Posts tagged ‘mohammed married a child’

November 18, 2011

Afghanistan: a nation where converts to Buddhism and Christianity face death

Afghanistan: a nation where converts to Buddhism and Christianity face death

Murad Makhmudov and Lee Jay Walker

Modern Tokyo Times

The United States, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, and a host of other nations, keep on sending economic support to Afghanistan and how do the leaders of this nation respond?  Yes, they still support an ongoing Islamic inquisition whereby every Muslim convert to Buddhism, Hindusim or Christianity faces the death penalty.

In truth, the policies of Karzai and the Taliban are not so different because both sides support killing apostates from Islam, the prevention of non-Muslim places of worship, continuing discrimination against women and rigid stratification of Afghanistan. Therefore, any positive images of Kabul being shown in the media, is just “a hidden disguise of reality” and corruption is endemic alongside the heroin trade.

Afghan converts to Christianity and other faiths also face persecution outside of Afghanistan and if de-Islamization of culture isn’t installed into the younger generation via the education system, then what is the point?

Therefore, the mosque and Islamic Sharia law needs to be kept out of all major institutions and reformist Muslim organizations should be supported. After all, how can commerce, pluralism, religious freedom, female emancipation, the rights of homosexuals, and so forth, happen under the prevailing conditions of modern day Afghanistan?

Secularism, credit unions to help business initiatives, a growing liberal media network, a judiciary which is free from religious dogma and an educational system based on liberal values is needed. Of course, other important areas need changing and this applies to restrictions on dress and challenging the power base of traditional rulers who care little about modernity.

This Sunni Islamic version of Islam in Afghanistan is mainly ultra-conservative and based on preserving inequality and the subjugation of non-Muslims, women, and maintaining stratification. The Islamic enlightenment in this country is a million miles away. Therefore, the current Western policy appears to be based on the status quo and allowing another generation of girls to be chained by an oppressive society.

If the option is the Taliban who recently stoned a woman to death for so-called immorality, yes, Mohammed married a child of 6 years of age and consummated the marriage with Aisha when she was 9 years old, and by this time Mohammed was over 50 (Obviously morality is conditional on individuals and not their own prophet); or the Karzai government which is corrupt and supports killing apostates via the state; then what option is this?

Trillions of dollars have been spent on Afghanistan and the return on all this money is you have schools which teach basic education to girls. However, this educational system is uneven and in more conservative areas it is still disliked.

Therefore, what are NATO forces and American troops dying for? Why are the sons and daughters of democrats being thrown to “the jaws of radical Sunni Islam” and the complete corruption and hypocrisy of the Karzai regime?

Once Buddhism and Hinduism nurtured the land of Afghanistan but the Islamic inquisition after countless invasions changed everything and one day all Buddhists would disappear because of many factors. These factors apply to dhimmitude, massacres, pogroms, and once the power shift became dominated by Islamic forces then Buddhism was doomed to just being a shell.

However, the Taliban didn’t even like a shell, therefore, the forces of conservative Sunni Islam turned against all Buddhist images. At the same time, the forces of radical Sunni Islam then turned against the Shia and slaughtered them in the thousands but of course Osama Bin Laden believed that this policy was both Islamic and a jihad.

This madness, and it is madness, which desires to kill apostates to Buddhism, apostates to Christianity, kill homosexuals, stone women to death for adultery, and so forth; isn’t being challenged by “the light of democracy;” on the contrary it is being challenged by appeasement and the corruption of the Karzai regime which also supports killing all apostates and not allowing any other religion in Afghanistan.

If Western political leaders just desire the status quo then surely they should stop wasting the lives of military people who are dying for nothing. Also, tax-payers money shouldn’t be thrown at a county which is undemocratic and corrupt.

America likes to rebuke North Korea but women at least have a million times more freedom in this nation than Afghan women. The same also applies to Saudi Arabia where women can’t drive cars and shop freely with men and so forth.

Indeed, you have more Christian churches in North Korea than in both Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. What does this tell us about Western policy and the nature of conservative Sunni Islam? Also, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia are deemed to be allies but from the point of view of democracy, religious freedom, equality of the sexes, and so forth, it certainly doesn’t look like it.

It is time to stop coddling up to despotism and for greater accountability.

http://www.aina.org/news/20111116185325.htm  (Recent article about apostates in Afghanistan)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2060380/Afghan-mother-daughter-stoned-shot-dead-Taliban-accused-moral-deviation-adultery.html  (Woman and daughter stoned to death)

leejay@moderntokyotimes.com

http://moderntokyotimes.com

 
 
 
Advertisements
October 25, 2011

Saudi Arabia: Child marriage, the Hadiths and the Islamophobia card

Saudi Arabia: Child marriage, the Hadiths and the Islamophobia card

Murad Makhmudov and Lee Jay Walker 

Modern Tokyo Times

Saudi Arabia continues to allow old men to marry young girls aged eight years old and upwards. The mantra by Muslims and converts to Islam, is that Islam equals morality and that Mohammed is a great role model but this depends on your interpretation of a good role model?  Therefore, with Saudi Arabia supporting Islamic Sharia law and believing that society should be based on what Mohammed did and stated in the Hadiths, it is clear that child marriage is sanctioned because Mohammed also married a child.

This reality is creating a problem for the Guardians of Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia. If this nation modernizes, then it may be seen to be pandering to Western morals and increasing the age of marriage will be challenged by conservative Sunni Islamic leaders in Saudi Arabia.

Ironically, the people who use the “Islamophobia card” are basically trying to prevent individuals speaking out against Islamic Sharia law. This is despite the fact that Islamic Sharia law and the Hadiths support pedophilia, killing homosexuals, killing apostates, chopping hands and feet off for petty crimes, stoning people to death for adultery, and other draconian laws. All these draconian measures are based on the life and sayings of Mohammed.

Therefore, if people are deemed to be “Islamophobic” for fighting against the brutal reality of many Islamic states which are based on hatred and supporting the abuse of children, apostates, homosexuals, and others; then in a world based on justice and morality the overwhelming majority of people should be deemed to be “Islamophobic.”

However, democratic nations, the mass media on a whole, international child advocates, and major institutions like the United Nations are not doing enough to fight against a legal system which clearly discriminates against non-Muslims and allows children to be married to old men.

More surprisingly is that major religious leaders, irrespective if they are Christian, Buddhist, or whatever, appear to be fearful of speaking out against this injustice. The political correct brigade and “trendy left” and “trendy liberals” appear to have “sold their soul” because if anyone speaks out against the brutal reality of Sharia Islamic law then they are deemed to be “Islamophobic.”

However, it is the political correct brigade, “trendy left” and “trendy liberals” who have joined forces with a legal system and a religion which supports pedophilia; killing homosexuals; supporting the notion that a female testimony is unequal in law; killing or victimizing apostates; and supporting a dhimmitude system which states that non-Muslims are unequal.

Not only this, it is only Islamic sources which are being used by individuals who fear the growing threat of Islamic Sharia law.  Despite this, freedom to counter the reality of Islamic Sharia law in nations like Saudi Arabia or rebuking the most draconian aspects of this legal system is being crushed by political correctness and moral relativism.

Therefore, despite a raped teenager being stoned to death in Somalia by Sunni Islamists; converts to Christianity being beheaded in Somalia; homosexuals being hanged in Iran; women facing being whipped in Saudi Arabia for not covering up; non-Muslim men facing the death penalty if marrying a Muslim female in several Islamic Sharia law based nations; old men marrying young girls in nations like Saudi Arabia and Yemen; people facing the death penalty in Pakistan for blasphemy; and so much more, including the unequal testimony of women and chopping hands and feet off; this hatred is being allowed because of the weakness of nations and the failure of people to confront this reality.

Turning back to Saudi Arabia, in an earlier article by Modern Tokyo Times it was stated that “On the one hand the Saudi Arabian legal system of Islamic law supports killing people for adultery and homosexuality. However, on the other hand it is deemed to be Islamic to marry a young child of 8 years of age or 9 years of age, irrespective if the male is 30 years old or 40 years old, or even older. Surely these morals are twisted?”

“Before focusing even more on the strange morals of the Saudi Arabian legal system it is vital to state why child marriages are allowed. This of course applies to Mohammed. “After all, when Mohammed, the prophet of Islam, was 49 years of age he married a 6 year old child called Aisha. When Aisha was 9 years old and Mohammed was 52 years old, he consummated the marriage.”

“Therefore, this sets a major problem for the conservative Islamic religious leaders in Saudi Arabia because they want to govern society by the laws of Islamic Sharia Law and the Hadiths. If they support increasing the age of marriage like the majority of mainly Muslim nations have done, then how does this fit in with the legal system being based on the teachings of Mohammed?”

This is a real problem for Saudi Arabia because the majority of Muslim nations have introduced laws which protect children by increasing the marriage age.  Also, more secularized Muslim majority nations have introduced reforms whereby the most draconian aspects of Sharia Islamic law have been rejected.

However, many conservative and radical Islamic organizations in the so-called Muslim world and within Western nations desire to re-introduce the most draconian aspects of Islamic Sharia law.

Turning back to Saudi Arabia and allowing old men to marry young girls then clearly this is based on the Hadiths. The following quotes are from highly acclaimed Islamic scholars and these Hadiths have been known since the early days of Islam.

“Narrated Aisha: The prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six. We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Harith Kharzraj” and it continues that “Unexpectedly Allah’s Messenger came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.” Sahih Al-Bukhari states in volume 5, 234

“Aisha reported: Allah’s Messenger married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine…..” Muslim, volume 2, 3309

“Narrated Aisha: that the prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old.” Al-Bukhari

Therefore, the Hadiths vindicate religious leaders and the kingdom’s Grand Mufti, Sheikh Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh, commented that “A girl aged 10 or 12 can be married. Those who think she’s too young are wrong and they are being unfair to her.” From an Islamic point of view and based on what Mohammed did, then the Grand Mufti is technically correct – however, how is this moral and why no reformation like in other faiths?

In an earlier article it was stated that “…a judge in Saudi Arabia justified the right of an 8 year-old child to marry a man of 47 years of age. Even after the mother signed a petition to demand the annulment of the marriage, the judge still refused because of the teachings of Islam. Therefore the judge, Sheikh Habib Abdallah al-Habib, refused openly to annul the marriage and in his eyes it is morally right to marry a child to an old man.”

In the modern world you still have seven Islamic Sharia law based nations where apostasy is punishable by death.  Also, in nations like Saudi Arabia men who are very old are allowed to marry young girls.  Therefore, it is time for nations like Saudi Arabia to be challenged and the same applies to societies which sanction child marriage to old men.

Also, in modern day Saudi Arabia many Muslim citizens are fed-up and ashamed by religious clerics and some brave human rights organizations in this nation desire change.  It is vital that their voice is heard and supported.

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-17/world/saudi.child.marriage_1_saudi-arabia-deeply-conservative-kingdom-top-saudi-cleric?_s=PM:WORLD

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-04-12/world/saudi.child.marriage_1_appeals-court-marriage-girl-s-mother?_s=PM:WORLD

http://moderntokyotimes.com please visit

June 23, 2011

Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi follows Islamic utopia and Jihad but it eludes him!

Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi follows Islamic utopia and Jihad but it eludes him!

Lee Jay Walker

Global Security News

Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi is a convert to Islam and the schizophrenia nature of his sermons and spreading the faith in mainly non-Muslim nations sums him up precisely.  After all, note how he does not want to reside in beautiful nations like Afghanistan whereby he can witness women being herded like cattle or in Somalia where he could watch converts to Christianity being beheaded. 

Instead Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi, just like all hypocrites desires to Islamize from within but not only this; he is somehow turning Mohammed into a prophet of humanity despite his prophet having sex with concubines, supporting jihad, stealing wealth from others and introducing thinking which would enslave non-Muslims.  Therefore, he is not only involved in Islamic kitman but he mocks himself and should take up comedy.

In his latest sermon he states “There is war in Libya and in Afghanistan. Muslims there are being daily slaughtered on an authority from the political class, men who wage war by proxy and at a safe distance.”

Note the complete manipulation of language once more because Libya is an internal dispute and Muslims are killing each other.  I also do not support the bombing of Libya but on the grounds that Arab Muslim elites are slaughtering non-Muslim Africans in Southern Sudan and continue to slaughter African Muslims.  After all, in Sudan the enslavement of Africans goes hand in hand and of course Mohammed owned slaves, enslaved, and had sex with slaves.  Therefore, Western intervention should be focused on Darfur in Sudan and the current crisis near the border of Southern Sudan and Sudan.

Secondly, Muslims are also slaughtering each other in Afghanistan and he knows full well that Shia Muslims were massacred in the tens of thousands under The Taliban and Al Qaeda (Al Qaida) alliance.   However, it must be stated that the white convert Ian Dallas, yes, Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi; hates the Shia and he states this in his sermons and even makes it clear that they should pay jizya in Bahrain just like Christians should.

The egalitarian Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi is not so egalitarian but he forgets about his own hypocrisy just like he forgets about the reality of Mohammed.  After all, he talks about the need to eradicate the money system based on interest but says little about Mohammed supporting jizya, the right to enslave during war and taking the wealth of the vanquished.

Yes, you have many white converts to Islam who reside in cloud cuckoo land but this “cuckoo” is dangerous because he is spreading his false message to vulnerable individuals who also hate what they once were. 

If Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi aka Ian Dallas does not know that Pakistan is involved in the carnage in Afghanistan and that Shia Muslims now have much greater freedom.  Then what does he understand? 

Or does Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi desire to see women shot to death for adultery or stoned to death in accordance with Islamic Sharia law?  Where does he see Muslims being victims in Afghanistan when it is tribal, ethnic and sectarian Muslim hatred which is destroying this once Buddhist-Hindu land?

More double-talk from Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi because he states “…not one kafir intellectual has grasped that the mechanism of their disaster is not a breakdown of a system, but the logical and mathematically inevitable completion of its programme. It is a process of expropriation, seizing lands, commodities and peoples. The expropriators are an oligarchic class comprising bankers, media and corporation chiefs, its servants are the under-class of politicians.”

I wonder where he got this language from in the Koran because he sounds rather Marxist but Mohammed wasn’t Karl Marx.  Communism in power may have exploited and created a system of power control and power concentration but Marx did not support a system where individuals were deemed inferior based on religion, ethnicity or sexuality.

Now, let us look at Mohammed the not so utopian who did not support equality or equal distribution amongst all people.  After all, Mohammed stated the following:

The Koran: 8:12 “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.”

Koran: 5:33 “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter…”

Koran: 9:5 “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem.”

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

These verses alone and you have so much hatred within other verses and in many Hadiths, means that Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi is not only a hypocrite but he is involved in Islamic kitman at the highest.  He knows the real message but gullible converts are not listening to quotes from the Koran but instead they are listening to his message based on utopian Marxist concepts. 

Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi states “It is a process of expropriation, seizing lands, commodities and peoples.” Note how Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi is condemning this but he supports Mohammed when he states “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem…….Koran 9:5 and in Koran 9:29…. “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

It is abundantly clear that Mohammed is not only ordering the slaughter of non-Muslims but he is also supporting non-Muslims to be completely subdued and to pay jizya to the ruling Muslims.  If non-Muslims refuse, then they would face either death or slavery.

However, Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi the hypocrite condemns the West on the one hand but says nothing about the enslavement, redistribution of wealth and power in the hands of the Muslims and the enslavement or massacres of non-Muslims who happen to support equality or religious freedom. 

This dangerous hypocrite is also spreading stealth jihad in non-Muslim nations in the full knowledge that Buddhists, Hindus, Christians and all non-Muslims have no equality or freedom in the land of Mecca and Medina. The Shia also face massive discrimination at the hands of Sunni Islamic zealots and Ahmadiyya Muslims are not allowed to even set foot in Saudi Arabia.

However, the gullible who hate their own past culture are listening to an individual who can easily be shown for what he is – a hypocrite and deceiver because he supports utopia and the slave master at the same time and his words can’t hold because the Koran and Hadiths contradict him.

Also, note how Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi appears to be putting himself above Mohammed because his sermons are based on the Western liberal background he came from and tinged with Marxist rhetoric.  He therefore is not preaching the Koran or Hadiths in his main message but only at the end.

It is essential that stealth Islamic jihadists who are spreading the faith in democratic nations are rebuked for the deceivers they are and because they desire to spread Islam by abusing the freedoms that they have in mainly non-Muslim nations.

Liberal democracy and liberal non-Muslim religious leaders alongside politicians understand the reality of Saudi Arabia. However, they believe that if they appease then Islam will become more moderate but this will not happen.

Also, stealth jihadists like Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi will continue to build a structure from within in order to Islamize and fellow hypocrites like Ahmad Thomson are clearly dangerous.

Ahmad Thomson, another white convert to Islam, is being listened to by people in power in the United Kingdom and he is using law in order to obtain so-called equal rights for Muslims in the United Kingdom via Islamic Sharia law.   However, the hypocrite, just like Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi, knows full well that apostates face death in Islam and that non-Muslim males who marry Muslim women face death in accordance with Islamic Sharia law.

However, this does not concern Ahmad Thomson because like Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi he believes that Muslims should be treated special in non-Muslim nations.  Yet they know the reality of non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia where apostates can be killed and so forth and in full accordance with Islamic Sharia law. 

Neither can pick and choose which parts of Sharia Islamic law that they support and they know that Islamic Sharia law supports killing people by stoning people to death for adultery; killing people for freely changing their faith; killing non-Muslims for marrying Muslim women; and other draconian laws like killing homosexuals and cross amputation.

Despite the harsh reality of Islamic Sharia law and the un-utopian nature of Mohammed both Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi and Ahmad Thomson, and a host of other white converts like Abdur-Raheem Green; are intent on stealth jihad and while non-Muslims have freedom it is essential to challenge them in order to show their falsehood and Islamic kitman for what it is.

In my article called “United Kingdom: Ahmad Thomson, Islamic hypocrisy and sharia law” I stated that “Despite the rampant inequality of Islamic Sharia law and barbaric laws which support killing non-Muslims for merely marrying Muslim females; Ahmad Thomson and Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi still peddle their Islamic kitman.”

“Both individuals know that non-Muslims are unequal in Islamic Sharia law and when they visited Saudi Arabia they witnessed a nation which even imprisons Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, and other non-Muslims, for merely talking openly about their faith.”

“These two hypocrites openly proselytize in mainly non-Muslim nations in order to spread the Islamic faith and they do this in the full knowledge that non-Muslims face the death penalty if they try to convert Muslims in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, The Maldives, Yemen, and a few other nations.”

“However, Ahmad Thomson in the United Kingdom is in the vanguard for changing laws in this nation and his voice is being listened to in important circles. 

Ahmad Thomson cries human rights in the United Kingdom but what about the human rights of non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia and Islamic Sharia law?”

Non-Muslims in Islamic Sharia law based nations like Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, The Maldives, and a host of other nations; do not have equality and freedom but despite this stealth jihadists, Islamic kitman leaders and others still desire to spread their doctrines in democratic nations.  

Either individuals fight back against this tyranny or one day this tyranny will be unleashed against us and our civil liberties will be crushed.

 

http://www.shaykhabdalqadir.com

http://www.shaykhabdalqadir.com/content/articles/Art122_22062011.php

http://www.islamsgreen.org/

http://www.wynnechambers.co.uk/  

http://global-security-news.com

June 9, 2011

Islamic liberalism is a million times more dangerous than radical Islam

Islamic liberalism is a million times more dangerous than radical Islam

Lee Jay Walker

Global Security News

The biggest threat to all civilizations is Islamic liberalism because Islamic liberals fully understand Islamic history but like the deceivers they are; they still desire to Islamize but by Islamic dawah, stealth jihad, and Islamic kitman.

Osama bin Laden supported killing apostates, Islamic jihad, Islamic Sharia law, killing homosexuals, child marriage, stoning women to death for adultery, enslaving non-Muslims during jihad, and he believed that Muslim men would go to heaven and meet virgins after killing infidels.

The Islam of Osama bin Laden was based on Mohammed, the Koran, Hadiths and Islamic Sharia law.  All the above in the previous paragraph was sanctioned by Mohammed and Mohammed himself married a child and ordered the killings of non-Muslims in the name of Allah.

Islamic liberal organizations like Muslim Bridges (http://muslimbridges.org) in America are openly spreading Islam despite claiming to build bridges.  You only have to check their website to note that they visit Christian churches and teach people how to pray to Allah and how Islam is based on love and peace.

Of course, these liberal kitman Muslims know full well that apostates are killed in Islamic nations based on Sharia Islamic law.  Therefore, Muslim converts to other religions face the death penalty in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, the Maldives, and Yemen.

However, the kitman liberal Muslims will state that Mohammed means peace and that Islam means love and humility.  Somehow killing apostates, stoning to death, cross amputation, child marriage (child rape and still sanctioned in Saudi Arabia), stoning to death for adultery, enslaving during jihad and so on; all this means “peace” in the minds of kitman loving liberal Muslims who love to spread Islamic dawah by stating complete lies.

Muslim Bridges also plays the race card and states how ethnicity is not important in Islam and so forth. This organization praises the fact that mixed marriages can be seen openly in Mecca and all because of the greatness of Allah.

Strange because slavery was not abolished until the 1960s in the lands of Mecca and Medina and this only happened because of external pressure by non-Muslim nations.  Also, in modern day Mauritania and Sudan it is clear that black Africans are treated with disdain and that slavery is a constant threat.

Another point which Islamic liberals gloss over is the fact that non-Muslim men face the death penalty in Saudi Arabia for marrying a Muslim female.  Yes, for an act of love the reality of Islam in accordance to Islamic Sharia law means death in the lands of Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, the Maldives, Yemen and a few other nations.

Of course the liberal media machine, the United Nations and political leaders in the West desire to ignore this reality.  After all, the non-Muslim world must show its fairness while Islamists kill Buddhists in southern Thailand and marry non-Muslims freely and without any hindrance. 

It seems that Islamic fanatics and Islamic liberals can’t lose because either way it is a win-win situation.  Therefore, the Muslim population keeps on growing in India and the United Kingdom and at the same time the Hindu population faces complete annihilation in Pakistan and the same fate awaits the Christian community in Iraq.

If you magnify organizations and individuals like Muslim Bridges then it is abundantly clear that liberal Islam is the real threat to non-Muslim nations.   Also, liberals in the West and India are bending over backwards in order to allow this lie to spread despite Islamic sources in the Koran and the Hadiths which state the opposite.

Therefore, for every non-Muslim who is converted to radical Islam in mainly non-Muslim nations, you will have another 99 who are converted to liberal Islamic kitman, whereby Islamic dawah openly enabled lies to be told in order to spread the faith.

The madness of these Islamic liberals is much worse than individuals like Osama bin Laden who fully understood the reality of Islam. 

After all, if you look at Afghanistan then firstly liberal Islam was spread along with the Sufi deceivers who are dangerous because they first went out and converted in the name of deceit and lies. 

Once the faith spread and Islam grew in power then Buddhism, Hinduism and all non-Muslim faiths in Afghanistan were doomed to slavery and the Islamic inquisition.

In time Islamization would take place in Afghanistan and all Buddhists and Hindus faced the sword of Islam.  After this, the various thought patterns in Islam were seen to be problematic because past culture remained therefore the Sunni Islamic Taliban emerged and now it was the turn of Shia Muslims and other non-Sunni branches to face the wrath of pure Sunni Islamization.

Liberal Muslims are the real threat because Islamic armies can no longer invade the majority of non-Muslim nations.  Therefore, Saudi Arabia and others are spreading Islam via Islamic dawah, deceit and open lies in order to Islamize.

It is vital that non-Muslim religious leaders and politicians don’t fall into this trap and the truth about Mohammed, slavery in Islam, child marriage, and so forth; must be told to the masses in order to fight stealth jihad and liberal Islam.

Islamic fanatics like Osama bin Laden only wake people up to the real hatred of Islamic dogma.  However, the television version of Malcolm X who supported the slave owning Mohammed is the real threat alongside organizations like Muslim Bridges.

This is based on the reality that Islam is being revamped in the mainly non-Muslim world in order to Islamize and Islamic liberals, Islamic kitman and stealth jihad is a trinity which is much more powerful than Islamic terrorism.

In nations where non-Muslim minorities are small they face the sword of Islam and in modern day Somalia the Islamic inquisition is in full swing and many Christians have been beheaded and killed in gruesome ways.  The same barbarity is being unleashed against Buddhists in southern Thailand and against minorities in a host of other nations.

However, in the non-Muslim world the threat is liberal Islam, stealth jihad and Islamic kitman. This threat is magnified by the “enemy from within” and many universities, the mass media, Western politicians and liberal non-Muslim religious leaders are bending over backwards in order to accommodate the Islamic faith.

Yet history tells us that Islam cares little about accommodation and the Islamization of Kashmir, Kosovo, Pakistan, Iraq, southern Thailand, and in other parts of the world, is ongoing in the twenty-first century.

http://global-security-news.com

August 8, 2010

Islamic radicalism or Islamic liberalism: which is the real threat?

Islamic radicalism or Islamic liberalism: which is the real threat?

Lee Jay Walker  –   The Modern Tokyo Times

Islamic terrorism is spreading its hatred

Islamic terrorism is spreading its hatred

In the 21st century you have two types of Islam and this applies to the systematic persecution of minorities, for example which is happening in Iraq, the Maldives, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen, and many other Muslim dominated nations.  This violence is aimed at converting minorities or crushing them via dhimittude and systematic persecution.

The other type of Islam is aimed at “stealth jihad” and this comes via liberalism, blatant lies about the real Mohammed, control over the media, playing the persecution card, inter-marriage but with the child or children always being Muslim, and a complete re-writing of history and facts.  At the same time many non-Muslim liberals or the political correct brigade are sowing the seeds for Islamic expansion because of the manipulation of language.

Therefore, it is often perceived that Islamic radicalism is the real threat and not Islamic liberalism, yet how true is this? For history teaches that Islam not only conquered by the sword, but also via liberals who preached a different Islam in order to convert the masses. Yet irrespective if former nations were conquered by the sword or via Sufi mystics or liberal versions of Islam, the outcome was normally the same and this applies to the gradual Islamization of society.  This in turn led to dhimmitude, religious persecution, female exploitation, and backwardness.

Today the sword of Islam is still forcing non-Muslims to convert in nations like Sudan and Somalia, and systematic persecution in majority based Muslim nations is ongoing.  Despite this, many liberals and Western leaders remain silent about the true nature of Islam, the Hadiths, and Islamic Sharia law.  Even worse, many major leaders are praising Islam and it is clear that Islamists are winning the media war in many parts of the world.

For example in the United Kingdom the ex-Prime Minister, Tony Blair, often praised the beauty of Islam and he stated openly that he often reads the Koran. And similar major figures like Prince Charles glorify Islam and he supports Islamic organizations in the United Kingdom. At the same time the mass media ignores major issues like forced conversion, Islamic Sharia Law which discriminates against both women and non-Muslims and other draconian facts about Islam. 

Also, nations like Saudi Arabia  are free to spread their propaganda and build Islamic institutions throughout the West.  Therefore, despite the fact that Saudi Arabia persecutes all non-Muslims it is still clear that this nation can spread false images of Islam and attack nations from within.

At the same time Islamic leaders at major institutions are spreading a liberal version of Islam and if you didn’t know about the “real” Mohammed, you would believe that Mohammed was gentle, loved humanity, treated women with respect and that he was a forerunner of global human rights. Yet the “real” Mohammed made it clear that the enslavement of non-Muslims and war was justifiable in order to spread Islam. Mohammed also stated that male Islamic apostates must be killed and he made sure that non-Muslims were inferior in law and had to pay extra taxes via the system of dhimmitude.

Therefore, while Islamic militants are a threat with regards to Islamic terrorism and persecuting non-Muslims in nations like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan and countless other mainly Islamic nations; this does not apply to the whole picture. For in Western Europe, North America, East Asia, and other parts of the world, Islam can not conquer by the sword, yet the message of Islam and Islamization can take place via mass migration and liberal Muslims spreading an enlightened version of Islam, which does not apply in the real “Islamic world.”

Given this, the real threat of Islamization is not via people like Osama Bin Laden when it comes to developed nations.  Instead the real threat is liberal Islam and non-Muslims who are re-writing history.  Also, many liberal nations are bending-over-backwards in order to reach out to the so-called Muslim world, therefore, the stealth jihad is growing and Islam is being protected by the very same liberals who would be crushed and persecuted under Islamic Sharia law.

For example, Karen Armstrong is teaching an alternative history of Islam and her Prophet Mohamme is very different to say the least.  The same applies to Prince Charles and many others, for these people Mohammed was a man of peace and of course they negate to mention that Mohammed supported jihad, that he cleansed Arabia of Jews and Pagans, and that he married a child and so forth.

Therefore, the spread of Islam is growing in nations like the United Kingdom and at least 50,000 people have converted to Islam. Yet why did they convert? Was it because of people like Osama Bin Laden or because of people like Karen Armstrong and Islamic liberals?   Or is it because of other factors like marriage and the fact that little is said about the real nature of Islam?

It is also baffling that religious leaders in the West are also quiet about the threat of Islam or the persecution of non-Muslims in mainly Islamic nations. And when brave religious leaders rebuke Islam, Sharia Law and the Hadiths, they in turn become rebuked by their own co-religionists. Why?

Surely religious leaders have a duty to tell the truth and to warn their co-religionists about Islamic persecution throughout the Muslim world? However, their silence is helping Islam to grow.  Therefore,  how many of the 50,000 British national converts know about the real Mohammed?

Were they told that Mohammed had slaves, had sex with a child, killed Jews and Pagans, attacked caravans, divorced many times, had sex with concubines, and so forth?

The irony is that Osama Bin Laden is a “real” Muslim who follows the teachings of Islam; and even if you hate this person, he at least follows his convictions which have been installed into him from reading the Koran, the Hadiths and Sharia Law. Yet Islamic liberals, like Sufi teachers, are hypocrites and they are the real threat. For once the liberal period of Islam manages to Islamize society, then only one conclusion will happen and this applies to a future society being backward and based on Sharia Islamic Law.

In the past the Islamization of many nations took place either quickly because of forced conversions, massacres, slavery, dhimmitude, and so on.  Or Islamization was slow and Sufi leaders were then sent in order to talk about the love of God and this lead to confusion or to fusions which would lead to Islamic conversion but based on outside influences.

However, this love of God in time became replaced by conservative Islam and non-Muslims were subdued or became a small minority, or in the case of Buddhism and Hinduism in Afghanistan, then being wiped from the face of Afghanistan. Given this, then which is the real threat, is it Osama Bin Laden and fellow Islamists who will wake people up to read about the real nature of Mohammed and Islam.  Or is it Islamic liberals and non-Muslim liberals who are re-writing Islam?

Lee Jay Walker

https://islamicpersecution.wordpress.com
http://themoderntokyotimes.wordpress.com

 
May 28, 2010

USA appeases Islam under President Obama

USA Appeases Islam under President Obama

 

By Lee Jay Walker
Tokyo Correspondent  –  THE SEOUL TIMES

 

 THE MODERN TOKYO TIMES

US President Barack Obama

The Muslim holy month of Ramadan is set to begin and already President Obama of America is in “manipulation mode” in order to draw America closer to the so-called Muslim world. However, it is clear that Obama’s words are based on Islamic propaganda, however, like so often, coming from the words of a non-Muslim liberal.

Therefore, is it good to have a world leader who speaks on the behalf of another religion and at the same time, repackages it out of all proportion?

In the world of Obama he states that the rituals of Ramadan “remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.” Therefore, what “justice” and “tolerance” is Obama talking about?

After all, Mohammed himself did not believe in the dignity of all human beings, on the contrary, Jews and Pagans were killed and enslaved, and within a short time all faiths would be banned from the lands of Mecca and Medina. The multi-religious nature of Arabia would be shattered and destroyed by both Mohammed and the early Muslim leaders who would then eradicate Christianity from Arabia.

If Muslims want to follow Mohammed and to uphold traditions like the superiority of Muslims in Islamic Sharia codified law; then this is on their conscience. However, unlike Islamic Sharia law which deems non-Muslims to be inferior, or indeed subhuman if you do not belong to the people of the book; modern Western law believes in the equality of law for all citizens, irrespective of race, religion, or gender.

In recent weeks we have seen the usual Islamic tolerance of non-Muslims by radical Sunni Islamists. This applies to burning Christians alive in Pakistan, beheading Christian converts from Islam in Somalia, killing innocent Shia Muslims in Iraq, killing Buddhists in Southern Thailand, beheading Christian pastors in Nigeria, persecuting Coptic Christians in Egypt, and so forth.

Instead of the world confronting this menace, we have so many Western leaders in appeasement mode and even moderate Muslims are overwhelmingly silent on the reality of Islam and any nation which is ruled by Islamic Sharia law. Given this, what “tolerance” and “dignity” of all human beings is based on the Koran and the Hadiths. Also, when did Islamic Sharia law believe in the “dignity” of all human beings and eqaulity?

Of course Obama understands the reality of what Islamic Sharia law means and sometimes it is much better to say nothing, rather than trying to fool people by making grand statements based on myths.

After all, the testimony of Christians and Jews in Islamic Sharia law is half that of a Muslim. Therefore, it is clear that Christians and Jews are deemed to be inferior in Islamic Sharia law and for other faiths, like Buddhists or Hindus, then their testimony is even less or according to some radical Islamists, all Buddhists and Hindus should be killed and not even the traces of Buddhist or Hindu monuments must be allowed (this happened in Afghanistan).

Obama is not alone in supporting institutions which clash with his own thinking, after all Obama claims to support the equality of homosexuals, religious freedom, democracy, gender equality, and so forth. The former Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, embraced Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi, this Muslim cleric, like many others, supports the execution of homosexuals and he justifies terrorism according to an article which was published in the New York Times.

However, in modern day Saudi Arabia homosexuality is punishable by imprisonment or death. The Sunni Islamic Taliban in Afghanistan also kill homosexuals and of course this is sanctioned in Islamic Sharia law and by Islamic clerics. Recently, it was also reported that Muslims are killing homosexuals in modern day Iraq and homosexuals reside in fear in many mainly Muslim parts of the world, for example Palestinian controlled areas, Iran, Somalia, and a host of other nations.

Meanwhile in 2010 in the modern era we have several faiths that face annihilation or the imposition of jizya tax in order to survive under their Islamic masters. Therefore, the Baha’is reside in fear in Iran because of massive persecution; the Shabaks, Christians, Yazidis, and Mandaeans face death and persecution on a daily basis in Iraq; Buddhists in Southern Thailand are being beheaded and killed; Sikhs have been forced to pay jizya in Pakistan and recently Christians were burnt alive in this nation; the minority Ahmadiyya Muslim community also suffers massive inequality and persecution in Pakistan and they are not allowed to visit Saudi Arabia; and Hindus also fear radical Sunni Islamists in both Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Like I stated in a past article about the Mandaeans in Iraq, it is worth repeating because the Islam of Obama is very different to the reality of Islam and what is happening in the modern world.

Therefore, in 2007 the BBC covered a story about the Mandaeans via the headline “Iraq’s Mandaeans face extinction” which was written by Angus Crawford. During the article Angus Crawford states that “The Mandaeans are pacifists, followers of Adam, Noah and John the Baptist.” He highlights that by 2007 more than 80% had already fled their homeland because of the fear of death and daily persecution.

The article also highlights the plight of a 9 year old boy called Selwan. However, for this 9 year old boy he witnessed the hatred of radical Islam because he was forced to jump into a burning bonfire. The consequences of this, yes, the persecution of such a young boy, is around 20% burns and this only happened to him because he is a Mandaean.

The same article also highlights the forced conversion to Islam of Luay who is too petrified to give his full name. For Luay, a Mandaean, he was forced to convert to Islam and “forcibly circumcised.” Also, like Angus Crawford mentions, because “he was forcibly converted. That means in the eyes of those same extremists, if he now declares himself Mandaean he is (an) apostate.” Therefore, if he re-converts back to the Mandaean faith he may be killed by radical Islamists.

Given this, just where does President Obama think that these people want to reside after fleeing persecution? Does Obama think that all these minorities want to flee to Sharia Islamic law nations, like Saudi Arabia or do they want to flee to the West? Of course he knows the answer and he fully knows that in modern day Saudi Arabia that all converts from Islam face the death penalty.

Also, Ahmadiyya Muslims are forbidden from entering Saudi Arabia and the minority Shia Muslim community suffers enormous persecution. Meanwhile Muslim females can not even drive a car in Saudi Arabia and when a young girl’s school was burning they were left to die because the fire brigade was too worried about mixing with the opposite sex.

Mohammed also married a child when he was an old man and the child was only 6 years old and like Sahih Bukhari (respected Islamic scholar) states “Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old.” Therefore, because of this many young girls are married to old men in modern day Saudi Arabia and other Islamic Sharia law based nations and one must add is this the “dignity” that Obama is talking about?

Also, Mohammed stated that (Koran 9:29) “Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.”

Mohammed also stated (Koran 5:38) “As for the thief, both male and female, cut off their hands. It is the reward of their own deeds, an exemplary punishment from Allah. Allah is Mighty, Wise.” Therefore, radical Sunni Islamists in Somalia are enacting this because of the Koran and the same applies to killing apostates because this is also sanctioned in Islam.

Therefore, why is Obama making false statements and why is he ignoring reality? Remember, the same Obama who talks about the dignity of humanity visited the lands of Mecca and Medina. Of course, during his visit to Saudi Arabia he would not have seen one Christian church or Buddhist temple, and if he wanted to read his Christian Bible openly, then under Saudi law he would have faced prison.

The Saudi Arabia he visited is a land which continues to support the killing of apostates from Islam and which denies equality to any other faith, and even persecutes minority Muslim sects. The same Saudi Arabia supports the persecution of all religions and homosexuals; and Islamic clerics in this nation are open about their clear understanding of Islam.

Therefore, why does Obama close his eyes when it pleases him and why does he make false statements which can be ridiculed or openly contradicted at the drop of a hat? If the Dalai Lama, a Buddhist leader, wanted to visit and openly preach in Saudi Arabia he would be killed; therefore, where is the justice and equality in Islamic Sharia law and the Koran for non-Muslims?

LEE JAY WALKER

http://www.leejaywalker.wordpress.com

http://themoderntokyotimes.wordpress.com

leejayteach@hotmail.com

 https://islamicpersecution.wordpress.com