Tag Archives: Sharia Law

What Is Being Said To Muslims In America

Posted on by

Coexist is a really nice concept. However, it only works when the people involved are willing to coexist–it doesn’t work when one person’s concept of coexistence means overpowering the other person and taking away their freedom. We need to understand that many of the Muslim leaders in America have no concept of coexisting–they plan on taking over.

On November 2nd, Breitbart reported:

Islam’s advocates are using their mosque networks to maximize voter turnout in favor of Democratic candidates in Michigan, Texas, and other states.

There are two ways Islamists take over a country. The first way is through civilization jihad–that means encourage Islamists to immigrate into a country,  vote Islamists into office until they are the majority, and then begin to implement Sharia Law. The second way is called kinetic jihad–that simply means to conquer a country by force.

The article at Breitbart continues:

“You need to vote for candidates that represent your interests and our interests … especially in the battle states of Texas and Michigan,” said Yasir Qadhi, an apparent top U.S. leader of the dominant Muslim Brotherhood faction among U.S. mosques.

Qadhi (pictured), who is based in Texas, said via X on October 29:

It is our ethnic duty, it is our civic duty, it is our religious duty to go and support those candidates and choose those that represent the best of our interests … We are undergoing perhaps the most important election season, perhaps of our entire lifetimes, and it is imperative that we, as Muslims of this country, as American Muslims, we avail ourselves to the same rights, the same privileges, the same sense of civic engagement and civic duty as everybody else.

He added: “And so, today, tomorrow, pray jumma [midday prayer, usually at a mosque] and go to vote for the ummah,” which is the Arabic term for the worldwide political society of Islam.

The goal here is not to coexist–the goal is to take over. Consider that when you vote and when you allow Sharia Law to creep into your community by demanding special rights for Muslims (broadcast prayer call, dog-free zones, no pork in school cafeterias, etc.).

Sharia Law In America

Posted on by

On Friday, Just the News posted an article about the views of young voters on Sharia Law.

The article reports:

Nearly half of likely young voters, 43%, view Islamic Sharia law positively, according to a new poll.

The demographic of likely voters between the ages of 18 and 24 hold a different view than the majority of voters polled of all ages, 57%, who hold a negative view.

The poll was conducted by Rasmussen Reports and a nonprofit organization, Our Republic, on Sept. 20. The results were released just a few weeks ahead of the November 3 election.

In response to the findings, outgoing U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said, “Sharia law is incompatible with our Constitution and has no place in America. But it’s on the rise.” That’s why he and U.S. Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, launched the Sharia Free America Caucus, he said.

Roy has introduced several bills related to Sharia law and other Islamic-related issues, which have gone nowhere in Congress, The Center Square reported Roy, an outspoken opponent of Sharia law, lost his primary in March.

These are some of the tenets of Sharia Law:

  • Theft is punishable by amputation of the hands (see above and Quran 5:38).
    • Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
    • Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
    • Criticizing or denying Allah is punishable by death (see Allah moon god).
    • A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death (see Compulsion).
    • A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
    • A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
    • Homosexuality is punishable by death but sodomizing boys is fine (see Islam & Sex).
    • Girls can be sodomized until and vaginally raped after 8 years of age (see Islam & Sex).
    • A woman or girl who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
    • Testimonies of 4 male witnesses are required to prove rape of a female (Quran 24:13).
    • A woman or girl who alleges rape without producing 4 male witnesses is guilty of adultery.
    • A woman or girl found guilty of adultery is punishable by death (see “Islamophobia“).
    • A male convicted of rape can have his conviction dismissed by marrying his victim.
    • Muslim men have sexual rights to any woman/girl not wearing the Hijab (see Taharrush).
    • A woman can have 1 husband, who can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
    • A man can beat his wife for insubordination (see Quran 4:34 and Religion of Peace).
    • A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a wife needs her husband’s consent to divorce.
    • A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.
    • A woman’s testimony in court, allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a man’s.
    • A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits (see Mathematics in Quran).
    • A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
    • Meat to eat must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah – i.e., be “Halal.”
    • Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.

Would they support it if they understood what it was? Our education system is failing us. Where are the feminists? Does anyone believe that this is compatible with the U.S. Constitution?

An Interesting Legal Question

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about a lawsuit that is going to have an impact for beyond the state it is filed in.

The article reports:

On Sept. 17, the American Freedom Law Center filed a landmark lawsuit on behalf of a Dearborn, Michigan, resident, alleging that the Arab-majority Detroit suburb, led by Muslim officials, has promoted Islam and discriminated against and fostered hostility towards Christians and Jews — in violation of the Constitution’s establishment clause.

The details of the case brought by my courageous colleague, Federalist Senior Legal Correspondent Margot Cleveland, are shocking. She alleges that Dearborn’s leaders have endorsed glitzy Ramadan displays and advertised an iftar dinner with public funds. Conversely, they have allegedly ignored Cleveland’s requests for comparable commemorations for Christian and Jewish holidays and sidestepped concerns over public rallies glorifying jihadism. They have also berated a Christian pastor and fellow constituent. Dearborn Mayor Abdullah Hammoud called Pastor Ted Barham a “bigot” and “Islamophobe” who “is not welcome here” when he questioned the city’s renaming of a city street for an avowed Hamas and Hezbollah supporter.

The complaint cites past instances where courts have found the city to have discriminated against non-Muslims.

The article notes:

The suit claims that “acts, customs, policies, practices, and/or procedures that favor Muslims and discriminate against Christians and Jews” reflect the mayor’s “message … that Christians and Jews are not welcome … and are, indeed, second-class citizens.” [Emphasis added.]

Islam is a proselytizing religion. To bring the world under Allah’s command, it calls for employing means including persuasion, subversion, coercion, and violent jihad. Allah’s rule takes the form of sharia law, governing not only religious practices but all aspects of life, public and private. Sharia abides neither freedom of religion nor speech, brooks no dissent, subjugates women and minorities, and imposes a host of illiberal rules.

Islam does not preach coexistence with non-Muslims. It preaches subjugation. The tenets of Islam, such as Sharia Law, are incompatible with America’s Constitution. One of the basic tenets of Islam is that non-Muslims should either be killed or relegated to being second-class citizens who pay a yearly tax to live. This is NOT a religion–it is a political movement, and it is a mistake to give Islam a foothold anywhere in America.

That Doesn’t Sound Like A British Name

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Daily Caller reported that Muhammad was the top baby name in England and Wales in 2025 (for the third year in a row). Normally, the most popular name in a country would not qualify as news, but this represents a demographic shift in Britain that may very easily become a problem for the British.

The article reports:

There are around 4 million Muslims living the UK, representing 6% of the nation’s population, the Muslim Council of Britain reported March 2025. Muslims reportedly accounted for around 32% of the UK’s population growth between 2011-2021.

Lowe released “The Rape Gang Inquiry Report” in June. The report alleged that some young Muslim men would befriend, kidnap, drug, and rape girls as young as 11, often forcing those they impregnated into getting abortions. This occurred in nearly 40% of the UK’s local authority districts, according to the report

The Britain leader Rupert Lowe has formed a group called Restore Britain to fight the Islamification of Britain. 

Islam is not compatible with western culture. Westerners do not believe it is acceptable to kill or harass people who do not share your faith. Westerners do not believe it is acceptable to sexually assault a woman because she is not wearing a hijab. Westerners do not believe that any woman who is not a Muslim is fair game for sexual abuse. Sharia law does not give women rights–a women accused of adultery can be stoned regardless of the evidence. Under Sharia law, husbands are allowed to beat their wives. None of this is compatible with the law in western culture.

Letting large numbers of people who do not share your culture into your country all at once is a recipe for cultural suicide. If immigrants are not willing to assimilate, they should not be welcomed. We are currently watching the death of England as we know it.

Preserving American Law

Posted on by

America is supposed to be a melting pot. It’s not supposed to be a place where a group of people from somewhere else travel here en masse and set up their own little fiefdom with their own laws. We have seen that movie in Europe, and bad things have happened.

On Monday, Red State posted an article about an honor killing in the Netherlands.

The article reports:

In May of 2024, 18-year-old Ryan Al Najjar, a native of Syria, went missing in the Netherlands. Six days after she was reported missing, her body was found in a lake in the northern part of the country. Her hands and feet were bound. That is a horrific enough story by itself, but here is where things go terribly wrong. Al Najjar’s father and brothers are now being prosecuted for her murder and could face up to 25 years in prison. But the worst part was the brothers’ defense of the murder upon being arrested: Honor killings are just “part of their culture.” 

Sadly, the reason for the heinous crime is not new or unheard of. Ryan Al Najjar’s father and brothers believed that her lifestyle was “too Western” and was bringing dishonor on the family. She had refused to wear a veil in public and had posted a TikTok video of herself wearing make-up but no head covering. Authorities believe that her brothers, Mohamed and Muhanad, may have lured her to Rotterdam, where they took her to a secluded location. Her father, Khaled, then joined his sons in Al Najjar’s murder. Dutch prosecutors are seeking a 25-year sentence for Al Najjar’s father, who immediately fled to Syria, and will be tried in absentia, leaving his sons holding the bag for the killing. Both brothers say they were not involved and claim that Khaled carried out the murder alone.

So, how have Europe’s multiculturalism policies, which have allowed millions of Middle Eastern immigrants into European countries, worked out? As of November 2024, roughly 900 “no-go zones” existed across Europe. Neighborhoods where, if you are a woman, gay, Jewish, or just not part of the ethnic community, you might want to think twice about going into. Closer to home, in Dearborn, Michigan, a city with a majority Muslim population, non-Muslim residents complained at a recent city council meeting that a local mosque is using an outdoor loudspeaker for daily calls to prayer, often beginning at 5:30 a.m.

There have been honor killings in America and there has been female genital mutilation (FGM) in America. Both are acceptable under Sharia Law. As of August 2023, 41 States currently have laws against FGM. We need to require immigrants to assimilate within a reasonable amount of time. If they choose not to, they need to leave.

Dealing With the Islamic Threat to America: Part I

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D.

In a previous article, I outlined the threat that unfettered immigration poses to America. Starting with this article, I want to provide more details and give examples of what we are facing and how to deal with that threat. First, let me state that I am not against the practice of any religion. I agree that America should allow the practice of any religion. However, an Islamist is someone who supports a political ideology that advocates for a society governed by Islamic law and values. The central goal of Islamism is the establishment of a state governed by Sharia law. A person can follow the Muslim religion and not be an Islamist. This distinction is critical to remember. I am opposed to any group that wants to fundamentally change America (as Barack Obama famously once said). Islamists are committed to using any and all means to create an Islamist state, including violence.

I would like to start off with an exploration of what Sharia law entails. The laws we follow in this country are derived from Western civilization sources such as the Roman Empire, Judeo/Christian beliefs like the Ten Commandments, and the historical British legal system. Sharia law derives solely from the writings of the prophet Muhammed. Also, our legal system focuses on the sphere of public interaction; Sharia law controls public interactions and also controls private behavior and beliefs. While an internet search will provide information about all of the elements of Sharia law, I am going to address some that are most concerning. Sharia law advocates drastic physical punishments for violators, as well as being especially restrictive to women. A few examples:  amputation of a person’s hand for theft; a woman who alleges she was raped must present four male witnesses in order to seek justice; a woman found guilty of adultery is punishable by death; Muslim men have sexual rights to any woman that does not wear a Hijab (covering of neck, head, ears, except face) in public; a man can have up to four wives, whereas a woman can only have one husband; a man can physically beat his wife for insubordination; a woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative; women and girls should be genitally mutilated; a Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by  death; criticizing Muhammed, the Quran (i.e. their Bible), or Allah is punishable by death.

While these rules are obviously not the laws that Americans want to live by, the majority of people in many Muslim majority countries find them very acceptable. For example: 74% of Egyptians; 71% of Jordanians; 72% of Indonesians; 86% of Malaysians and 91% of Iraqis are in favor of living under Sharia law. Of course, that is their heritage, and they have a right to any legal system that they choose. The problem is that many of the immigrants from these and many other Muslim majority countries want to have Sharia in the country to which they immigrate. A good example of what can happen when large numbers of Islamists immigrate is the current situation in Europe. European countries have experienced higher numbers of Muslim immigrants over the past few decades than we have here in America (at least until Biden opened up our borders to all comers). As of 2024, 8.5% of the population of Sweden are Muslim immigrants; Britain at 6.9%, France 10.5%, Germany 7.2%, and Austria 8.6%. Estimates show that about 2%, or 5 million people in the United States are Muslims. One thing to note is that among Muslims, the birthrate is much higher than for native born Americans (which is now at 1.6 children per woman), so even if all immigration were stopped, the percentage of Muslims in America would continue to increase. As shown above, with a high percentage of Muslims committed to Sharia law coming to America, what is the likelihood that they will assimilate and become committed to America as we have known it? Very slim to say the least. Part II of this article will address the impact and what we should expect if the Islamic philosophy is permitted in this country. Stay tuned.

Not Everyone Supports Women’s Rights

Posted on by

On May 3rd, The Associated Press reported the following:

DHAKA, Bangladesh (AP) — Thousands of supporters of an Islamist group rallied in Bangladesh’s capital on Saturday to denounce proposed recommendations for ensuring equal rights, including ones related to property, for mainly Muslim women.

Leaders of the Hefazat-e-Islam group said the proposed legal reforms are contradictory to the Sharia law. More than 20,000 followers of the group rallied near the Dhaka University, some carrying banners and placards reading “Say no to Western laws on our women, rise up Bangladesh.”

The group threatened to organize rallies on May 23 across the country if the government didn’t meet their demands.

Mamunul Haque, a leader of the group, demanded that the interim government’s reforms commission be abolished and its members punished for the proposed changes. He said they hurt “the sentiments of the majority of the people of this country” by labeling the religious laws of inheritance as the main cause of inequality between men and women.

Sharia law provides justification for mistreating women. Sharia law includes such things as honor killings, wife beating, and equal rights for women. There are currently 85 Sharia law courts in Great Britain. Some American states have banned the use of Sharia law in their states, but it is not universally banned, and there is an effort by some pro-Islamist organizations to bring Sharia law to America. Where are the feminists in this battle?

Tyranny Has A Pattern

Posted on by

There is a pattern involved in establishing and keeping a tyrannical government. It was evident in Nazi Germany and it is evident today in countries where Sharia Law is the law of the land. Syria is a current example.

Tyranny in Germany began with Paul Von Hindenberg’s appointment of Adolf Hitler as Chancellor on January 30, 1933.  In March 1933, the first concentration camp, Dachau, opened as a place to house political prisoners. The demonization of German Jews began shortly after Hitler took power. In April 1933, citing overcrowding in the schools, the government limited the number of Jewish students that could attend school. The year 1938 brought Kristallnacht, a night when German Nazis attacked Jewish persons and property. There were no consequences for the violence against Jews and Jewish businesses. The few Christian pastors who refused to allow the government to dictate what was preached from their pulpits were arrested and placed in the concentration camps. One of the major factors in establishing a tyranny is not holding those who break the law but have the correct political view accountable. Those who have the wrong political views may be arrested or held prisoner for almost anything.

President Trump is something of a litmus test. The people who hate him are willing to overlook almost any lawlessness as long as it opposes him. Until January 20, 2025, those who oppose President Trump were operating within a justice system that was not going to hold them accountable. The attempted Watergate wiretapping resulted in the end of the Nixon presidency and in people going to jail. The wiretapping of the 2016 Trump campaign and transition team resulted in very little consequences for those involved. Kevin Clinesmith, who altered an email to allow the wiretapping, was sentenced to12 months’ probation, 400 hours of community service, and no fine. The people involved in the Russia Hoax were never held accountable for their lies. The Washington Post got to keep its Pulitzer Prize, and people still buy the newspaper. Adam Schiff said he had seen proof of Russian collusion by President Trump. We now know that was a lie, and he is still in Congress. Lawfare became on acceptable way of doing business. Lawfare against President Trump and the raid on Mar-a-Lago were acceptable actions to many Americans. The majority of the people who assaulted police and burned cities during the summer of 2020 were never held accountable. Kamala Harris encouraged Americans to contribute to a bail fund for them. In contrast, people who peacefully walked through the Capitol after police opened the doors for them were hunted down and arrested for trespassing. Most of them even stayed between the ropes set up to guide visitors! When there is a two-tiered justice system, the seeds of tyranny are being planted.

Currently we are seeing Elon Musk and President Trump demonized. How could the President be so cruel to send murderers who were here illegally to prison in El Salvador? Elon Musk is going to take away America’s safety net (no, he’s not.) The difference now is that people who are breaking the law are being held accountable. Protesting is legal. Free speech is legal. However, destroying other people’s property is not legal. Threatening or assaulting Jewish college students is a crime. Someone who is not a citizen and commits a crime needs to be sent back to where they came from.

The slouch toward tyranny can be stopped by implementing equal enforcement of the law—upholding the rule of law. Again, protesting is legal, but assault or destruction of property needs to result in jail time.

Losing Your Culture Due To Uncontrolled Immigration

Posted on by

On Thursday, MSN reported that Britain now has sharia courts–85 Islamic councils operating across the nation. The article explains that the sharia courts are necessary because the large number of Muslims in Britain from across Europe and North America seek religious rulings on marriage and family matters.

The article notes:

An estimated 100,000 Islamic marriages have been conducted in Britain, with many not officially registered with civil authorities.

These marriages often require religious rulings for dissolution, particularly affecting women who must seek approval from sharia councils for divorce.

Many aspects of traditional sharia have been modified in most Muslim countries, but classical rulings are frequently still observed in marriage and divorce matters.

The councils have religious authority to end marriages at a wife’s request if her husband is unwilling to grant a divorce, though this process differs significantly from civil proceedings.

Men seeking Islamic divorces can end their marriages simply by saying “divorce” three times, highlighting a stark contrast in gender-based religious procedures.

The normalisation of polygamy is evident through modern technology, with an app allowing Muslim men in England and Wales to create Islamic wills.

The app features a drop-down menu enabling men to specify between one and four wives.

This same app demonstrates further gender disparities, allocating daughters half the inheritance amount given to sons.

This is a very watered-down, friendly description of sharia law.

Some of the tenets in sharia law not mentioned are (source here):

• Theft is punishable by amputation of the hands (see above and Quran 5:38).
• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
• Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Allah is punishable by death (see Allah moon god).
• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death (see Compulsion).
• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
• Homosexuality is punishable by death but sodomizing boys is fine (see Islam & Sex).
• Girls’ clitoris should be cut (Muhammad’s words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
• Girls can be sodomized until and vaginally raped after 8 years of age (see Islam & Sex).
• A woman or girl who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
• Testimonies of 4 male witnesses are required to prove rape of a female (Quran 24:13).
• A woman or girl who alleges rape without producing 4 male witnesses is guilty of adultery.
• A woman or girl found guilty of adultery is punishable by death (see “Islamophobia“).
• A male convicted of rape can have his conviction dismissed by marrying his victim.
• Muslim men have sexual rights to any woman/girl not wearing the Hijab (see Taharrush).
• A woman can have 1 husband, who can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
• A man can beat his wife for insubordination (see Quran 4:34 and Religion of Peace).
• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a wife needs her husband’s consent to divorce.
• A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.

This is not nearly as insignificant as MSN is painting it to be. This is a major cultural change that will spread as more Muslims enter Britain. What we are seeing will eventually be the end of Britain as we have known it.

This Is Not A Good Sign

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Hot Air posted an article about what is happening to the Jewish population in Germany. The massive immigration of people from the Middle East into Germany and Europe has had a number of unintended consequences.

The article reports:

No doubt, there are plenty of wonderful Muslims who contribute in many ways to our society. I am not suggesting that all Muslims are terrorists or bad citizens, but if you can’t see that the mass importation of people who openly despise Western Civilization, declare their commitment to Islamizing our societies, and impose Sharia law on Westerners has turned out badly, I invite you to move to Iran or Syria.

America, due to its lack of proximity to the Middle East, has suffered the least from this self-imposed disaster. Europe, on the other hand, may collapse due to the idiocy of its elites. As a general rule, America does a better job of integrating migrants, and with a more dynamic economy, opportunities to rise up the socio-economic ladder made integrating a more realistic and attractive option than in Europe.

Germany and Sweden have helped lead the way in disastrous policymaking. And now, once again, Berlin has become unsafe for Jews and Gays.

Tolerance wins.

This is what is happening in Germany:

Jews and gay people should hide their identity in parts of Berlin with large Arab populations, the German capital’s police chief has warned.

“There are areas of the city, we need to be perfectly honest here, where I would advise people who wear a kippah or are openly gay to be more careful,” said Barbara Slowik.

“There are certain neighbourhoods where the majority of people of Arab origin live, who also have sympathies for terrorist groups,” she said, adding that they were often “openly hostile towards Jews”.

She told the Berliner Zeitung newspaper that “violent crimes against Jewish people are few and far between, but every act is one too many”.

A fortnight ago, a youth football team from Makkabi Berlin, a Jewish sports club, reported being “hunted down” by youths carrying sticks and knives after a match in an Arab neighbourhood of the city. The victims, aged 13 to 15, said they were spat at and insulted throughout the match.

Taking in large groups of migrants–too big to assimilate–from a place with a totally different culture is never a good idea.

Isn’t This Racist?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Jewish News Syndicate reported that the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution declaring Israeli presence to be illegal in any area over the 1949 armistice line. That’s interesting. Israel is one of the few countries in the Middle East where Jews, Christians, and Muslims have the same rights and are allowed to participate in the government of the nation. Why is the United Nations picking on the a non-racist country in the area rather than the countries where Jews are not allowed? Why–because there are now enough Muslim countries in the United Nations to begin to take over the organization and to align with the non-Muslim tyrants to attempt to make Sharia Law and Muslim dominance a feature of the United Nations.

The article reports:

More than 40 countries sponsored the resolution, which was the first that Palestinians filed after being granted unprecedented privileges, for a non-U.N. member, earlier this year.

The resolution calls on the Israel Defense Forces to withdraw completely from Judea and Samaria, eastern Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip within 12 months, which means evacuating all Jewish communities beyond the armistice line, including Jerusalem’s Old City.

It also bans arms sales to the IDF of any equipment that would be expected reasonably to be used in the territory over the 1949 lines and calls for a boycott of all products produced by Jews in those areas.

The resolution text lacks any mention of Israeli security concerns, historic ties to the lands or Hamas’s terror attacks in Israel on Oct. 7.

Just for the record, this is the land given to Israel by the Balfour Declaration”

These are the borders for the Jewish state set up by the League of Nations:

The Arabs do not have a legitimate claim to Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, eastern Jerusalem, or the Gaza Strip. Historically, all of these lands are Jewish and play a major role in both Jewish and Christian history.

The article at the Jewish News Syndicate concludes:

Arsen Ostrovsky and Nadav Steinman, CEO and board chair, respectively, of the International Legal Forum, stated that “today, simply put, the United Nations has become the diplomatic arm of Hamas” and that the resolution “is just the latest in a litany of obscenely one-sided anti-Israel resolutions at the U.N. since Oct. 7.” 

“All it does is reward the murderers, rapists and abductors of Hamas while pouring further fuel on worldwide antisemitism and eroding whatever remaining credibility of the already problematic and politicized International Court of Justice, upon which this resolution is meant to be based,” they added. “Ultimately, peace will only prevail when Hamas is defeated and the hostages are released, not through tiresome antics and pyrrhic Palestinian ‘victories’ at the U.N.”

Giving land to terrorists has never worked in the past. There is no reason to believe that it will work in the future.

Knowing History, Religious Practices, And Cultural Norms Can Save Your Life

Posted on by

On Monday, Hot Air posted an article reporting that a group called the New Tolerance Campaign has offered $1,000,000 to any LGBTQ advocacy organization to hold a gay pride parade in Gaza or the West Bank! As of now, no one has accepted the offer.

In Iran, another Muslim-controlled area, people who belong to the LGBTQ community are thrown off of buildings with their hands tied behind their backs. In some Muslim countries they are stoned. Under Sharia Law, it is illegal to be gay.

The article notes (rather tongue-in-cheek) that no group has accepted their offer:

It’s a mystery because so many of these groups have expressed solidarity with Hamas and the Palestinian authority. You would think they would be chomping at the bit to show their undying (pun intended) support for their brothers and sisters in arms.

The article concludes:

Obviously, I don’t want anybody to actually go to “Palestine,” because I don’t want anyone killed just to make a point. But making the offer is a good way to remind these idiots that their “solidarity” with people who want to kill them is stupid.

Even if it were true–and the opposite is true–that both Palestinians and alphabet people were equally “oppressed”–it makes no sense for “Queers” to align themselves with the terrorists of Hamas. Their interests diverge in almost every way.

But they don’t see it that way because both hate America. It really is that simple. Hating America is the great unifying force of the radicals.

Kumbaya.

Maybe it’s time to remind some people how much freedom we have in America and to encourage them to be grateful for that.

America, Pay Attention!

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Geller Report reported the following:

Germany: Muslim party DAVA wins 41 per cent in Duisburg in the European Parliament elections

The fact that Germany no longer looks like Germany in certain areas is evident after the EU elections in voting districts in the highly Islamised city of Duisburg, where Erdogan’s hardcore Muslim party, DAVA, was able to collect 41.10 per cent of the vote.

Voting district 1001 in the city of Duisburg – like many districts in Germany – has already been lost to Islam. There, the Muslim party founded in January, which operates under the bogus name ‘Democratic Alliance for Diversity and Awakening’ (DAVA), was able to mobilise its Islamic voters and achieve a shocking election result. With 41.10 per cent of the vote, the Muslim party did best by far. In second place was the AfD with 14.16 per cent, followed by the SPD with 10.96 per cent. The CDU achieved 8.68 per cent.

So exactly what is this about? The goal of Islam is create a caliphate (the Ottoman Empire was the most recent caliphate which ended in 1922) ruled by Sharia Law that will dominate the world, eventually conquering the entire world. It this seems farfetched to you, please examine the government exhibits from the Holy Land Foundation Trial. One of those exhibits is “An Explanatory Memorandum: From the Archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.” This exhibit explains the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan to use the American legal system to introduce Sharia Law into America.  We already have courts in America using Sharia Law. If the Islamists can do in America what they did in the German elections, we will have more courts using Sharia Law.

Sharia Law is not compatible with the U.S. Constitution. We have already had a number of ‘honor killings’ in America, which are acceptable in Sharia Law but not acceptable under the U.S. Constitution. (for further information on honor killings in America, go here). Honor killings are justified under Sharia Law if a person converts from Islam to another religion or in the case of a daughter who refuses to marry the person her parents have chosen for her or becomes too “westernized.” We already have ‘no go’ zones in certain areas of America where the police are hesitant to go or to enforce the law. Be aware that the same people who have managed a 41% election victory in German have the same plans for America–one city at a time.

An Often Overlooked Fact

Posted on by

The mindless college students who are chanting “Free Palestine” and “From the River to the Sea” not only have no idea of the history behind those chants, they have no idea what living in a Palestinian state would look like. Many of these students have marched for gay rights and pride parades. Do they understand that in a Palestinian state (which would be a Muslim-Arab state), homosexuals are dropped off buildings with their hands tied behind their backs?

On Saturday, Townhall posted an article about a recent interview on CNN by Don Lemon. Mr. Lemon was interviewing the Washington Post’s Taylor Lorenz.

The article reports:

Taylor, how do you reconcile the way marginalized groups fighting for what’s happening in Gaza, yet in Gaza, they would not have any freedom,” asked Lemon. 

“They don’t have any freedoms in Texas and Florida,” replied Lorenz, which was something Lemon wasn’t going to tolerate. 

“Taylor I’m a member of the LGBTQ community, if I go to Texas, they’re not going to throw me off a roof.”

The LGBTQ community may not be happy with their freedoms in America, but have they considered the consequences of their chosen lifestyle in other countries? For example, although homosexuality is legal in China and major cities can have thriving LGBTQ social scenes, same-sex marriage and adoption are not allowed and LGBTQ people are not legally protected against discrimination.

America is one of the freest nations in the world. Those protesting various aspects of American life need to spend some time in whatever country they are heralding. We should require every college student in America to spend a semester in a country ruled by Sharia Law followed by a semester in Israel. It might change their perspective.

When The World Is Upside Down

Posted on by

The recent pro-Palestine protests on American college campuses were a disgrace. The students were not only overlooking the fact that there are still Americans held hostage by Hamas, but many of the homosexual students who were part of the protests have no idea how they would be treated in a Sharia Law compliant country. Ignorance is bliss, but it is not always safe or healthy.

On Saturday, Front Page Magazine posted an article about some of the Biden administration’s actions in response to the protests (some of which definitely overstepped the boundaries of peaceful protest). The subject of blocking Jewish students from attending class does not seem to be covered in the Biden administration’s response to the protests.

The article reports:

After weeks of bias intimidation by Hamas supporters aimed at Jewish students and faculty, including Khymani James, an encampment leader who had talked to Columbia University officials about killing Jews, the Biden administration’s Department of Education, with the inevitability of a rigged slot machine in Reno, is launching a “civil rights investigation” into the university for “extreme anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab, and Islamophobic harassment”.

The complaint comes from ‘Palestine Legal’, the same group providing advice to the encampment protesters.

It complains that “Columbia has reinforced the hostile anti-Palestinian environment, including by suspending Students for Justice in Palestine — a student organization that advocates for Palestinian human rights — for engaging in speech activity supporting Palestinian rights”

What sort of “speech activity” did Columbia University’s SJP chapter engage in?

After Oct 7, Students for Justice in Palestine hailed the Hamas rape of girls, murder of babies and kidnapping of children as a “historic win for the Palestinian resistance”.

The national organization which has 200 chapters on campuses across North America put out a ‘toolkit’ which explained that the Jewish victims were “not civilians” and could be freely targeted.

Its poster for a ‘Day of Resistance’ featured an image of the paraglider that Hamas terrorists had used to massacre and rape young Israelis at a music festival.

Columbia University’s Students for Justice in Palestine celebrated the “unprecedented historic moment for the Palestinians of Gaza” and asserted their “full solidarity with the Palestinian resistance”. It was also a signatory to the “victory or martyrdom” statement signed by the national organization.

The article concludes:

The Department of Education refuses to protect Jewish students from Hamas supporters, but rushes to protect Hamas supporters from Jewish students.

This is much more reminiscent of Germany in the 1930’s than the values of most  Americans. Remember that Germany began enacting anti-Semitic laws in 1933, followed by the Nuremberg Laws in 1935. In March 1933, Dachau, the first concentration camp opened. The anti-Semitic actions of the German government also spawned Kristallnacht in 1938. I do not want to see America go down that path.

Believe Them When They Tell You Who They Are

Posted on by

On February 12th, PJ Media posted an article about a recent comment by Elham, described as a Member of Hamas and a Planner of a Suicide Bombing.

The article reports:

The video is of a hijabed woman, identified as “Elham, Member of Hamas, Planner of a Suicide Bombing,” explaining matter-of-factly that “we don’t only fight against occupation. Our goal is to spread Islam to all, everywhere.” This suggests that Hamas would not be satisfied with a Palestinian state, but would continue its war against the diminished Israel that would remain after the creation of a Palestinian state until the remainder were Islamized as well. What’s more, Elham’s statement amounts to a declaration of war against every state that is not governed under Islamic law.

Of course, there is no indication that Elham speaks for Hamas as a whole. However, many other Hamas spokesmen have said essentially the same thing. Last December, Fathi Hammad, a member of Hamas’ Political Bureau, also spoke of Hamas as having a universal mission beyond the destruction of Israel. He explained that “the [Palestinian] people have been soldiers throughout history. They are now preparing to liberate Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and I am saying this loud and clear: [The Palestinian people] are preparing to establish the Caliphate, with Jerusalem as its capital city, Inshallah. Jerusalem will not only be the capital city of Palestine as an independent state – it will be the capital city of the Islamic Caliphate.” 

The link above will allow you to view the video.

The thing we need to understand is that up until 1922 there was an Islamic Caliphate. It was the Ottoman Empire. When the Empire fell, Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) set up the secular state of Turkey in what remained of the Ottoman Empire. Some members of the global Islamic community were not happy about the fall of the Empire or with Turkey becoming a secular nation. Hassan al Banna, who lived in Egypt, formed the al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin, the Muslim Brotherhood. The goal of the Muslim Brotherhood was to unify all the Islamic states under a new caliphate and put all lands under Sharia Law. In the quote above, Elham is simply restating that goal. This basic philosophy is the reason Hamas will never be at peace with Israel.

 

Why Cultures Matter

Posted on by

On Monday, The U.K. Daily Mail posted an article that illustrates one of the really negative aspects of Sharia Law.

The article reports:

A five-year-old girl who was raped by a stranger has been murdered by her family in a so-called ‘honour killing’, according to reports.

The young girl’s parents allegedly killed their daughter in ‘cold blood’ after she was kidnapped and raped by an unidentified man in the Al-Shahba area of Syria on November 18.

The child’s body was found in a garbage container in Manbij, north Syria, on January 27 before being transferred to Al Furat Hospital which lies in eastern Aleppo.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) have said that Internal Security Forces have arrested several family members of the girl.  

The girl’s parents have denied killing their daughter and investigations are ongoing, the SOHR added.

The article concludes:

Just days after the video of Eida’s murder emerged on social media, a 16-year-old girl was strangled to death by her father in another so-called ‘honour killing’ after she was raped by a relative.

The girl was identified as Aya Muhammad Khalifo by the Violations Documentation Center in northern Syria.   

Following the murders, hundreds of women protested against the ‘honour killings’ in the city of Hasakeh by marching down streets. 

Protester Evin Bacho, a member of the Kurdish feminist group Kongra Star, said: ‘We condemn these crimes in the name of tradition or religion.’

Honor killing is an acceptable practice under Sharia Law. Honor killings have happened in America in Islamic communities that practice Sharia Law. This is a practice that should never be condoned here or anywhere else. Western culture would have taken the five-year-old girl who was raped and worked to help her heal from the trauma. Sharia Law says she has dishonored her family (despite the fact that she was the victim–not the perpetrator) and deserves to die. Cultures matter.

The Cost Of Telling The Truth

Posted on by

On Thursday, Jihad Watch posted an article about some recent statements by Samuel Hayek, the chairman the Jewish National Fund (JNF UK).

The article reports:

British Labour MP Alex Sobel has called on Samuel Hayek, the chairman the Jewish National Fund (JNF UK), to resign or be removed from office for offensive anti-Muslim remarks.

Speaking to the Jerusalem Post in early December, Hayek said Jews should start planning to leave Britain because “Jews who are unable to protect their assets, Jews being discriminated against badly is something that could quite easily happen – that is happening.”

Hayek claimed one of the reasons for the rise of anti-Semitism in the UK is shifting demographic patterns and that Muslim immigration threatens the future of Jews in the UK and Europe as whole.

“I am not against any minority or against Muslims in the UK or Europe, but against anyone who spreads hatred that harms Jews,” Hayek said; adding, “That is how I see the near future evolving.”

Anyone who has read the Koran understands the Muslim hatred of Jews.

The Hadith quotes the Prophet Mohammad as saying” The Resurrection of the dead will not come until the Muslims will war with the Jews and the Muslims will kill them…the trees and rocks will say, ‘O Muslim, here is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.'”

History reminds us that when Hitler said that he would exterminate the Jews no one believed him. That reluctance cost millions of lives. Now when a religion openly states its intention to kill Jews, it would serve us all well to pay attention.

The definition of slander in Sharia Law is saying something that the hearer does not like. It does not matter if what is said is true or not. What Samuel Hayek said is true–the increasing Muslim population in Britain will eventually pose a threat to the Jewish population–Jews in France have been under attack by Muslim immigrants for a number of years. The efforts to cancel out what Mr. Hayek is saying are an example of ‘creeping sharia’–cancelling out anyone who says anything negative about Islam.

Sharia Law In America

Posted on by

There are many aspects of Sharia Law that are different from American Constitutional law. One of the more obvious is the conflict between the concept of free speech and the penalty for blasphemy. On Tuesday, The American Thinker posted an article about a bill that was recently passed in the U.S. House of Representatives that will move America in the direction of Sharia Law.

Congress.gov (you have to go to the site and put in the bill number as the specific link expires) describes HR 5665 as follows:

Passed House (12/14/2021)

Combating International Islamophobia Act

This bill establishes within the Department of State the Office to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia and addresses related issues.

The office shall monitor and combat acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement in foreign countries. The bill establishes the position of Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating Islamophobia, who shall head the office.

The bill also requires certain existing annual reports to Congress about human rights and religious freedom in foreign countries to include information about Islamophobia, such as information about (1) acts of physical violence or harassment of Muslim people, (2) instances of propaganda in government and nongovernment media that attempt to justify or promote hatred or incite violence against Muslim people, and (3) actions taken by a country’s government to respond to such acts. The office shall coordinate and assist in preparing these portions of the reports.

No funds made available pursuant to the bill may be used to promote or endorse a boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement ideology (i.e., economic measures against Israel or Israel-related individuals or organizations) or used to promote or endorse a Muslim ban.

It is no surprise that the bill is sponsored by Ilhan Omar.

The American Thinker reports:

The actual text of the bill not only seeks to eradicate blasphemy against Islam around the world – and solely against Islam at that – but even requires the federal government to reorganize some portions of the State Department along the lines of an Islamic religious institution which will be responsible for interpreting the Quran.  For example, the text of the bill mandates that “[t]he Secretary of State shall establish within the Department of State an Office” and the “purpose” of the office is described as “[m]onitoring and combating acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement that occur in foreign countries.”  That is, the State Department is required to create an office that is a cross between George Orwell’s Big Brother and the Taliban.

The word ‘combat’ in the text of the law is problematic but fits in perfectly with the concept of waging violent jihad against the countries deemed to have committed blasphemy against Islam.  Almost every dictionary defines the word primarily as an action pertaining to war.  While the internet firm Google’s dictionary defines ‘combat’ as “fighting between armed forces,” Cambridge Dictionary defines the word as “a fight, especially during a war.”  According to Collins Dictionary, “combat is fighting that takes place in a war.”  This is no hyperbole as the State Department has a long history of supporting Islamic terrorists such as Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and ISIS.  Former Assistant Secretary of State, Robin Raphel, ran her office as though it were an outpost of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and she lost her security clearance when she was investigated for counterintelligence activities.  Little wonder then that Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House, used the term “Rogue State Department” and President Donald Trump described the State Department as the “Deep State Department.”

This law is not consistent with our Constitution.

This Is What Desperation Looks Like

Posted on by

Remember when you were a child or were raising children and anything bad that was done in the house was done by “not me”? It seems as if the Biden administration learned that lesson well. They are desperately trying to avoid responsibility for the humanitarian disaster that is unfolding in Afghanistan.

Yesterday Breitbart reported that CBS News is claiming that climate change is responsible for strengthening the Taliban. Really? President Jefferson was dealing with the Barbary Pirates during his term as President. Did climate change strengthen them?

The article at Breitbart reports:

CBS News has blamed “climate change” for abetting the Taliban in their rise to power in Afghanistan, insisting that global warming has forced farmers into debt and into the arms of the Taliban.

In a risible report that has been compared to spoofs in the Babylon Bee and the Onion, CBS News asserted last week that Afghan farmers struggle to maintain productive crops and thus have to borrow funds to survive.

“When Afghans can’t pay off lenders, the Taliban often steps in to sow government resentment,” CBS News declared in its airtight “gotcha” report.

“If you’ve lost your crop and land or the Afghan government hasn’t paid enough attention then of course, the Taliban can come and exploit it,” the article states, citing Kamal Alam, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center.

CBS News does not bother explaining how “drought” and “flood-ravaged soil,” which have been a constant in Afghanistan for ages, are suddenly the result of “climate change.” They seem to assume that any weather-related phenomenon, no matter how commonplace, must somehow be related to global warming.

The article concludes:

In 2014, Charles B. Strozier, professor of history at the City University of New York, asserted that “environmental stressors and political violence are connected in surprising ways” and suggested driving hybrid cars as a way to thwart the Taliban’s war on girls.

“If more Americans knew how glacial melt contributes to catastrophic weather in Afghanistan — potentially strengthening the Taliban and imperiling Afghan girls who want to attend school — would we drive more hybrids and use millions fewer plastic bags?” Strozier asked rhetorically. “How would elections and legislation be influenced?”

I hate to disagree with the learned professor, but Islam has been waging war on women long before the automobile was invented. Sharia Law is the basis for the Taliban’s war on girls. Sharia Law goes back to the founding of Islam. While limiting our carbon footprint is an admirable goal, it will not improve the lives of the women left behind in Afghanistan.

Something I Never Would Have Believed Could Happen In America

Posted on by

On Friday, PJ Media reported the following:

Everything is bigger in Texas, including the egregious miscarriages of justice. The Blaze reported Wednesday that Collin County, Texas, District Judge Andrea Thompson “effectively denied a U.S. citizen,” a Muslim woman named Mariam Ayad, “her constitutionally protected due process rights, choosing instead to order her to appear before an Islamic tribunal where her testimony is considered inferior. And when her lawyers sounded the alarm — the judge doubled down.” Islamic law, Sharia, taking precedence over U.S. law — in Texas? Celebrate diversity!

Ayad was trying to get a divorce from her husband, Ayad Hashim Latif. Sharia stipulates that while a man can divorce his wife simply by telling her three times that he is divorcing her, a woman has to seek the permission of Muslim clerics and make her case for a divorce before them. There is, of course, no such provision in U.S. law, but when Ayad told Latif that she was going to seek a divorce, he told her that she had signed an Islamic prenuptial agreement that stated the marriage, and any possible divorce, would proceed according to Sharia provisions.

Mariam Ayad contends now that she was tricked into signing this agreement, and thought that what she was signing was something else altogether. Her lawyers state that American law should supersede it in any case. Thompson, however, ruled that the prenuptial agreement was binding, and thus Ayad will have to go through the Islamic Association of North Texas to get permission to divorce. According to The Blaze, this decision was in “complete disregard of both federal and state law.”

This case isn’t over: Ayad is appealing at the Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas….

The article goes on to list some of the aspects of Sharia Law that contradict the U.S. Constitution–the Qur’an declares that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man, the Qur’an teaches that men are superior to women and should beat those from whom they “fear disobedience”, the Qur’an also allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls, the Qur’an rules that a son’s inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter. You get the idea. These ideas have no place in America.

The article concludes:

Non-Muslims in several states a few years ago tried to outlaw the elements of Sharia that interfere with Constitutionally protected freedoms, not Islam as an individual religious practice. These anti-Sharia measures were aimed at political Islam, an authoritarian ideology at variance with the Constitution in numerous particulars: Sharia denies the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law. That is what people wanted to restrict, and the elements of Sharia that contradict Constitutional freedoms were all they want to restrict. But of course these efforts met furious opposition and were denounced as “Islamophobic.”

Meanwhile, Sharia really does deny equality of rights to women. But to oppose that is “racist.” So Mariam Ayad just has to suffer, you see, for diversity.

It’s interesting that the court was willing to embrace Islamic Law, which is in conflict with the U.S. Constitution while at the same time many of our courts are pushing Judeo-Christian laws and values, which are the basis of our Constitution, out of the public square.

This Is Actually According To Sharia Law

Posted on by

ABC News is reporting today that Fox News host Jeanine Pirro was taken off the air for remarks made about Democratic Representative Ilhan Omar.

These are the remarks:

“Think about it: Omar wears a hijab, which according to the Quran, 33:59, tells women to cover so they won’t get molested,” Pirro said on her show last week. “Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to Sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?”

Sharia Law is antithetical to the United States Constitution. Sharia Law does not support Freedom of Speech, equality for women, equal rights for all religions, and believes in the killing of homosexuals. Those ideas are not in tune with the U. S. Constitution. The fact that Jeanine Pirro was taken off the air for telling the truth is much more in line with Sharia Law than American Law. Under Sharia Law, slander is anything that offends the hearer–it doesn’t matter if it is true or not–if the hearer is offended, it is slander.

We need to put the speech police out of business or we will totally lose our freedom. The question Jeanine Pirro asked was a perfectly logical question. I am sure pressure was put on Fox News by CAIR and other Muslim groups (threatening lawsuits, etc.) to take her off the air to make an example of her. It is sad that Fox News did not have the backbone to stand and fight for free speech in America.

People In Glass Houses…

Posted on by

Ilhan Omar has been in the news recently for implying that a pro-Israel lobbying group — the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) — is paying US politicians to support Israel. AIPAC does not directly contribute to political campaigns, but does make contributions through a number of political action committees (PACs) and does lobby. That is no different than many other organizations. Her criticism is interesting, however, when you look at her donors.

Sara Carter is reporting today that Ms Omar received tens of thousands of dollars from PACs and lobbyists.

The article reports:

According to the records of the Federal Election Commission, last summer Omar received nearly $60,000 from PACs.

One PAC from which Omar received thousands of dollars in 2018 is the Council on American Islamic Relations. CAIR was named as an un-indicted co-conspirator in the 2009 Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism-financing trial in American history.

And CAIR not only has a PAC, it is a lobbying organization. On Jan.10, CAIR hosted the Community Congressional Reception at which Omar spoke.

In all, Omar received tens of thousands of dollars from lobbying groups. None of her money came from AIPAC or the NRA or the fossil fuel industry; That must be a coincidence.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Holy Land Foundation trial, here is the link to one of the government exhibits introduced in the trial. This exhibit outlines the plan of the Muslim Brotherhood to undermine the government of the United States and replace the U.S. Constitution with Sharia Law. CAIR is listed as an un-indicted co-conspirator in this effort. That is where some of this Congresswoman’s  campaign money is coming from. She should be removed from the Foreign Relations Committee–she does not represent the best interests of America.

Not Here. Not Now.

Posted on by

Yesterday BizPacReview posted an article about something new on the streets of New York City–the Muslim Community Police.

This is a picture of one of their cars:

The article reports:

Some New York City residents were shocked last week to see vehicles with the words “Muslim Community Patrol” emblazoned on them cruising the streets like police squad cars.

The article includes a number of tweets by people concerned about this community patrol.

This is the response to those tweets:

These tweets reflect a belief among some Americans that the Muslim community wants to usurp America’s constitutionally based system of law and replace it with that of Sharia, a religious law derived from the religious precepts of the Islamic religion.

While these fears may sound outlandish, they stem from actual examples of Sharia being practiced in the United States. A perfect example of this occurred in 2010, when a federal judge appointed by former Democrat President Bill Clinton ruled that it was unconstitutional for Oklahoma to bar state courts from considering the application of Sharia law in their rulings.

Another example happened just last year, when a Minnesota Muslim man intent on imposing Sharia law in his local community reportedly began patrolling his neighborhood and confronting anyone who dared to violate Islam’s strict rules and dress codes.

At the time local authorities received reports about a mob of Muslim men walking around with uniforms that read “Muslim Defense Force” and “Religious Police.”

How is this legal and who is paying for the cars? Please read my article on The Holy Land Foundation Trial if the idea of a Muslim Community Patrol is acceptable to you. This could easily be the start of some very bad things.

Europe’s War On Free Speech

Posted on by

Many years ago I met Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff at a dinner in Stoughton, Massachusetts (story here). She told her story of being charged with hate speech for teaching a course about Mohammad that included identifying him as a pedophile (story here).

Today, Reason posted an article about a decision by the European Court of Human Rights that most knowledgeable observers recognize as the case of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff. The title of the article is, “European Court: OK to Criminalize Calling Mohammed a Pedophile.”

The article reports:

The case, decided yesterday by the European Court of Human Rights, is E.S. v. Austria — I assume from the facts and from the initials that this is the Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff case. Here’s the court’s own summary:

Criminal conviction and fine for statements accusing the Prophet Muhammad of paedophilia: no violation

Facts – The applicant held seminars with the title “Basic information on Islam” at the right-wing Freedom Party Education Institute. At one such seminar, referring to a marriage which Muhammad had concluded with Aisha, a six-year old, and consummated when she had been nine, she stated inter alia “[Muhammad] liked to do it with children”, “the thing with Aisha and child sex” and “a 56-year-old and a six-year-old? What do you call that? Give me an example? What do we call it, if it is not paedophilia?”

In 2011, as a result of these statements, the applicant was convicted of disparagement of religious precepts pursuant to Article 188 of the Criminal Code. She was sentenced to pay a fine of EUR 480, or serve 60 days of imprisonment in the event of default.

The domestic courts made a distinction between child marriages and paedophilia. In their opinion, by accusing Muhammad of paedophilia, the applicant had merely sought to defame him, without providing evidence that his primary sexual interest in Aisha had been her not yet having reached puberty or that his other wives or concubines had been similarly young. In particular, the applicant had disregarded the fact that the marriage with Aisha had continued until the Prophet’s death, when she had already turned eighteen and had therefore passed the age of puberty.

The thing to remember here is that there is no regard for truth here.  What Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff said about Mohammad is true, but according to Sharia Law, any speech that a Muslim does not like can be considered slander. In a country under Sharia Law, you can be executed for slander. Is Europe moving toward a Sharia Law definition of slander by calling it hate speech? In America we have the First Amendment (at least for now). We need to protect our First Amendment rights because they are somewhat unique–even in the western world. In Britain and Canada pastors have been charged with hate speech for quoting the Bible on such issues as homosexuality. Their pastors are not free to share the Bible in its entirety. In America we need to make sure we elect leaders who will abide by the Constitution and protect free speech.

I strongly suggest you follow the link above to read the entire article at Reason. The thought that you can go to prison for telling the truth is chilling.