

“Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science — the science against which it had vainly struggled — the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

Relatives in defense of jihad

In Appeasers and Useful Idiot Dhimmis, Memorial Day, Relatives in defense of jihad, The truth about Islam on May 26, 2008 at 7:50 PM

Recently a family member shared photos of the honoring of Marines who’ve made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of Western Civilization and our God-given, unalienable rights.

To that e-mail I replied, “It’s too bad Mohammed made their sacrifice necessary.”

This is what was sent in response to that observation by another family member:

. . . it is indeed even worse that . . . people continue to be misinformed.

The author appears to argue that worse than Americans dying in defense against jihad are the imagined misinterpretations of Islamic texts by jihadists and the plain reading of those texts by non-Muslims.

This ad hominem attack was sent to several family members, but not to me.

Impugning someone’s integrity behind their back does not a healthy dialogue make.

Also, her position is inherently dishonest. If someone claims to know enough about Islam’s “holy” book (there are actually several texts considered authoritative in traditional Islam besides Qur’an) to absolve Mohammed of responsibility for 1400 years of global jihad against non-Muslims, then they must know the commands of Allah and the example of his apostle requiring that slaughter.

On the other hand, if they don’t know the texts well enough to admit from where Allah’s monsters derive the justification for their murders (and worse), if they are so completely ignorant of Qur’an, ahadith, and Sira so that they defend Mohammed and his book as “holy,” then how can they call anyone else “misinformed”?

I am confident that the author is incorrect in her assertions regarding Islam’s authoritative documents, since I’ve actually read them.

Rather than assume that one or more sessions in the People of the Desert School of Islamic Propaganda makes her an expert on Islam, she ought to open a book.

Regrettably, this is the same line of “argumentation” used by jihad’s agents in the West. Considering that even the Commander-in-Chief repeats the same canard, the wide dissemination throughout non-Muslim lands of the facts regarding the word of Allah and the example of Mohammed is needed now.

What are these facts? Did Mohammed command offensive warfare against non-Muslims or not? If so, why defend him?

Allah and the prophet from hell demand (and boasted, among other things):

“fight and slay the unbelievers wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) . . . ” (Qur’an 9:5).

“Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya [poll tax]. . . If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them . . . ” (Muslim Book 019, Number 4294).

“Fight those who believe not in Allah . . . nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book [Jews and Christians], until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

“Allah’s Apostle said: ‘I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle . . . ‘” (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

In defending Mohammed, this is what she defends.

Why not instead attack the monster?

Relatives in defense of jihad

In Appeasers and Useful Idiot Dhimmis, Memorial Day, Relatives in defense of jihad, The truth about Islam on May 26, 2008 at 7:50 PM

Recently a family member shared photos of the honoring of Marines who’ve made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of Western Civilization and our God-given, unalienable rights.

To that e-mail I replied, “It’s too bad Mohammed made their sacrifice necessary.”

This is what was sent in response to that observation by another family member:

. . . it is indeed even worse that . . . people continue to be misinformed.

The author appears to argue that worse than Americans dying in defense against jihad are the imagined misinterpretations of Islamic texts by jihadists and the plain reading of those texts by non-Muslims.

This ad hominem attack was sent to several family members, but not to me.

Impugning someone’s integrity behind their back does not a healthy dialogue make.

Also, her position is inherently dishonest. If someone claims to know enough about Islam’s “holy” book (there are actually several texts considered authoritative in traditional Islam besides Qur’an) to absolve Mohammed of responsibility for 1400 years of global jihad against non-Muslims, then they must know the commands of Allah and the example of his apostle requiring that slaughter.

On the other hand, if they don’t know the texts well enough to admit from where Allah’s monsters derive the justification for their murders (and worse), if they are so completely ignorant of Qur’an, ahadith, and Sira so that they defend Mohammed and his book as “holy,” then how can they call anyone else “misinformed”?

I am confident that the author is incorrect in her assertions regarding Islam’s authoritative documents, since I’ve actually read them.

Rather than assume that one or more sessions in the People of the Desert School of Islamic Propaganda makes her an expert on Islam, she ought to open a book.

Regrettably, this is the same line of “argumentation” used by jihad’s agents in the West. Considering that even the Commander-in-Chief repeats the same canard, the wide dissemination throughout non-Muslim lands of the facts regarding the word of Allah and the example of Mohammed is needed now.

What are these facts? Did Mohammed command offensive warfare against non-Muslims or not? If so, why defend him?

Allah and the prophet from hell demand (and boasted, among other things):

“fight and slay the unbelievers wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) . . . ” (Qur’an 9:5).

“Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya [poll tax]. . . If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them . . . ” (Muslim Book 019, Number 4294).

“Fight those who believe not in Allah . . . nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book [Jews and Christians], until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

“Allah’s Apostle said: ‘I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle . . . ‘” (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

In defending Mohammed, this is what she defends.

Why not instead attack the monster?

Honor our fallen heroes by telling the truth about the enemy we face

In Appeasers and Useful Idiot Dhimmis, Hugh Hewitt misunderstands Islam, Memorial Day, President Bush establishing Islam, The truth about Islam on May 25, 2008 at 10:17 PM

Our best and bravest sacrifice life and limb to defend us.

At the same time, they are being sacrificed to the President’s woeful misunderstanding of Islam, a misunderstanding echoed by nescient cheerleaders/dhimmis/appeasers like Hugh Hewitt.

The religion of Mohammed is no “religion of peace.” There may be moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate.

How can any Infidel sacrifice enough to win hearts and minds which already belong to this:

“the Messenger of Allah . . . would say: ‘Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war. . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya [the poll tax demanded of subjugated and humiliated non-Muslims]. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them . . .'” (Muslim Book 19, Number 4294).

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror. The treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

“Allah’s Apostle said: ‘I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle . . . ‘” (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

Honor our fallen heroes by telling the truth about the enemy we face

In Appeasers and Useful Idiot Dhimmis, Hugh Hewitt misunderstands Islam, Memorial Day, President Bush establishing Islam, The truth about Islam on May 25, 2008 at 10:17 PM

Our best and bravest sacrifice life and limb to defend us.

At the same time, they are being sacrificed to the President’s woeful misunderstanding of Islam, a misunderstanding echoed by nescient cheerleaders/dhimmis/appeasers like Hugh Hewitt.

The religion of Mohammed is no “religion of peace.” There may be moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate.

How can any Infidel sacrifice enough to win hearts and minds which already belong to this:

“the Messenger of Allah . . . would say: ‘Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war. . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya [the poll tax demanded of subjugated and humiliated non-Muslims]. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them . . .'” (Muslim Book 19, Number 4294).

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror. The treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

“Allah’s Apostle said: ‘I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle . . . ‘” (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).