'cookieChoices = {};'

The Right of the People to be Secure in their Persons, Houses, Papers, and Effects,
Against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures,
Shall Not Be Violated


Saturday, September 29, 2012

The Thirty Bad Sharia Laws

The shariah laws listed in Thirty Bad Shariah Laws – however culturally insensitive it may seem to hear – need to be rejected, because they are aggressive and oppressive, not peaceful or benign. These practices are themselves intolerant or fail to respect all humans with full dignity.
They are extreme and thus deny life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Therefore, these harmful shariah laws are wrong. They (should) have expiration dates on them – back in the seventh century.

This list of shariah laws is intended to be read by judges, lawyers, legislators, city council members, educators, journalists, government bureaucrats, think tank fellows, TV and radio talk show hosts, and anyone else who occupies the “check points” in society; you initiate the national dialogue and shape the flow of the conversation in society.

You are the decision and policy makers. As intellectuals, you believe the critics of shariah exaggerate (and maybe some are guilty of it). They’re just “Islamophobes.” Ignore them. Islam is a worldwide religion, after all. It deserves respect. You are also thorough relativists who believe in tolerance for all religions, in all their parts.

At first glance, this is a commendable outlook. You like what Thomas Jefferson said, “But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my legs.” It is a true that beliefs that do not harm us monetarily or physically should be tolerated. Shariah has positive aspects to it – or, rather, they do no damage in those two ways. Therefore, parts of shariah should be tolerated in a religiously diverse society like America.

The Five Pillars are examples. They are part of shariah – divine Islamic law, which traces its origins ultimately back to the Quran (or Koran) and Muhammad’s example or life, the sacred traditions, which were eventually written down in the hadith. None of those five rituals and policies picks our pockets or breaks our legs, if the five are done privately or in the mosque.

Unfortunately, however, this list is not about the harmless parts in shariah, but the ones that are incompatible with the modern era. Even Thomas Jefferson had his limits. He sent the marines to take back captured American merchant sailors and to open up the trade routes that were hampered by the Muslim Barbary pirates in North Africa, who had sold the captives into slavery or demanded ransoms. Do the elites have any limits?

In some cases, a religion does indeed pick our pockets and break our legs. Each item in the list has one or more back-up articles. Readers should click on them to find out that the thirty points come right out of original Islam and are not invented out of thin air. Each back up also has a section on modern Islam, mentioning Muslims – too few – who advocate reform.

And if readers would like to see various translations of the Quran, they may go to the website quranbrowser.com and type in the references. If readers are in doubt about the meaning of a verse, they may go to the tafsir (commentary) written by Ibn Kathir (d. 1373), one of the most authoritative and highly regarded classical commentators in the Sunni world, at qtafsir.com; or the readers may search through the modern commentary by Sunni Indo-Pakistani religious scholar and politician Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi (d. 1979) at englishtafsir.com.
1. The mosque and state are not separate. To this day, Islamic nations that are deeply rooted in shariah, like Iran and SaudiArabia, do not adequately separate the two realms, giving a lot of power to courts and councils to ensure that legislation does not contradict the Quran (never mind whose interpretation). Most of the laws listed below come from this confusion. Back-up article: Mosque and State 
5. A woman captive of jihad may be forced to have to sex with her captors (now owners). Quran 4:24 and especially the sacred traditions and classical law allow this. The sacred traditions say that while out on military campaigns under Muhammad’s leadership, jihadists used to practice coitus interruptus with their female captives. Women soldiers fighting terrorists today must be forewarned of the danger.  
6. Property can be destroyed or confiscated during jihad. Quran 59:2 and 59:5 discuss those rules. Sacred traditions and classical law expand on the Quranic verses. Modern Islamic law officially improves on the Quran: see Article Three of the 1990 Cairo Declaration of Human Rights, which is nonetheless based on shariah, but it outlaws wanton destruction of property. Would there be any conflict between old Islam and modern Islam in a war today? Back-up articles: Jihad and Qital and The Quran and the Sword 
7. Jihad may be waged to collect spoils. Quran 8:1, 8:7, 8:41, and 48:20 show this clearly. Early Islam followed the old Arab custom of raiding caravans, but as its military grew, the raids were elevated to jihad. The spoils of war were coveted. Which Islam would prevail in a war today – the old oneor the modern one? 
8. A second-class submission tax, called the jizyah, must be imposed on Jews and Christians (and other religious minorities) living in Islamic countries. Quran 9:29 offers three options to Jews and Christians: (1) Fight and die; (2) convert to Islam; (3) or keep their religion, but pay a tribute or submission tax, the jizyah, while living under Islam. In Islamic history, vanquished Jews and Christians became known as dhimmis. This word appears in Quran 9:8 and 9:10, meaning a “treaty” or “oath,” but it can also mean those who are “condemned” “reviled” or “reproved” (Quran 17:18, 17:22; 68:49). The word “submission” in Quran 9:29 can also be translated as “humiliation,” “utterly humbled,” “contemptible” or “vile.” It can mean “small” as opposed to “great. Islamic nations today still seek to impose this second-class religion tax. Back-up articles: Jihad and Qital and The Quran and the Sword 
9. Slavery is allowed. It is true that freeing slaves was done in original Islam (Quran 5:89 and 24:33), and the Quran says to be kind to slaves (Quran 4:36), but that is not the entire story. In addition to those verses, Quran 4:24, 23:1-7; 33:52 allow the institution. Muhammad owned slaves, even one who was black (so says a sacred tradition). He was militarily and politically powerful during his later life in Medina, but he never abolished slavery as an institution. Officially, Islamic nations have outlawed slavery (Article 11, which is still based on shariah). That proves Islam can reform on at least one matter. Can it reform on the other shariah laws? And we are told that “no other nation or religious group in the world treated slaves better than the Muslims did.” The back-up article and next two items in this list contradict that claim. The legacy of slavery still runs deep in Islamic countries even today. 
10. A male owner may have sex with his slave-women, even prepubescent slave-girls. See Quran 4:24 and 23:1-7; but it is classical law that permits sex with prepubescent slave girls and describes them as such. Some Muslim religious leaders and others still advocate this practice, taking the slaves as concubines (though sex with prepubescent slave-girls is another matter).  
11. Slaves may be beaten. That’s what sacred traditions and classical laws say. See Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery  
12. Apostasy laws, including imprisonment or execution, may be imposed on anyone who leaves Islam (an apostate). Normally this is a prescribed punishment, but it is also political, since it is about freedom of religion. Surprisingly the Quran does not cover punishing apostates down here on earth, though in the afterlife they will be punished. Does this modern Islam can reform old Islam? Quran 4:88-89, 9:73-74, and 9:123, read in that sequence, might deal with earthly punishments. Mainly, however, the sacred traditions and classical law permit harsh treatment for anyone who leaves Islam. Islamic courts and laws still impose these punishments today, or religious scholarstoday argue for the law. 
13. Blasphemy laws, including imprisonment or execution, may be imposed on critics of Islam or Muhammad. These verses should be read in historical sequence, for they show that as Islam’s military power increased, the harsh treatment of mockers and critics also intensified, as follows: Quran 3:186, 33:57-61, 9:61-66, 9:73 and 9:123. Sacred traditions, classical laws, and historical Islam are unambiguous about the punishments, recording the people, often their names, who were assassinated for mocking Muhammad and the Quran. Islamic nations and pockets of Islam in non-Muslim countries still impose thesepunishments today. 
 18. Homosexuals may be imprisoned, flogged, or executed. Surprisingly, the Quran is not all that clear on this subject, but the traditions and classical laws are. Islamic nations to this day still impose those punishments, and religious leaders stillargue for harsh punishments. Back-up article: Homosexuality 
20. Adulterers may be stoned to death. The verse that says to stone adulterers to death went missing from the Quran, so says Umar, a companion of Muhammad and the second caliph (ruled 634-644). But he left no doubt that this penalty was done under Muhammad’s direction, and the sacred traditions and classical laws confirm it. But a few rules of evidence must be followed, like confession of the adulterer or four eyewitnesses. In some interpretations of the law, if a woman is raped, but cannot produce four just and pious men who witnessed it, then she is slandering the alleged rapist (or gang rapists) – never mind that the four just and pious eyewitnesses did nothing to stop it, but stood there and watched it. Some modern Islamic nations still do this, and religious and legal scholars argue for it.  
22. A woman inherits half what a man does. Quran 4:11 says it, and the hadith (traditions) and classical law confirm it. Modern Islamic nations still do this, and religious leaders still argue for it. Back-up article: Women’s Status and Roles 23. A woman’s testimony in a court of law counts half of a man’s testimony, since she might “forget.” Quran 2:282 says it in the context of business law. But the hadith (traditions) explains that women’s minds are deficient; classical law expands this curtailment to other areas than business. Modern Islamic nations still do this, and religious scholars still argue for it. 
24. A man may legally and irrevocably divorce his wife, outside of a court of law, by correctly pronouncing three times “you are divorced.” Quran 2:229 says this, and the traditions and classical law explain and confirm it. A judge in a modern Islamic country will ensure that the husband did not speak from a fit of irrational rage (anger is okay) or intoxication, for example. Then the court will validate the divorce, not daring to overturn it, since the Quran says so. Sometimes this homemade and irrevocable divorce produces a lot of regret in the coupleand manipulation from the husband in Islam today. 
25. A wife may remarry her ex-husband if and only if she marries another man, has sex with him, and then this second man divorces her. Quran 2:230 says this, and the traditions and classical law confirm it. Supposedly, this rule is designed to prevent easy divorce (see the previous point), but it produces a lot of pain, in Muslims today. 
26. Husbands may hit their wives. Quran 4:34 says it, and the traditions and classical law confirm it. There is a sequence of steps a husband follows before he can hit her, but not surprisingly this rule creates all sorts of abuse and confusion in Islamic society today.  
27. A man may be polygamous with up to four wives. Quran 4:3 (and 33:50-52) allow this, but only if a man can take care of them. The traditions and classical law confirm it. Modern Muslims still push for this old maritalarrangement even in the USA, and many Islamic nations still allow it. But someMuslims are fighting polygamy. The hadith (traditions) paints a picture of Muhammad’s household that was full of strife between the wives. 
28. A man may simply get rid of one of his “undesirable” wives. Quran 4:128 says this. The traditions say about the verse that the wife whom Muhammad wanted to get rid of was “huge” and “fat.” She gave up her turn to his favorite girl-bride Aisha. He kept the corpulent wife. There is heartbreak in Islam today. 
29. A mature man may marry a prepubescent girl. Quran 65:1-4, particularly verse 4, assumes, but does not command, the practice. The hadith says Aisha was six years old when she was engaged to Muhammad (he was in his fifties), and their marriage was consummated when she was nine. The hadith indicate she was prepubescent at nine. She never did bear him any children. Classical law says a father may give away his prepubescent daughter, but she also has a few rights. Officially many Islamic nations have raised the legal marriage age, but pockets in the Islamic world still follow this old custom. The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia okaysmarriage to ten-year-old girls. Work is still needed to be done for the rights of girl brides, particularly for their sexual health.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

Swing State BUYOFF? 1 million Ohioans with Obamaphones

1 million Ohioans using free phone program

 Fees on phone bills pay for $1.5 billion national Lifeline program


A program that provides subsidized phone service to low-income individuals has nearly doubled in size in Ohio in the past year — now covering more than a million people. At the same time, federal officials say they’re reining in waste, fraud and abuse in the program.
The Federal Communications Commission announced recently that reforms have saved $43 million since January and are expected to save $200 million by year’s end. In Ohio, savings are expected to be $2.9 million a year.
The savings were realized in part because the government gave out fewer cellphones to ineligible people and took steps to avoid issuing duplicate phones.
But the size of the program in the state — and profits to the increasing number of cellphone companies involved — has exploded in recent months, according to a Dayton Daily News analysis of program data.
The program in Ohio cost $26.9 million in the first quarter of 2012, the most recent data available, versus $15.6 million in the same timeframe in 2011. Compared to the first quarter of 2011, the number of people in the program nearly doubled to more than a million.
Growth could cost everyone who owns a phone. The program is funded through the “Universal Service Fund” charge on phone bills — usually a dollar or two per bill — and the amount of the fee is determined by the cost of this and other programs.
A growth of $100 million in this program could result in an increased fee of a few cents on the average bill, according to officials from the agency that administers the program. The total cost of the program nationwide was $1.5 billion in 2011, up from $1.1 billion in 2010.
One cannot help but think of the buyoffs of congressmen and Senators, and states with exceptions and bribes for Obamacare.
But there is something far more slimy about it when you just buy off voters with a tacit QUID PRO QUO
Advocates for the poor say this growth is to be expected; eligibility is dependent on having a low income or being in a program such as food stamps or heating assistance, and that population is ballooning, they say.
“I am unable to have a cellphone and I need one for emergencies,” said Aliesa Azbill of Dayton, who is in a work training program at Community Action Partnership. She said the 250 free minutes she gets per month through SafeLink isn’t enough to use it for much more than emergencies.
I have a cell phone and no house phone yet manage to get along with LESS THAN 200 minutes a month usage, NO PROBLEM.
Anyone else have feeling that there is a better way to achieve this result? Such as phones which ONLY dial 911?
Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments

Obama's Momma In Porn Movie - Hot, Hot, Hot

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

The News Today

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 3 Comments

Pamela Geller on the MTA's Support of Sharia-Like Decision To Make Us All Bow To Savages


The Savage Mona Elathawy would 
behead your Freedom of Speech

I would suggest donating money to Pamela's organization

Pamela on MTA's outlandish decision to attempt to insert Sharia/blasphemy law into their

Let me make this perfectly clear. I will never sacrifice my freedom so as not to offend savages. And neither should any other American. The MTA may have injected an ambigous, unconstitutional, and thoroughly reckless revision into their ad policy in order to appease a lawless mob, but it will not stand.
And where were these same gutless cowards protesting against fascists and enemedia tools when the anti-Israel ads were running? Their ugly anti-semitic bias is painfully obvious.
"Since 1838, there have been only a handful of blasphemy prosecutions in the United States, and a broad consensus has emerged that Jefferson and Adams had it right. In 1952, the Supreme Court of the United States finally put the matter to rest in Burstyn v. Wilson, holding in a unanimous decision that "it is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine" or to protect "any or all religions from views which are distasteful to them." The First Amendment, the Court declared, renders any such government action unconstitutional. Religions and religious figures, like political parties, politicians, businessmen, and other members of society are fair game for criticism, condemnation and even mockery." [...]

"Apply this to the current situation, and the implications are obvious. If we punish American citizens for engaging in otherwise constitutionally protected speech in order to prevent foreign terrorists from engaging in violent acts, then we cede to those very terrorists the meaning of the First Amendment. That doesn't sound very promising, does it?"

Geoffrey R. Stone

Geoffrey R. Stone is the Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago. From 1987 to 1994 he served as Dean of the University of Chicago Law School and from 1994 to 2002 he served as Provost of the University of Chicago. He is currently Chair of the Board of the American Constitution Society. (thanks to FS)
Here is the bottom line. Whatever capitulation the MTA is hoping to make to the sharia, the fact is that our ads are running, and based on this new ruling, I intend to expand and increase my New York buy.

Go read the whole thing.

Please donate via Paypal to or tax-deductible to director@jihadwatch.org. We don’t get salaries and we don’t have a staff. Your contribution will go entirely to our work for freedom. And for that, may God bless you.
Mailing address:
1040 1st Avenue
BOX 121
NY NY 10022



If we are deemed to be wrong for offending Muslim Savages,



Also, Epaminondas points out that Mona Elathawy is clearly not a Sharia-advocating Jihadist Radical.

I agree.

Elathawy, like Huma Abedin and some other new-fangled Islamists, is a Feminist,



People like Mona Elathawy, Huma Abedin, Imam Rauf, and Tariq Ramadan, are all the more dangerous, because of their ability/natural tendency to couch their Islamism in the trappings of Modern Society's obsession with the Victim Group-chic version of "Human Rights."

But, if Human Rights does not include the right to criticize the powerful institutions of our society (Government, Corporations, Religion, the Media, and Academia) then we are throwing Free Speech out the window.

No Human Right-based society can continue to exist without it's first principle being Freedom of Expression/Conscience.

Epa says: Actually I've read Elthaway's stuff for years. She wrote for Al Sharq al Awsat and was WAY OUT THERE for Egyptian ladies. She is ANYTHING but savage, or radical.
She is secular to the extreme ... FOR EGYPTIANS
Therefore that is the lesson.

The most secular revolutionary in Egypt, who could not even live safely there, does not understand the NECESSITIES and DEMANDS of freedom of speech.

What does this say about administration foreign policy?


Pastorius saysEpa, 
Yes, you are right. But, if we were to follow Elathawy's prescription, we would wind up with a savage culture, just like the Sharia shithole from which she emanated.

She may be comparatively open-minded, but she is proving herself to be a friend of the Dark Age at a "perilous time."

For the record, I imagine Epaminondas would agree with everything I say above about Elathawy,


I feel I need to clarify because I believe his point is valid and will be a common objection to those of us who are vehemently critical of this psycho-bitch from the land of Allah.

EPA SEZ:She is a strong lesson.What is far to the secular side in that culture cannot conceive of the reasons for freedom of speech in the VERY FIRST SET OF REAL TESTS OF 'DEMOCRACY'

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 10 Comments

And just like that Romney is handed his Foreign Affairs Issue

Yesterday I posted a story in which Christians fled the Sinai after being threatened, and having their places of business fired upon, ‘Mississippi 1955 style’. The local churches alerted authorities after the threats had been received ..and they did nothing.  After the people had been fired on .... they did nothing.
Why? Because it would be better for all if people of the book were not around, so we’ll just sort of not enforce those secular laws because they kinda sorta void the Quran’s clear intention (certainly as far as the Arabian peninsula, but hey we’re just across the Red Sea, which is pretty narrow).
Now the USA sends $1.3 billion a year to support not enforcing those secular laws (ipso facto, intent just doesn’t count)
Next up, a $450 million cash advance. Now. right away.

U.S. Move to Give Egypt $450 Million in Aid Meets Resistance

The Obama administration notified Congress on Friday that it would provide Egypt’s new government an emergency cash infusion of $450 million, but the aid immediately encountered resistance from a prominent lawmaker wary of foreign aid and Egypt’s new course under the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood.
The United States Agency for International Development notified Congress of the cash infusion on Friday morning during the pre-election recess, promptly igniting a smoldering debate over foreign aid and the administration’s handling of crises in the Islamic world.
An influential Republican lawmaker, Representative Kay Granger of Texas, immediately announced that she would use her position as chairwoman of the House appropriations subcommittee overseeing foreign aid to block the distribution of the money. She said the American relationship with Egypt “has never been under more scrutiny” than it is in the wake of the election of President Mohamed Morsi, a former leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.
“I am not convinced of the urgent need for this assistance and I cannot support it at this time,” Ms. Granger said in a statement that her office issued even before the administration announced the package.
We all know President Muslim Brotherhood Morsi has just told the USA it’s up to us to make it all better with his people. This statement is the ICON for the behavior, plans and inner core of Mr. Obama and this admin. 
Well, Gallup found just before the movie trailer manufactured stupidity …
So, Obama hasn’t changed views of the USA. And the Arab spring CONFIRMS that given free rein, the people LIBYA EXCEPTED, hate our guts.
Why would we send american dollars, recession or not, to a set of peoples who are inimical to ALL THAT WE DO, and all that we stand for (like …. oh I don’t know, FREEDOM OF SPEECH?)
Mitt are you paying attention, here?

The policy of this administration, in the Arab Spring is part and parcel of them ALL setting the stage for America’s reduced role because they ALL BELIEVE IN THEIR BONES not only are we (which is to say that ‘flawed’ founding document)  no better or different than any other people or nation, but we are BAD FOR EARTH, and must be made to feel and act that way.

The Arab/Muslim peoples THERE don’t like us, find our freedoms repulsive and blasphemous, dislike other beliefs among them, have DEMONSTRATED they will not protect minorities, hate our allies, and in Egypt their sole value to the USA (actually to our ally, not us) is to uphold a peace treaty which they have ALREADY factually violated (by keeping their army in the Sinai after ‘temporary’ action against terrorists … you know, the guys who attacked and chased the christians out).
Sequester the money and let it wither.
MITT, pound this as a lack of strategic vision by this admin. Pound the Pakistani Govt for keeping the minister who called for the murder of the idiotic playwright, and ours for saying nothing to that ‘ally’. Pound them over and over using CHAMBERLAIN. Let the MSM report on how TERRIBLE you are for doing this repeatedly.
The administration has failed at EVERYTHING except killing Osama. Get you lists out and pound them items home.
Two messages only…
  1. “I am a turnaround specialist and I know how to turn this nation around, Obama has FAILED in four years to make any real dent”
  2. “The foreign policies of this administration do not reflect the practical needs of the nation only their own wishful thinking about how others want to live”
Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments

Damn, I Wish Steven Harper Was President of the USA

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 1 Comments

American Muslims Launch Petition to Limit Free Speech

From the Vlad Tepes Blog:

Islamic leaders in Missouri and New Jersey are calling for lawmakers to limit free speech after an anti-Muslim film sparked outrage across the world.
The Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City has launched a petition calling on Congress to “establish a law against insulting one’s religion.”
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 1 Comments

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 3 Comments

NYC Institutes Sharia, Bans All Speech Which Might Insult The Prophet of Islam 

They've rewritten their blasphemy laws to try to fit them into the "Fighting Words" exception to free speech, as Allah admirably explains. 
This means that if you would like to exercise your peaceful right to free speech, and someone else wishes to unlawfully exercise his non-peaceful non-right to engage in violence over your statement, your right is limited by his non-right. 
Now, I suppose even liberals would understand the problem with this, if this "rule" were being generally applied. But they know it's not-- this "rule" shall only be applied to protect the de facto state religion of the US (the only religion afforded any sort of protection from "slander" and "provocations" in our laws), Islam. 
There is a confusing aspect to this article that kept me from mentioning it earlier. I still cannot figure it out. 
First the article says that ads like Pam Gellar's will be "prohibited," because violent people might use them as an excuse for illegal violence. So her rights will have to be taken away from her, so that violent thugs' non-rights aren't exercised.

Ace also wrote this:

Suppose you accidentally click on a link and wind up seeing the raunchiest, most grotesque pornography imaginable.
What do you do?
You probably close the link and perhaps bark at whoever linked you to it.
But do you attempt to have the site shut down?
In all likelihood you do not. And that doesn't mean you approve of the pornography, or even tolerate it.
You don't attempt to have the site shut down, or stir up a rage, because you know it will be futile. The law has spoken on this point; and where the letter of the law hasn't spoken, the actions of thousands of LEO's and politicians have. There will be virtually no action taken against pornography, ever.
So you don't attempt to get the site shut down because the letter of the law, and the actions of those enforcing it, have informed you that it is a situation you'll just have to live with.
The law has become normative. You may not agree with it (or, of course, you might). But you have internalized the teaching of the law, just as a student internalizes the real rules of his school, what he can get away with, what he can't.
The law has taught you what you will have to accept, what you will have to work around, what you will have to teach yourself to ignore and come to peace with.
The law is normative. It establishes our norms.
The law is currently establishing a new norm. Some -- liberals, chiefly, are quick to line up to embrace the new norm.
The new norm is that certain religions -- oh, why be coy with the plural? One religion -- shall have the protection and sanctification of state power.
One religion, and one religion only.
Piss Christ is being shown in New York City again. There are few calls for the exhibit to be banned, and none for the artist to be arrested -- or vigorously investigated to find if there are any breaches in his past to be arrested for.
Because we know the law and the action of government in executing the law would not be responsive. Not even a little bit.
The law is normative. We have learned there is no point protesting Piss Christ, or any thousand "slanders" against the Prophet of Christianity. We have learned that we will just have to live with it, and, if such things offend us, learn to control our tempers, and learn to avoid certain things that might otherwise give us pleasure, like museums.
What norms are the laws currently teaching the most extreme and intolerant members of Islam?

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

Friday, September 28, 2012

Melody Gardot
Who Will Comfort Me

Sweet Memory

Baby I'm A Fool

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments

Welcome to Mississippi in 1955? Christians ‘flee Egypt town after death threats’

AFP - Several Christian families have fled their homes in Egypt’s Sinai peninsula after receiving death threats from suspected Islamist militants, officials and residents told AFP on Friday.
Last week, flyers began circulating in the town of Rafah on the Gaza Strip border demanding that its tiny Coptic population move out, residents said.
Officials at the local church informed the authorities of the threats, but no actin was taken, they added.
Days later, a shop belonging to one of the families was fired on with automatic rifles, witnesses said.
Flyers? Really?
We’d like to introduce ourselves,. We’re the international wing of the KKK„ and this time, you frickin’ CHRISTIAN ARE IT
The first breezes of a Huntington Hurricane of ignorant intolerance.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 1 Comments

What cult of personality?

The incredible viral video of that moron-ette bragging about her Obamafone got me thinking and looking around…. THIS IS NOT A SATIRE

The Obama Phone Program

What exactly is the free Obama phone? The free Obama phone is a program that is meant to help the financially unstable who cannot afford access to a cell phone. Communication should not be limited to people in relation to what they are able to afford. The Lifeline program was actually created decades ago to help low income families have access to land lines. Over the years the cost of cell phones and cellular service has decreased and the program has been extended to cover cell phones.
During the Bush administration, there was the introduction of a project that gave subsidies to those who could not afford a phone. The basic principle of the program is that everyone should have access to emergency services like 911. There are a number of deaths that take place every year do to lack of proper communication, and access to emergency services should be a right for everyone.
The free Obama phone is an important program, especially for low income families that would otherwise not have access to basic communications. There are different plans to choose from. Some plans offer fewer minutes and more texting and some even include rollover minutes. Make sure you check out all the plans before choosing the one that is right for you.

Get Started Now

Click Here to learn how to qualify. If you have further questions about the Obama Phone, visit our Obama Phone FAQ.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 3 Comments

The Obama Administration

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

Don't Make Fun Of Muslims!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For those who would like to verify the sources I cited, here you go:

Qur’an 9:29—Fight those who believe not in Allah. 

Qur’an 9:123—O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness. 

Qur’an 48:29—Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves. 

Qur’an 98:6—Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Qur'an and Prophet Muhammad) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikun will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures. 

Sahih Muslim 33—“I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah.” 

Qur’an 5:51—O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people. 

Sahih Muslim 4366—It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattab that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim. 

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

Older Posts Newer Posts