Monday, August 30, 2010

Saffron terrorism: PM should apologise to people, says Modi


Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi on Monday sought an apology from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for use of the term 'saffron terrorism' by the home minister.

"The post of the Prime Minister has been devalued and he has become helpless as someone else is in control of the administration," Modi said at a public function here.

Criticising home minister P Chidambaram for using the term 'saffron terrorism', Modi said, "it is the height of misfortune that the Union minister has demeaned the chair which was once held by the Iron man of India, Sardar Patel."

"Is not there a saffron flag on a temple? Would you call it a centre of terrorist activity? Swami Vivekanand, Dayanand Saraswati, Shankracharya, Swami Ramdas and others who have sacrificed for the country wore saffron clothes. Are you calling them terrorist?" Modi asked.

"Every Congressmen will have to answer this. And the Prime Minister has to apologies to the people of the country for this," the chief minister added.

Modi said saffron colour is an integral part of Indian tradition. "By conning the term 'saffron terrorism', the home minister has caused insult to the Indian heritage," he said.

Attacking the Congress on the alleged misuse of CBI against him, Modi said one cannot make place in people's heart through CBI.

Modi also dared the Congress-led UPA government to compete with Gujarat on the development front.

"The Union government had the country, entire administration and crores of rupees at its disposal. I dare the Union government that despite of all this, Gujarat will be far ahead if there was a competition," he said.

He said those bent on demeaning Gujarat will be taught lesson by the people themselves.

The chief minister, today dedicated number of project to the people which included a recreation centre, water pumping and distribution station, a sports and commercial complex, a Sardar Patel Heritage Hall and Zonal office of New western zone of the city to name a few.

Modi speaking at a function in Vadodara on Sunday also had demanded an apology from the Prime Minister on the 'saffron terrorism' issue.

Thursday, August 26, 2010

How to Combat Islam: Islamic Trinity

Ali Sina

Dear Ali

I spoke with my state representative today and asked him to sponsor a bill to ban Sharia in KY. He is very open to that but wants support. What other states have banned Sharia or are contemplating that and where can I direct him for good data?


Rodney (name protected by Ali Sina).

Dear Rodney,

First, kudus to you for your patriotism and for realizing that Islam is a threat to America and to the world!

Banning a religion goes against the First Amendment. As long as Islam is classified as a religion, it cannot be banned.

Islam is also a religion, but unlike other religions it is multi dimensional. All other religions have one dimension or at least one main dimension. It is the vertical line that unites man with God.

Islam has a width and a depth that are absent in other religions. They are its social and political dimensions.

The social and political dimensions of Islam are defined by the Sharia law. Its social dimension regulates every aspect of human relations, e.g. the relationship between husband and wife. Under the Islamic social law, a husband has the right to beat his wife if he fears she is being uppity. He can divorce her at will and in absentia. To him belong the children. He can marry as many women as he pleased. The four wives limitation is a misunderstanding of the Quranic verse, or perhaps a well intentioned effort of Muslims to put a limit to the number of wives.

The Shaira law does not apply only to Muslims, but also it regulates the rights of the non-Muslims. The non-Muslims in Muslim majority countries must be reduced into dhimmis, subdued and humiliated and they should pay a penalty tax to the Muslim state, as high as 50% of their income.

Under the Sharia, women’s rights are half of the rights of men. They are deemed to be deficient in intelligence and their testimony in court is worth half of that of men.

Under the Sharia, homosexuals must be killed; adulterers must be stoned to death, even if they are victims of rape. If a raped woman can’t bring four males witnesses to testifying that they saw the rape happening, her testimony against her assailant is not admissible in the court. However, if she gets pregnant as the result of the rape, her pregnancy can be used as evidence that she has had sex out of wedlock and according to the Sharia she should be stoned.

The political dimension of Islam is its most important dimension. Without it Islam ceases to exist. The foremost objective of Islam is not religious, but political. The goal is to “reclaim” the earth and on it establish Allah’s domain. The means to do that, according to the teachings of the Quran and the examples set by Muhammad, are through raid and terror. The objective of Islam is not to convert everyone, but to make the Sharia law dominant. Even Islamic countries that are not Sharia compliant are legitimate targets of islamic terrorism.

Under the Sharia, people of Book can still keep their faiths and practice their religion, as long as it is done privately and they don’t make a show of it. They are of course not allowed to preach their faith to others, except to their own children.

A Muslim is not just a believer, but also a member of the umma and a subject of the universal Islamic state. Consequently, leaving Islam is regarded as betrayal to the state and a high treason. Apostates should therefore be put to death.

Under these three dimensions noting is left to the individual. Every aspect of the life of a believer is regulated by the Sharia law. The Sharia determines what he should eat and drink and what he should not. When is he allowed to eat and when he is not. What should he wear and what he should not. How should he shave, bathe, brush his teeth, clean his private parts after answering the call of nature, with what foot to enter the toilet, what to say upon entering the toilet and on which fool to put most of his weight while defecating.

As Muslims will tell you, Islam is not a religion. It is a way of life. It is a totalitarian system that dominates every aspect of one’s life. Even the believers’ thoughts are not theirs. The control is absolute.

These three dimensions are indivisible. They are the trinity of Islam. Islam cannot exist without either one of them.

This knowledge is important. The Chinese sage Sun Zi said, know your enemy and you will not be defeated. And here is the problem. Muslims know us and they use our system to penetrate into our countries and to defeat us from within. NABIC, CAIR, ISNA, ICNA, and a host of other Islamic organizations are not the only fronts of Islam. Many politicians, many academicians and I dare to say, many rabbis and priests receive favors from Muslims and viciously fight for their interests. They are not just useful idiots, but well paid traitors.

Muslims have been planning and working relentlessly for decades to penetrate America and to destroy it from within. Today they have their man in the White House. The American Commander in Chief is a traitor in Chief. Obama came to power with the support of Islamists and his job is to open the gates of America to the enemy.

As you see Muslims know us. They know our laws and they know how to use them against us. That is why they are advancing. The Westerns on the other hand don’t know Islam and as the result they are losing the battle. To win this war they need to know their enemy.

If Americans understand the “trinity” of Islam, i.e. its religious, social and political dimensions as indivisible facets of one single entity, it will be easy to defeat it.

We cannot ban Islam as a religion, but we can ban it as a political system. As a political system Islam is incongruent with our democracy and our laws.

While Muslims use the First Amendment to advance their own propaganda, they riot and kill innocent people if someone draws a cartoon of Muhammad. They want to kill him if he speaks against Islam. So they are in violation of the First Amendment. Islam does not recognize the equality of all men before the law. And it does not recognize the equal rights of men and women. On these grounds Islam is in violation of our laws and as such it can be denounced and banned.

Muslims should be asked to repudiate the parts of the Sharia and the Quran that are explicitly in violation to American constitution and Bill of Rights.

Billy Rojas, from Portland OR, has launched a brilliant initiative. He has written a declaration and is inviting Muslims to:

1. Repudiate any verses or interpretations of the Qur’an that oppose the American values
2. Sign the Freedom Pledge promising Muslims who seek to change their religion the same rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution
3. Demand that Muslim nations to grant other religions the same freedom to build houses of worship that American grants them
4. Postpone, relocate, or reconfigure their plans for an Islamic center within a mile of Ground Zero

These are legitimate demands. You can’t be loyal to America if you don’t agree with these principles. Nonetheless, Muslims will find it difficult to sign this declaration. That is because their allegiance is to Islam and not to America.

This is how they will be exposed as the enemies of America and can be expelled under our laws. Those Muslims, who are willing to repudiate the inhumane laws of Islam and join the rest of humanity as brothers and sisters, will be received as such. We have no enmity with Muslims as fellow humans. But at the same time we must not tolerate their evil belief that calls for our subjugation and death.

I urge all Americans to sign the Ground Zero Declaration. If millions of Americans sign this declaration, those patriotic servants of the people serving in the congress and senate will have plenty of ammunition to champion this initiative and put an end to Islam in America for good.

This is by far the most effective way to combat Islam and ban it legally. This strategy is so powerful that no Islamic organization and no Islamic nation can oppose it. Anyone who does so is demonstrating his enmity to human rights to women right and to the cherished values of civilized world.

Islam advances through deceptions. This is how to expose those deceptions.

This declaration is by far the most powerful weapon we have in our fight against Islam. Please go here, read it and sign it, if you are an American.

Those of us who are not Americans should create our own declaration.

Kashmir's 'Azadi' with the tricolour

Tarun Vijay

Sushma Swaraj stunned the students from the valley on August 18 with the question "tell me what idea of the so-called 'azadi' you have and I shall speak after that". The students decided to have one among them to define what they thought about the concept of freedom they were seeking for Kashmir. Sarmad said: "We want to include Gilgit, Baltistan, Jammu and Ladakh in 'Azad Kashmir' and will have friendly relations with Pakistan and India." Some others tried to interject with more ideas. There was no clear voice that could describe what they mean by "azadi" when they chant it.

Now the leader of the opposition explained in a motherly way that they were all like her children. She said: "So, son, first decide what you want. Some want to remain independent, some want Gilgit and Baltistan, some want to go with Pakistan. No one is clear. You already have Jammu and Ladakh; enjoy an autonomy which is not available to any other Indian state. Gilgit and Baltistan you can't have without getting into a scuffle and that may lead to a war. The best 'azadi' that all of you enjoy is with the tricolour. The Indian Constitution provides everything that a citizen can aspire for. It has space for all the shades and opinions within its framework. Look at the educational and technological advances other Indian states are making and see the number of Kashmiri youths coming out of the valley to take advantage of it — in Bangalore, Chennai, Mumbai and Delhi. That's the freedom of development and reaching the sky for lifetime achivements." She brillinatly punctured the 'azadi' fumblings and made Manjoor Yusuf, a braveheart student from Srinagar, to come to the dais and declare: "It's wrong to say that all Kashmiri Muslims want 'azadi'. We want our future with India. It's a great country and in the last election 61% of the citizens of Kashmir cast their votes. India, not Pakistan, is our destiny." The atmosphere changed in a second. A small section of "azadi" seekers couldn't say anything except jeering at the Indian voice from Kashmir. He later complained that some of the students threatened him, "but I am not scared, sir". He was firm.

Smriti Irani, actor (Tulsi) and national president of the BJP's women's wing, charmingly disarmed the separatism advocates. "Azadi — What for and how? By making innocent kids and young people leave their homes and pelt stones on soldiers who are guarding the nation under their constitutional duty? Why should you not be concentrating on making the education system better and responsive? All the separatist leaders including Gilani and Andrabi send their children to various Indian cities and abroad to get the best education and settle down as progressive persons, but make the valley youth cannon fodder for their nefarious games, played and funded by Pakistan. Why don't you see the game?"

The Kashmiri Hindu students, like Radhika Kaul (just about to leave for Yale University) asked why none from Jammu or Ladakh supported what they said and wanted to be distanced from all their claims. "Why none of you ever, even in passing, refer to the pains and aspirations of these two areas which you think form an essential part of your so called 'Azad Kashmir'?"

"Your 'Azad Kashmir' remains a small, marginalized cry of a section of stone pelters in the valley alone," said Aditya Kaul. Utpal Kaul — born, brought up and educated in Srinagar — reminisced about his student days, about his Muslim teachers and the tradition of "Dal Cross" and "Wooler Cross" by girl students too who had pretty good hockey and tennis teams. "Where has all that vanished? Why do you want to be just confined to a small area of the valley? Give leadership to the Indian Muslims. Where is the space of Indian Muslims on your radar?" Prof Fouzia too became emotional and said: "We always had the tradition of mosques and temples existing side by side." To this, Aditya wanted to know, where have all the temples gone now? Thousands of them have been demolished and graffiti in foul language written against Hindus on their half-burnt walls. Why none of them ever protested against such happenings?

Editors' interaction with the students hinged on how political aspirations are taking a turn in the valley. Chandan Mitra of the Pioneer, Rajesh Kalra of the Times Group and Shoma Chaudhry from Tehelka tried to understand and put forth their viewpoints about Kashmir's problems and their solutions. Shoma spoke about the new wave of political demands in the valley and termed stone pelting too as an expression of anger. Chandan predictably took the nationalist line and tried to explain how the Indian democracy is the best framework. "Be part of a larger Indian milieu and everything can be sorted out," he emphasized. Large sections of Muslim students, apart from those who came from Islamic University nodded in affirmation. Rajesh Kalra asked students about their academic pursuits and their dreams. He said that unless they joined the mainstream of a struggle within the Indian framework how could they think they could excel in their lives.

The thrilling part was the arrival of the seven young turk membes of Parliament belonging to various political parties.

Harsimrat Kaur Badal was at her eloquent best. She narrated emotionally the trauma Punjab had gone through during the Khalistan movement. How every Sikh was a suspect, how young Sikhs were killed as suspects by the security forces and the massacre of 1984. "But gradually we all felt separatism was not an answer, it gave nothing but blankness, a black hole. Today Punjab youths are in the grip of drugs and all sorts of negative traits, a direct fallout of the insurgency. Punjab lost its vibrant, dynamic youth in a movement that was self-defeating." "And listen," she turned a tigress, "I am not from the Congress or the BJP, but I am an Indian and as an Indian I must clearly tell you that till the last Indian is alive, no one will ever allow Kashmir to secede from us. It's an integral part of us, of India." The conference room rose to hail her with roaring claps. The voices of "azadi'' had no answer. Neeraj Shekhar asked: "How many of you have voted in the last elections?" Islamic University students said in unison: "No one." "Why?" asked Neeraj. They said: "Because the elections are always rigged, so we have no faith in them." This was contested again by Manzoor Yusuf, who said 61% of Kashmiris voted in the elections. "That means you do not represent the majority." Aditya pointed out: "A known separatist leader, Bilal Lone, contested the election and lost his deposit. It means the majority of Kashmiris do not like separatists."

Priya Dutt said in her inimitable style: "Why on earth you declare first that you are not an Indian and then ask for more? How can one come on a dialogue table with a baggage of preconceived notions and then begin with riders? We are with you, we understand your pains and sorrows, we share your grief and demands for justice, but that can be met only under an Indian constitutional framework. And no one, no party or ideology or shade of belief, can ever give you 'azadi'. Take it today as firmly as possible."

Anurag Thakur, the young turk from Himachal who is also the president of Himachal Cricket Association and national president of the BJP's youth wing, spoke from the heart: "We are with you on every issue that creates pain or anguish, but as Indians. Nothing can ever be discussed beyond the parameters of our Indianness. We are talking to you not because you are different but because you have always been a part of us, an inalienable story of a larger Indian epic." Madhu Yashki narrated his own story from Andhra Pradesh, where he too was witness to the demand of a Telangana state. "It never pays to be an extremist, trust me. Our destinies and dreams are best protected under the umbrella of our Indianness."

Jayant Chaudhary was candid. "You want peace, right?" And everyone nodded. So friends, peace as I read somewhere, is like lovemaking. You have to keep your eyes shut and let the process take its course. Coming on a dialogue table with preconditions spoils the game. Then he said: "Tell me why some of you want ‘azadi’." The students, voicing separatist threads, fumbled, "Pandit Nehru had promised a plebiscite." "But that was to be held without any demographic changes. The valley has gone tremendous change in its population contours, with Hindus ousted and people from across the border rehabilitated post-1947," retorted Radhika Kaul.

None could explain why they want "azadi"; none could reply why Ladakh and Jammu remained absent from their worldview. Students who wanted "separation" were not keen to listen to the voices of Indianness from their own Muslim brothers and sisters from Srinagar. They said that even the 2002 and 2008 elections — universally hailed as free and fair, including by UN observers — were rigged.

"We have a lost generation in the valley, fed from their early childhood that they are different, hence they have, a separate flag, a separate constitutional provision and they do not belong to India as Bihar and Assam do. Some of the students claimed Kashmiris were a different race and a different "kaum" unlike Indians. I said: "Read at least Sheikh Abdullah’s biography, 'Atishe Chinar', in which he traces his roots, two generations back, to Kaul Hindus. There are Rainas, Kauls and Bhatts this side, exiled from their homes, and Rainas, Kauls and Bhatts on the other side. Why the divide just because one has a different way of worship?"

Ram Madhav, national executive member of the RSS, shared his views and took difficult questions with aplomb, asserting the age-old unity of Jammu & Kashmir with India. "We can never think to have Kashmir separated from India at any cost," he asserted. "We would like every person in J&K to prosper and have a government of his choice within the framework of the Indian Constitution."

This dialogue could happen because Prof Siddiq Wahid and Prof Fouzia Kazi were among the believers in resolving issues through talks. I wish I were a student of Dr Fouzia, who was so articulate and spoke with great maturity and élan. The same goes for Prof Wahid. The students were brilliant, and put forth their views assertively and decently. The dialogue has convinced us that there are people in the valley who believe in sharing the views rather than stone pelting and killing. No bullet can ever find a solution to a complex problem and building bridges in spite of all hurdles and challenges remains the course of a civil society. That has to be supported from both sides, though. The vice chancellor, Prof Wahid, invited us to continue the dialogue in Srinagar, in his Islamic University of Science and Technology. We have accepted the invitation. Friends are made. Sinead Kachroo of Aman Satya Kachroo Trust shared the feelings of Kashmiri students by offering to wear a black band to mourn the deaths of innocent people in the valley; it deeply touched the hearts of everybody.

Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee gave his life in Srinagar for the complete integration of Kashmir with the rest of India. That a thinktank named after him would carry forward the dialogue in Srinagar and in Delhi with those who have a different opinion is a landmark event. That was what Bal Apte, the President of the organization, said, asserting the ancient threads of unity that bind Jammu & Kashmir inseparably with Bharat Vasrha. "We never imagined an India without Kashmir and will never do so." Kashmir se Kanya Kumari tak Bharat ek hai.

Reaching out and continuing talks can only be a better way out.

Monday, August 16, 2010

Ali Sina on Ground Zero Mosque, Cordova House

Faith Freedom

On 9/11 2001, Muslim jihadists butchered 3000 Americans. Nine years later, a Muslim Imam wants to build a 13 story monument two blocks away from the site of that carnage.

Many Americans, particularly the New Yorkers and the families of the victims of that tragedy are outraged at the insensitivity, bordering arrogance of Faisal Abdul Rauf, the imam behind this project. Rauf says it is not a mosque but an Islamic center. The name does not change anything. Whatever you call it, it is of extreme poor judgment.

In 2004, Rauf published a book calling it “What is Right with Islam is What is Right with America.” In that book he argued “The American political structure is Sharia compliant. For America to score even higher on the ‘Islamic’ or ‘Sharia compliance’ scale America would need to do two things. Invite the voices of all religions in shaping the nations’ practical life, and allow religious communities more leeway to judge among themselves according to their own laws.”

The truth is that the American constitution and the Sharia law are opposite of each other. It is interesting however, how Rauf composed his statement. He did not say that the Sharia is in compliance with the US constitution, but the other way round. By doing so he wanted to establish the superiority of the Sharia over the US constitution.

The fact is that the American Constitution and the Sharia differ fundamentally. For example, the Sharia does not recognize

* Freedom of speech,
* Freedom of conscience
* Equality of all people before the law
* Equality of the rights of women with men

Of course, as an Imam he can’t reject the Sharia. He will reject the constitution when not in compliance with the Sharia.

There is nothing in the constitution of the USA that is in agreement with the Sharia law. You cannot find two documents more diametrically opposed to each other.

Think about stoning the adulterers, killing the apostates, hanging or beheading the homosexuals, chopping the hands of the thief, imposing a dress code on people and flogging them for consuming alcohol. These are all part of the Sharia law and against the Constitution. You can’t serve two masters. Muslims will have to either submit to the Sharia law or to the US constitution. If they submit to one, they are in violation of the other.

But the disturbing part in Rauf’s statement is the fact that he compares Islamic laws with the secular laws of America. This is proof that his goal is to supplant the latter with the former. Statements such as this make it clear that the ambition of Muslims in America is political.

Rauf ignores the fact the in the USA religion and state are kept apart. When he says “America would need invite the voices of all religions in shaping the nations’ practical life, and allow religious communities more leeway to judge among themselves according to their own laws,” he is not talking about Jews, Christians or other religions. In fact adherents of these faiths want to keep state and religion separate. Rauf wants these rights solely for Muslims. He aspires to convert America into an Islamic theocracy.

The Sharia law does not just regulate the rights of the Muslims but also the non-Muslims must submit to it. How is that going to work according to this imam? Well that part will have to wait until Muslims become the majority and convert America into a Sharia compliant state, like Saudi Arabia. Then no one has any right anymore.

As far as Muslims are concerned the Sharia law is from God and it supersedes all constitutions that are written by men.

The implication is grave. It means that Muslims who uphold the Sharia law are a subversive group whose aim is to destroy our system of government. Muslims present Islam as a religion whereas their agenda is political and subversive.

When in 2007, Rauf published his book in the Muslims world, he did not call it What is Right with America is What is Right with Islam. He called it A Call to Prayer from the WTC rubbles: Islamic Da’wa from the Heart of America Post 9/11.

This is the kind of talk that resonates in Muslim world. The message that Rauf wants to send to Americans is that the Sharia is very similar to their constitution and hence they should not fear Islam. But his message to his fellow coreligionists is different. To them he is announcing that a da’wa is being issued to Americans from the rubbles of 9/11.

What is Da’wa? Da’wa means invitations to submit to Islam. Jihad has two phases. The first phase is the invitation. Disbelievers are to be warned first and given a chance to submit. If they refuse the next stage is qital (fighting). Da’wa and qital are integral parts of jihad.

The Cordova House will be the ultimatum, a line drawn in the sand for the Americans. After the da’wa is issued, Americans will have two choices: They must either submit to Islam or face more terrorism.

What is in the name?

The choice of the name is also significant. Cordova House may mean nothing to Americans, but for Muslims it is fraught with meaning.

Cordova is a city in south Spain. Muslims armies invaded Spain in 711, massacring countless people. Then they converted the biggest church in Cordova into a mosque.

Building mosques over churches, synagogues and temples of the conquered people began during the life of Muhammad who converted the temple of the Arabs in Mecca into an Islamic mosque.

Muslims have been doing the same ever since. Numerous Hindu temples, churches, synagogues and Zoroastrian temples were converted into mosques. The objective is twofold” To humiliate the defeated people and to establish the supremacy of Islam.

The mosque over the temple of Solomon in Jerusalem is one example. When Muslims conquered the Byzantine Empire they converted the biggest church in the Christian empire into a mosque. In India over 2000 mosques are built on Hindu temples.

A mosque, a place from which da’wa is issued, built over the rubbles of the WTC is a hint to Muslims that jihad is on the march and that Islam is advancing and conquering new territories. The conquest of Cordova ushered Muslims into an era of opulence, the so called Golden Age of Islam. It is therefore a symbol of Islamic conquest and supremacy, which Muslims recall nostalgically.

Who is Faisal Abdul Rauf?

Imam Rauf tries to present himself as a moderate Muslim. Far from it! He has made statements that show he has very radical views. Right after 9/11 Rauf blamed the victims and said, “United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened on 9/11.”

He also said “We [Americans] have been an accessory to a lot of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laded was made in the USA.”

Rauf supports Muslim Brotherhood, the same group that wants to destroy America from within, and has nerve condemned Hezbollah or Hamas terrorist organizations.

In October 2009, the Former Muslims United sent Rauf and his wife the Pledge of Freedom that states Muslims should not be killed if they choose to leave Islam. The couple refused to sign it. So much for their tolerance! Also he has never made it public where the $100 million dollars financing comes from.

There are 2300 mosques in the USA and over 200 in New York. There is no need for another one, especially in the proximity of where Muslims massacred thousands of Americans. Why this place? The choice of the Ground Zero is no accident. Muslims have chosen this spot to a) thumb their nose at Americans and at the families of the victims and b) send a message to Muslim world announcing Islam’s victory over the “Great Satan.”

The Cordova House will have a huge symbolic significance for Muslims and it encourages them to enlist in jihad and make the ultimate objective of Islam, which is world domination come true.

Rauf is not a man of peace. He has made very inflammatory comments, such as “one man’s terrorist is another man’s hero.”

In an article entitled, “Sharing the Essence of Our Beliefs,” published in the Al-Ghad Newspaper in Jordan, 5/9/2009, translated by Walid Shoebat, Rauf wrote:

If someone in the Middle East cries out, “where is the law”, he knows that the law exists. The only law that the Muslim needs exists already in the Koran and the Hadith.

People asked me right after the 9/11 attack as to why do movements with political agendas carry [Islamic] religious names? Why call it ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ or ‘Hezbollah (Party of Allah)’ or ‘Hamas’ or ‘Islamic Resistance Movement’? I answer them this—that the trend towards Islamic law and justice begins in religious movements, because secularism has failed to deliver what the Muslim wants, which is life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Rauf is not talking about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all the people. According to Islam these rights belong only to Muslims. The non-Muslims must suffer defeat, ignominy and dhimmitude.

Follow the Money Trail

Why would Mayor Bloomberg and the majority of the council members of the New York City support such an offensive project? The answer is, follow the money trail.

I am not accusing anyone, but my hunch tells me to be suspicious of anyone who strongly defends Islamic interests over the interests of his own country.

The Saudi and the Iranian regimes spend large sums of money buying the loyalty of politicians and the academicians in the west. The western supporters of Islam are not often mere useful idiots. In many cases they are well paid traitors.

An example that comes to mind is the US congressman Mark D. Siljander who began his career as a zealous evangelical Christian and then went on to write a book, A Deadly Misunderstanding, to “bridge the Muslim-Christian divide.” He argued that Christian and Muslim religious texts are surprisingly compatible, when studied in their original languages. This is of course a blatant lie. The truth came out on July 7, 2010, when Siljander pleaded guilty to two counts of receiving money from Muslims and supporting Muslim terrorists. He was indicted in January 2008 on charges of money laundering, conspiracy and obstruction of justice.

Throughout the history, Islamic forces have deceived their victims, making them think Islam and Muslims are peace-loving, only later to find the opposite. Another example of this deception/treason happened in A.D. 635 when Damascus fell to Muslims because they deceived and bribed its Bishop who opened the city gates at night.

Anytime a politician defends Islam under the guise of “tolerance” and “community cohesion,” I think about money. Chances are you’ll find a skeleton in their closet. I am not accusing anyone in particular. I don’t know the facts. But I won’t be surprised if one day we find out that the politicians who defend the construction of this Islam Trojan horse on Ground Zero were paid for their support.

Mayor Bloomberg calls patriotic Americans who don’t want this mosque, “un-American.” He should know that it is very American to defend the American constitution against any creeping alien ideology whose adherents do not hide their intention to bring down America and “sabotage its miserable house from within.” What is un-American is to open the gates of the country to its sworn enemies. Whether the Mayor is bribed, or he is merely a useful idiot is not for me to decide. It is one or the other and in either case he is not qualfied to be the mayor of New York. But one thing is certain and that is his support for Islamists against the interests of America is very un-American.

Taliban stones couple to death in northern Afghanistan

The Hindu

The Taliban has stoned to the death a couple in northern Afghanistan over charges of adultery, according to a provincial Afghan official.

The Governor of the Kunduz province said on Monday a man and woman were publicly killed over an alleged love affair. "The two were stoned to death in a bazaar of Dasht-e Archi district on the accusation of committing the act of adultery," said Mohammad Omar.

Last week, Islamist militants publicly flogged and killed a woman, accused of adultery, in the Badhgis province in northwestern Afghanistan, said officials.

These killings in Kunduz, if confirmed, would be the first of their kind by the Taliban in northern Afghanistan, where the militant group has comparatively lower influence than in the south. The stoning follows last week's call by a section of clerics for the imposition of a strict code of Islamic law that has frequently awarded capital punishmen

Afghan authorities say the Taliban had arrested the couple following complaints by their parents, as the two were to be married to separate individuals. The Taliban, during their rule of Afghanistan between 1996 and 2001, is known to have imposed draconian punishments on people who did not subscribe to its strict code of social behaviour.

A recent study by the United Nations has held the Taliban responsible for 76 per cent of Afghan civilian deaths, estimated at 1271, which have surged in the first half of 2010.

Friday, August 13, 2010

Autonomy to Kashmir will ruin India: Thackeray

PTIVoicing strong opposition to the proposal of giving autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir, Shiv Sena chiefBal Thackeray today said the move would ruin the country.

"Autonomy to Kashmir? This is the limit! Autonomy status should not be given to the state else the country would be ruined," Thackeray said in the party mouthpiece 'Saamana'.

He criticised Congress for floating the idea and asked them to leave power.

Thackeray was reacting to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's statement that the Centre was willing to consider autonomy for the state within the ambit of the Constitution.

He further said, "the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru's announcement of giving autonomous status to Kashmir and making Sheikh Abdullah its Prime Minister was opposed by the entire country and all the MPs, prompting him to rescind the move."

"Due to the strong opposition by MPs, even the remaining hair on Nehru's bald head started falling and he had to abandon the idea of autonomy to Kashmir," Thackeray said.

"Now Farooq and Omar, scions of Abdullah are also in favour of autonomy status. But it will not happen, otherwise the whole country would stand against," he said.

Thackeray was referring to National Conference President and Union Minister Farooq Abdullah's statement welcoming the autonomy initiative.

Meanwhile, Sena is today celebrating 50th anniversary of the party's weekly magazine 'Marmik' here at Shanmukhanand hall in central Mumbai.