|
Posted on 08/21/2010 8:13:24 AM PDT by Kaslin
The proposed mosque near to ground zero is not really a religious institution. It would be -- as many mosques throughout the nation are -- a terrorist recruitment, indoctrination and training center. It is not the worship of Islam that is the problem. It is the efforts to advance Sharia law, with its requirement of jihad and violence, that is the nub of the issue.
There is a global effort to advance Sharia law and make it the legal system of the world. Most major banks and financial institutions offer Sharia compliant funds, which have their investments vetted by the most fundamentalist and reactionary of clerics to assure that they advance Sharia law.
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the founder of the proposed mosque, helps to prepare a Sharia index that rates countries on their degree of compliance with Sharia law. In the United Kingdom, many courts have recognized Sharia as the governing law on matters between two Muslims.
Not only is Sharia law a vicious anti-female code that orders death by stoning, promotes child marriage, decriminalizes abuse of women and gives wives no rights in divorce, but it also explicitly recognizes the duty of all Muslims to wage jihad against non-believers and promotes violence to achieve its goals. In this respect, violent jihad is as inherent in Sharia law as revolution is in communist doctrine.
But there are non-Sharia mosques where peaceful and spiritual Muslims worship God in their own way without promoting violence. A soon-to-be published study funded by Frank Gaffney's Center for Security Policy found that 20 percent of the mosques in the United States have no taint of Sharia and simply promote peaceful worship. But 80 percent are filled with violent literature, Sharia teachings, and promotion of jihad and its inevitable concomitant -- terrorism.
Which brings us to the ground zero mosque. There can be no doubt that any mosque organized and run by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf will be based on Sharia law and will serve as local branch office of the pan-Islamic terrorist offensive against the west. That such a facility should be located right next to the place where jihad achieved its most hideous triumph is unspeakably inappropriate.
President Obama is confusing the issue when he describes it as one of religious freedom. There is broad latitude to worship God as one chooses. But there is none to promote violence and terrorism. The record of involvement of Sharia mosques with the 9-11 attackers and the Ft. Hood massacre shooter is so deep and extensive that it vividly underscores the difference between a religious institution and an organization that promotes terrorism.
Politically, President Obama's defense of the mosque and his efforts to make it a First Amendment issue are incredibly self-destructive. They raise questions about his political sanity. It is hard to believe how tone deaf he must have become to take such a position.
He has now embraced two positions that are anathema to two-thirds of all Americans -- the mosque and opposition to Arizona's immigration law. Neither was a controversy that sought him out. He waded into each one voluntarily with flags flying. He had no role in the Arizona law, but his lawsuit to invalidate it made it his fight. He does not sit on the New York City Planning Commission, but his endorsement of the mosque puts him squarely in the center of controversy. What is he using for brains these days?
To continue the efforts to battle Sharia law and the attempts of radical Muslims to use it to destroy our values and the gains of feminism, please follow the work funded by the Center for Security Policy and conducted by David Yerushalmi. To help to fund their efforts, go to centerforsecuritypolicy.org.
Muslims always build mosques at the sites of their victories.If we allow this mosque to be built,muslims will come to do a victory lap on the dead bodies of 3000 Americans.
Actually, we really should give Sharia Law an experimental try. Lets put San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York under Sharia Law for one year.
It’s not a mosque. It’s a WAR MEMORIAL.
|
I don’t hold the toe-sucker in very high regard, but if says a politician is tone-deaf, I’m inclined to believe him.
I feel the same way and he is exactly right when he says a politician is tone deaf
We need to remember that there are at least THREE definitions of “peace.”
1. The absence of war or conflict. This is the one embraced by most free peoples of the world.
2. The absence of RESISTANCE to aggression or attack. This is the one held by most western liberals, communists and the islamofascists.
If the second definition prevails, it invariably leads to the third and final “peace” for the losers — that of the gas chamber, graveyard or lime pit.
“A Midsummer Night’s Dream”, Act 3 scene 2
~ William Shakespeare (1564 – 1616)
But 80 percent are filled with violent literature, Sharia teachings, and promotion of jihad and its inevitable concomitant — terrorism.
You won’t hear this in the msm. Wait til they start calling for the death of homosexuals. We’ll see what the left says then.
“Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the founder of the proposed mosque, helps to prepare a Sharia index that rates countries on their degree of compliance with Sharia law. In the United Kingdom, many courts have recognized Sharia as the governing law on matters between two Muslims.”
Excellent article.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmZ0Qmqn3Wo&feature=player_embedded
In the video, Rauf says that Sharia provides the “right to freedom of religion”. That’s NOT the same as “protection of religion”. It is in direct conflict with the US Constitution’s 1st Amendment protect of speech and of the press.
Muslims have already silenced free speech in our own country through threats of violence and self-censors.
Rauf’ job is to ensure compliance of Islamic Law in ALL countries. Base-line polls were taken by Gallup in 2008.
Why are the EU and our government complicit in this? By not speaking out against it they are complicit and it was happening before Obama.
“a terrorist recruitment, indoctrination and training center”
finally, someone gets it.
This is not a religion. It is a world-domination movement cleverly disguised as a religion.
When that time comes, the MSM will be so afraid of retaliation and beheadings that collectively it will be silent.
AND, you know they will outlaw abortion, for Muslim women at the very least.
20 percent preach peace and 80 percent get tax free status (free money) from us so that they can teach their “worshipers” to hate us and kill us.
What happened to the “very small minority of violent terrorists” in a “big and peaceful religion”
Not everyone can run YouTube successfully (given their connections), and attempting to do so by following a link tends to crash my browser, if not my session. TIA.
I do not like Morris at all he is an opportunist that fox gives too much time to
"Hard to believe"? For you, a toe-sucking secularist, maybe, Dickie, but very self-consistent and credible ...... If Ozero is, in fact, a secret but very committed Musselman.
But only ignorant and malicious people would actually believe that ..... </sarc>
To rescue your astonishment, though, and drag back the unwashed from the precipice of some subtle Obamian "Rope-a-Dope" play, it may be, as I've posted elsewhere, that Obama is just looking for any way he can to put his fingers in ordinary Americans' eyes, deliberately, to provoke an act of violence that he can seize on politically to regain the initiative and bring us all, in the end, into the safe harbor of a martial-law society.
Sleeping with the enemy…Obama’s Man Behind the Mosque
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2574688/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
