Doc's Talk: Muslims: The Most Kind, Loving, Loyal, Protective and Easily Offended People

Sunday, January 06, 2008

Muslims: The Most Kind, Loving, Loyal, Protective and Easily Offended People

Denis Schulz

Syed Soharwardy says Muslims are the kindest, most loving, most loyal, most protective people if allowed to practice their religion openly and freely. Also the most easily offended. No Christians need apply.
Some people are easily offended. Take the late Billy Martin—he didn’t like being called a cross-grained jackass. Preston Brooks once beat a man over the head with a cane for making casual remarks about his Uncle’s ties to slavery. Al Capone used a baseball bat on Hop Toad Giunta. The old Wild West gunslinger Wilson didn’t like being called a low-down, dirty Yankee liar. There was a comedian name Raymond J. Johnson who didn’t like being called ‘Johnson.’ “Oh, ya doesn’t has to call me Johnson,” he would say. ”You can call me Ray, or you can call me Jay, or you can call me Johnny, or you can call me Sonny, or you can call me Ray Jay, or you can call me R J, but ya doesn’t has to call me Johnson.”

Billy Martin, Preston Brooks, Al Capone, Wilson…it didn’t take much to offend them but compared to Syed Soharwardy, the most easily offended person in all of Canada, they were models of patience and composure—no hair pulling or drooling. Soharwardy is more like Raymond J. Johnson. Capone shrugged off the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre—it was just one of those things; Soharwardy was so offended by the murder of Aqsa Parvez he threatened to go on a hunger strike. “The murder was absolutely un-Islamic,” he said. “We must not be using religion as a scapegoat to justify what we need. We should resolve our disputes based on reasoning, logic and cool-mindedness.” If Capone had been thinking like Soharwardy he would have blamed the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre on Eliot Ness. Booze, he would have said, had nothing to do with the murders. We must not use booze as a scapegoat. Soharwardy uses Islamophobia as a scapegoat. (Capone used reason, logic and cool-mindedness to resolve his dispute with Bugs Moran)

Scarcely days had passed before Soharwardy saw something on the Internet that infuriated him. It was so Islamophobic, so anti-Muslim, he just had to speak up! It was worse than Hamas Mouse arming 10-year-old Palestinians to kill Jews! Obviously someone had carried free speech too far! An Internet blogger had written, “There is no such thing as an innocent Muslim…They must all be killed. All of them.” Soharwardy was incensed. Islam was a religion of peace and toleration, but there were limits to toleration—even to Islamic toleration! Things could occasionally get out of hand. Look what had happened in Sudan…in Darfur…in Beslan…in Smyrna…in Bali…in Kosovo…in Amsterdam…Limits had been reached; believers had been pushed to an extreme. There are times when something has to be done to protect Islam from Kafirs and Infidels.

Syed was born in Karachi. He was trained as an Imam in Saudi Barbaria. He is national president of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada and founder of Muslims Against Terrorism. He defines terrorism as attacks on innocent civilian populations like those carried out by the Bush Administration on Iraq and Afghanistan, ignoring the fact that most of the civilian casualties have been the result of terrorist activities—a terrorism he refuses to acknowledge.

“I assure you,” he says, “if a Muslim is allowed to practice Islam openly and freely and the society does not discriminate against him/her for being openly Muslim, then the Muslim will love that society and will help in protecting the religious rights of the followers of other religions.”

Qur’an 9:29 “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day, who do not forbid that which is forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, or acknowledge the Religion of Truth (Islam), (even if they are) People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizyah tribute tax in submission, feeling themselves brought low.” (Another interpretation: “…pay the tax in acknowledgement of our superiority and their state of subjection)

Tabari VIII:130 “The Messenger said, ‘Two religions cannot coexist in the Arabian peninsula. ‘Uman investigated the matter, then sent to the Jews, saying, ‘Allah has given permission for you to be expelled.’”

Qur’an 48:28 “It is He Who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth (Islam) that he may make it superior to every other religion, exalting it over theirs. Allah is a sufficient witness. Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah. Those who are with him are severe with Infidel unbelievers.”

If Muslims are allowed to practice their religion openly and freely they will love that society and will help protect the religions of the followers of other religions. And how will they do that? It’s a bit complicated and difficult for a non-Muslim to comprehend. First the ‘protected’ religion must be brought low, feel itself subdued and pay the Jizyah tribute tax in submission. And there is that severe thing.

Sowarhardy is tiresome—worse than tiresome. If only the Nazis had been allowed to practice their politics openly and freely…Except for the dead gangsters, Muslims Against Terrorism make Al Capone and the capo di tuttis seem reasonable, logical and cool-minded.

Qur’an 4:114 “He who disobeys the Apostle after guidance has been revealed will burn in Hell.”

George W. Bush and Benedict XVI have been offered guidance. Theo van Gogh was not. It depends on the size of the bodyguard.

Soharwardy says, “A true practice of Islam develops a kind and loving person. Maybe…somewhere… But the kind and loving person Syed is talking about, if it has any existence outside of Islam, is not much in evidence in Saudi Barbaria or Iran or in any section of the universe where Muslims outnumber Infidels, Kafirs and dogs. The Qur’an says those who believe in the Holy Trinity (The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost) will suffer a painful doom. Acceptance of such folderol is not likely to develop kind and loving persons.

Soharwardy is a first-class blowhard. He is so full of silly statements it is difficult to take him seriously, yet like Herr Joachim von Ribbentrop he offers a forecast of the future. With less knowledge of the US Constitution than a mule has of the Ten Commandments, he offered this analysis of American history: “Separation of church and state was required in the west because the church was abusing ordinary citizens in the name of the Christian faith.” Can Christians and Muslims get along? “In holy Qur’an, chapter 30, Allah favored Christians over pagans and gave them victory over their enemies.” “The US government or the US media has no right to declare anyone as terrorists or part of an ‘axis of evil.” (Non-Islamic sovereignty does not exist anywhere in the world!)

Soharwardy listed six things a Muslim must not do at any time, including during Jihad. One: Kill or hurt women and children even if they are of the enemy. Two: Kill the sick and elderly even if they are of the enemy. Three: Do not destroy hospitals. Four: Do not cut down green trees. Five: Do not contaminate water sources. Six: Do not destroy the places of worship of other religions. The best that can be said is they no longer cut down green trees. Yet Soharwardy says, “Where else do we find these great ethics during war time except in a religion founded over 1400 years ago—that of peace loving Islam.”

Beslan…Bali…9/11…Smyrna…Darfur…Sudan…Indonesia…Cyprus…It is easy to get very tired of this drivel. Five minutes of Soharwardy would be worse than listening non-stop to every speech delivered by FDR from 1910 to 1945. Drivel…drivel…drivel…

If one takes into account ‘collective guilt,’ the Internet blogger that angered Soharwardy was correct when he wrote, “There is no such thing as an innocent Muslim.” There were no innocent Nazis, there were no innocent Americans in the USA in the spring of 1861 and the crimes of Islam are every bit as great as those of Hitler and substantially greater than those of Jeff Davis. The blogger, however, was wrong in his solution. Conversion or at least reformation is the answer. Islam’s crimes should be exposed—constantly—without end. Quote the Qur’an—beat them over the head with their own scripture, it may not be what they want but it is what they need.

And never stop.

.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk