Doc's Talk: Islam: America's New Firebell in the Night

Monday, August 17, 2009

Islam: America's New Firebell in the Night

Allen Hunt
Monday, August 17, 2009

I did not know Thomas Jefferson, and I am no Thomas Jefferson. But Jefferson rightly foresaw that slavery and the question of its morality and expansion would be America's “firebell in the night.” We are still coming to terms today with the awful legacy of slavery in a free land. However, Islam represents today's “firebell in the night.” The so-called “religion of peace” stands as a small, but growing, presence in America, and its slowly increasing demands for accommodation have thus far generally met with acquiescence and ignorance. One cannot help but wonder how long it will be before America awakens to the very real threat within its own borders, a threat not only to life but to freedom as well.

Rifqa Bary provides the latest demonstration that Islam's core DNA is incompatible with Western society. Meanwhile, America continues to heap politically correct platitudes on Islam as if it were merely a misunderstood religion, whose aims are like any other religion. Every so often, I sound the “firebell in the night” as a warning that our failure to assess Islam properly places our very freedoms in peril. Despite my warnings, Islam continues like colonial and antebellum slavery as an issue long-ignored or glossed-over.

Seventeen-year old Rifqa Bary sits in the custody of the state of Florida, awaiting a ruling to determine her fate. Either she will be allowed to remain in Florida on her own or she will be returned to the custody of her parents in Ohio, from whom she fled after receiving death threats for converting from Islam to Christianity. She now seeks refuge with a Christian family in Orlando. Rifqa claims that, upon discovering her conversion, her father began to threaten to kill her as prescribed in Islamic law. Thus, Rifqa claims her life literally hangs in the balance. It is clear in her mind that, if she is returned to her parents, she will be killed.

The real question is, “Does anyone care?” When Rifqa appeared in court last week, her father was present. Rifqa curled up in a fetal position in fear of confronting her father and possibly facing a return to her parents in Ohio. Rifqa awaits her fate. The world awaits the ruling.

At first blush, this appears to be a family feud, where miscommunication has filled a teenage girl with anxiety and fear.. By drilling a little deeper, the obvious reveals itself: Muslim women live a perilous existence, even in America, the land of the free. Rifqa's situation provides insight into key areas where Americans are shockingly ignorant about Islam.

First, America has already experienced the Islamic custom of “honor killing,” where the men in a Muslim family murder one of their own female relatives for having done something that brought “shame” to the family, like being raped or rejecting an arranged marriage. Documented recent examples in Texas, Michigan, New York, and Georgia illustrate the reality of honor killing in America. Most recently, the bodies of seven Muslim girls and women arrived in the morgue of Kingston, Ontario, after having been victims of drowning, with the male members of their own families being the primary suspects for the murders.

Of course, little has been made in the press of these honor killings in America and Canada because it is politically incorrect, even insensitive, to point out the horrors of Islam, even when they occur in North America. To offer a critique of Islam is not only politically unacceptable, it can be dangerous. Witness last week's announcement that the esteemed Yale University Press will not reproduce the famous Danish cartoons of Mohammed in a book they are publishing about, well, those very cartoons. Readers of The Cartoons that Shook the World will find themselves in the unenviable Orwellian position of reading thoughts about cartoons they cannot view. Yale Press said the risk of “instigating violence” was simply too high.

Meanwhile, Islam continues its slow, kuzdu-like creep into American freedoms. The reality is clear. First, prevent freedom of speech by stoking the fear of violent reprisal. Second, squelch the equality of women by slaying those who fail to remember their place and role in the family. Finally, crush freedom of religious expression by executing those who would dare leave Islam for another faith.

It is this last dimension of free religious expression where Rifqa Bary faces the greatest threat. Were her parents to kill her for bringing shame to the family, it would not only be the most recent example of honor killing in America. Even more significantly, Rifqa has also rejected Islam itself. She has made the decision above all decisions in Islam. She has chosen to reject Islam and embrace Christianity instead. According to Mohammed, she must die. By killing his own daughter, Rifqa's father would attain the highest approbation of the Prophet himself.

Islamic Hadith deal specifically with the sin of apostasy and how to deal with the apostate. The words provide little comfort for Rifqa Bary. She not only has dishonored her parents and family, but she has also dishonored Mohammed and Allah.

"Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except .. a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate." (Bukhari 83.37)

"[In the words of] Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'" (Bukhari 84.57)

The examples of Islam's incompatibility with Western life and values continue to grow. The bodies slowly pile up.The demands for accommodation accrue. May Rifqa Bary not be the next victim of America's desire to turn a blind eye in response to the ugly realities of Islam and its perverted understandings of freedom.

The immorality of slavery continued to rear its head over and over again in various ways as America struggled to come to terms with its existence within a land based on freedom. History books are littered with the Nat Turner revolt, the Dred Scott case, the Brooks-Sumner affair, the Missouri Compromise, and countless other examples of America's great wrestling match with its own ideals of freedom and the reality of slavery and racial division. Resolution finally began with the Civil War, but we are still reconciling that division even today.

One can only wonder how long it will be, and how many dead bodies it will take, before the American people wake up to the firebell in the night that Islam represents with its very real threats to our core freedoms. Should we wait too long to address the struggle, the consequences and aftermath could take centuries.

What is the best course of action? An honest conversation, filled with reality and facts, instead of mindless political correctness and sensitivities, would be a really good place to start.

Copyright © 2009 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

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