My only issue with this great graphic is #5. Congress doesn't “ALLOW” free speech (OR ANYTHING ELSE), they simply CANNOT RESTRICT IT! 
Posted on 09/26/2015 8:34:23 AM PDT by pinochet
Ben Carson is being attacked for noting the difference between Islam and other faiths. Islam is a religion that requires a person to violate the US constitution, in order to be even a mild practitioner of that faith.
In the performance of his job, a US President has to honor the Christian God Jesus, ahead of the Muslim God Allah, because America is a majority Christian nation. A moderate Muslim may be non-violent, but even he would never commit blasphemy against his God, Allah.
An American President is required by law to defend the US pork industry against foreign pork producers. Even a moderate non-violent Muslim would be offended by this "disgusting" act. Doing the job of a US President properly, requires a person to be unclean, by the standards of, even moderate interpretations of Islam.
A US President is required to defend the first ammendment of the US constitution, which gives Americans the right to insult the Muslim God Allah, and the Muslim prophet Muhammad. Even moderate Muslims believe that those who blaspheme against their God and prophet should, at least, be jailed for hurting the feelings of Muslims (Extremists Muslims prefer to have blasphemers executed).
One of the job requirements of a US President is to uphold the 1948 UN declaration of human rights in his dealings with other nations. But every single Muslim nation in the world rejects the UN declaration of human rights, irrespective of whether the country is a democracy or a dictatorship.This fact must be publicized by freepers. Instead, Muslim nations follow the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which rejects free speech, rejects equality of women, and refuses to permit people to change their religion. The Cairo Declaration affirms that the Koran and Sharia Law are superior to Western concepts of human rights, such as the US Bill of Rights and the US Constitution. For more on the Cairo Declaration, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo_Declaration_on_Human_Rights_in_Islam
In contrast, Buddhist nations and Hindu nations accept the 1948 UN declaration of human rights as part of the law of their countries.
Even left-wing Western human rights organizations have condemned the Cairo Declaration as a rejection of modern human rights law.
I despise ISLAM
that being said...
where in the constitution is the PORK INDUSTRY mentioned??
My only issue with this great graphic is #5. Congress doesn't “ALLOW” free speech (OR ANYTHING ELSE), they simply CANNOT RESTRICT IT!
Here is an active link to the Cairo Declaration, which is supported not only by Muslim dictatorships, but by Muslim democracies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo_Declaration_on_Human_Rights_in_Islam
And since you mentioned “moderate” muslims, here’s a little something to share.
THE TIP OF THE SPEAR
“Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.” Winston Churchill
Since the tragic events of 911, I have spent more time than I ought trying to understand what many – too many – foolishly refer to as the “religion” of Islam.
That has led me to a more intense study of Nazism, Communism, Maoism and other tyrannical political/economic/legal systems.
And THAT has led me to conclude that of the three named above – all of which exacted a terrible human toll – Islam is by far the most dangerous because, of them, only Islam holds itself out to be a “religion”.
As fanatical as the Nazis, Communists and Maoists were – and, of those now among us here in America, the communists who now call themselves “socialists” and “progressives” (all Democrats) – the mindless fervor of the more radical Muslims eclipses all but the more radical “progressives” by orders of magnitude.
But what about the “moderate” Muslims? As several authors correctly observe, they are “irrelevant” as they fail to condemn the murderous radicals. And if the radicals succeed in their quest to dominate the world with their “caliphate”, these so called moderates – who profess to embrace the words of the Koran and the verses calling for the murder of the infidel “wherever he is found” – would quickly swing in behind the crazies to avail themselves of the worldly fruits of their victory.
There are Western parallels to the current Muslim rampage.
Putting aside the frequently dredged up activities of the oligarchs, industrialists, war profiteers Zionists, New World Order crowd and the rest, when America has gone to war, it has been generally understood that we did so to either protect legitimate American national interests or to assist treaty partners under assault by invaders. And those American forces involved in actual combat have been a small percentage of our overall population. The military term for that is “the tip of the spear.” Despite the expected wartime disruptions and accelerated production activities, most Americans were behind those war efforts and could be viewed as analogous to the “moderates” among the Muslims of today.
The Muslim forces now murdering their way across the Middle East and now into Europe are also a fraction of the peoples from that area. So far as we can tell, the majority of other Muslims in that part of the world are those “moderates” referred to above.
Here’s where the parallel ends: When Americans defeated the forces that took us to war, we brought most of our folks home and tried to resume our normal national life, generally leaving the vanquished to resume theirs after attempting to share with them the principles and benefits of the system of economic and individual freedom that makes America unique and, Obama’s protestations to the contrary, exceptional. With the tragic exception of Germany after WWI, we have even helped rebuild the areas in which the conflict raged.
And here is the MOST significant departure from OUR foreign conflicts: OURS have been waged to preserve our freedoms and to establish greater freedoms for those whom we defeated. Islam’s goal is PHYSICAL, MORAL AND SPIRITUAL DOMINATION and those who RESIST ARE TO BE MURDERED!
If Islam should prevail in the current and escalating battle, because their Koran COMMANDS Muslims to DOMINATE THE EARTH, sure as God made little green apples, it IS coming, that bloody physical battle will be waged ON OUR SOIL. A far larger proportion of otherwise noncombat Americans will be involved because, like the American Revolution, the War of 1812 and the War Between the States, IT WILL BE FOUGHT AROUND AND AMONG US.
None will be spared.
Which brings me to a recent media “non-event” that just occurred. Senator Jeff Sessions warned Obama and Kerry to reexamine their insane plan to import up to 100,000 UNVETTED Muslim “refugees”. Senator Sessions used the term “POTENTIAL TERRORIST ARMY” in his remarks. I can’t recall ANY nation whose “leaders” sought to invite potential enemy combatants to its shores, let alone PAY them once in.
A senior statesman like Sessions does not lightly use such language unless he knows something a sad number of Americans either do not or, heads in the sand (or elsewhere) and because they prefer “diversity and tolerance” to freedom, choose to ignore. That phrase probably had a great deal to do with the blackout of his comments by the PC infected “progressive” news whores.
All of which has caused me – and others who have not been cowed by political correctness into a cowardly and, eventually, deadly silence – to offer that there IS NO RADICAL ISLAM: THERE IS JUST ISLAM and ALL of its adherents pose a threat to those who are not.
THINK ABOUT IT...THEN START RAISING HELL WITH THE PUSILLANIMOUS WIMPS NOW THE RULE AMONG THE POLITICAL ELITES!!
And if you believe my remarks to be too strong, rash and politically incorrect, spend 40 minutes here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjBDDC4wVxk with Dr. Bill Warner.
(Don’t be concerned that the first 5 minutes is a low key by Dr. Warner for his books. If not interested in that section, at least sample it to see how thorough is the man’s research. If you’ll run the slider out just past minute 5, you’ll be into the red meat of this important presentation.)
I know I’ve titled this “The Tip of the Spear”. To drive the point home more vividly, I should have called it “The Blade of the Beheading Sword”.
Perhaps Dr. Warner can convince you that we REALLY ARE LITERALLY in for the fight of our lives.
Dick Bachert
9/25/2015
‘Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant.
The Qur'an should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth’
--Omar Ahmed, Chairman of the Board of CAIR
(Council of American Islamic Relations)
San Ramon Valley Herald,
July 1998
Here is proof/support for Carson's POV.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/18/us-malaysia-islam-law-idUSKBN0ME0JJ20150318
>>>where in the constitution is the PORK INDUSTRY mentioned??
The constitution does not have to mention the pork industry. But a president is required by law to put the economic interests of America ahead of the economic interests of foreign nations. I was mentioning the American pork industry, the world’s largest, as one of those interests.
Advancing the interests of American pork producers is certainly one of the job requirements of an American President. If an American President destroyed America’s pork industry, because the pork industry is in conflict with his religion, he would not only violate the law, he would also be in violation of the first amendment of the constitution respecting religious freedom.
Absolutely right.
Sharia law is totally incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. A president of the U.S. must uphold and protect the Constitution.
Ergo a Muslim can't be president without using taqqiya.
Hey, we already have a Muslim president, so I guess my point is made.
5.56mm
taqiyyah,-- In Islam, the practice of concealing one’s belief and foregoing ordinary religious duties when under threat of death or injury.-- Lying to non-Muslims in advance for Islam is allowed till Judgment Day Quran 3:28, 16:106
-- It is fine to deceive the infidels. They are just pigs anyways. In fact, al-Taqiyyah of the Qur'an compels protection of Islam by deception.
A TEACHABLE MOMENT
…….....……………(of lessons from September 11, 1683)The West and the Refugees
Replies the refugee: "Its our nature..."
The general public is incapable of seeing the truth about the ROP. They hold fast to the illusion that it is a religion. In their limited minds religion is a harmless silliness that is indulged one day a week and has no influence on real life.
The ROP is a political ideology with a religious tint.
Very Good Graphics!
Do you mind If I 'borrow' them 
Oops!My 'Thank You' graphic didn't post.
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."
We should throw them out for lying whenst taking this oath.
I must have missed that clause in Article II. And wouldn't that also exclude a Jewish president? Finally, if I recall correctly Jesus was the Son of God, not God.
Its time to kick the PC stuff out the window and get back to talking reality. We don’t need nor should we ever allow Muslims in the Whitehouse. Anybody that tries to quote the Constitution needs to told that a Muslim by definition cannot pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. End of story.
“Violate it? Hell, they will DESTROY it if they get the upper hand. BTW, that “upper hand” will also hold a very sharp sword — just before it makes swift contact with the back of your neck!”
Or your .223 enters their brain. :-)
Borrowing from an old U.S. Supreme Court case involving independent tribes of Native Americans.. (no insult to Native Americans intended) I suggest this.
Sharia Camps,
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.
