Not All History Is Worth Making

With the new Congress coming in January, it is not without controversy. Among disconcerting factors is the election of two Muslim women to Congress and ever since then, deception has been the order of the day.

Even before they have taken office, facts have emerged that dispel the assumption that they are merely good Americans seeking to work for America and the American people. But is that true?

Ilhan Abdullahi Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Harbi Tlaib of Michigan have made history by becoming the first Muslim women to be elected to Congress. But not all history is good history.

Rashida Tlaib has chosen to be sworn in, not on the Bible, but on the Qur’an once owned by President Thomas Jefferson. She claims it as a symbol that Muslims have always been here in America. True to form, she is seeking to deceive America. Thomas Jefferson did indeed own that Qur’an, but it was not because he sought to embrace or even to include Islam in the American landscape. He acquired it as a means by which to know his enemy.

In 1786, Jefferson and John Adams traveled to London to meet with Sidi Haji Abdrahaman, the aid to Tripolitania’s Ambassador to London. Jefferson’s concern was understanding why they sought to wage war against America when we had not shown aggression against them. The reply he got was a warning then, and a warning now, to America.

Jefferson wrote that the Ambassador stated that their reason for aggression “was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman (Muslim) who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

This sentiment is still prevalent and exhibited in the terrorist attacks around the world today. It is the underlying theme of modern Islamic terrorism and it is also the underlying theme of Muslims that seek to obtain office in a country they are instructed to abhor.

The elected Muslim women bring with them other concerns as well. America has a tremendous ally in Israel and considering the fact that Islam is anti-Israeli as established in their Qur’an and their Prophet’s lifestyle, their election is not beneficial for American-Israeli relations.

Both women proclaimed themselves to hold a “moderate” view of Israel but their past shows something different. They both have supported the BDS Movement. The Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Movement challenges Israel’s right to exist. They oppose continued military aid to Israel and oppose the two-state solution to the Israeli-Arab conflict, which would allow for the Palestinian state to exist along side of Israel. Instead, they support a one-state solution which would, over time, by sheer numbers, replace Israel with a Palestinian state, erasing Israel from the map, as many Islamic dictators vow to do.

Ilhan Omar replaces a Muslim man, Keith Ellison in Minnesota’s 5^th congressional district. In her acceptance speech, she opened with the typical Arabic greeting, “As-Salam Alaikum” and there was no America flag present, a disconcerting fact in itself.

She also noted in her speech that she was the first woman in her new position to wear a hijab, the Islamic head covering that some see as a symbol of oppression of women who are seen as second-class citizens in Islam.

Her troubling past includes a Tweet from November 2012 where she wrote, “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.” Such statements would seem to disqualify her to be in support of workable American-Israeli relations.

After her Tweet came to light, she attempted to walk it back and denounced her support for the BDS Movement. However, a week after being elected, her office released a statement which read in part, “Ilhan believes in and supports the BDS movement, and has fought to make sure people’s rights to support it isn’t criminalized. She does, however, have reservations on the effectiveness of the movement in accomplishing a lasting solution.”

On September of this year, she spoke at a fundraiser which was attempting to raise money for Palestinians in Gaza, which is controlled by Hamas, an organization that has been designated as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department. Hardly an endorsement for a representative of the United States.

The other Muslim woman to be elected to Congress, Rashida Tlaib, won a race where she had no Republican challenger, practically ensuring her victory. The night of her acceptance speech, no American flag was seen in the room and she draped herself in a Palestinian flag. She declared, “A lot of my strength comes from being Palestinian.”

As far as being supportive of Israel, she changed her public persona, as did Ilhan Omar, when after winning the Primaries she stated when asked if she supported a two-state solution, “One state. It has to be one state. Separate but equal does not work… This idea of a two-state solution, it doesn’t work.”

“Separate but equal” is not the Islamic stance concerning Israel and Israel’s right to exist is always threatened by any opposition to that idea. So, while many applaud the election of these two Muslim women to Congress as being historic, when you look beyond the surface and see the implications of those victories, there is cause for concern. And while they are still outnumbered in Congress and their views are not held by the majority, Islam now has a growing foothold in the process by which America is governed.

2018 saw a record number of Muslims being elected to various offices in America, from local to the federal level. As Omar Ahman, the founder of the Council for American Islamic Relations, CAIR, once stated proudly, “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Qur’an, the Muslim book of Scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion of earth.”

So, instead of celebrating the election of Muslims into our government perhaps it should not be celebrated as much as viewed with suspicion. This has nothing to do with embracing “diversity” or “cultural sensitivity” but is an ominous warning of the dilution of American values, a dangerous trend.

The Democratic Party, of which these two Muslim women are a member of, have been seeking to rewrite history by erasing the Confederate portion of it by crumbling statues and misinterpreting historical facts. Trying to weave Islam into the fabric of America is both deceptive and devious.

Yes, Islam has played a role in the history of America, but it has been as an enemy, not a friend. While no Islamic army is powerful enough to force its desire to have America become an Islamic nation upon us directly, Islam is now working from within to accomplish that same goal it declared to Thomas Jefferson early in our existence.

Just as Jefferson did in 1805 and again in 1815, we must resist the Islamic demands that would bind us to a philosophy that is contrary to all we stand for. Call it Politically Incorrect or whatever you want to. America’s survival depends upon recognizing our enemies, knowing how they operate, and acting accordingly to preserve this great American experiment.

The old question, “How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time,” still holds true. America cannot be devoured instantly, but by one bite at a time it can disappear into the dust bins of history as have all of what used to be the Christian Middle East and Europe.

Islam needs to know that America is off the menu.

The Law of Saturation, Islam's Trojan Horse - The art of taking over a country without firing a shot

During Muhammad’s early “ministry,” he was merely a preacher spreading Islam by talking about his revelations and spreading the word of Islam peacefully, even though this caused confrontations between him and the Jews and followers of other religions, of which there were 365 or so in Mecca at the time.

So how did every Arab in Saudi Arabia become Muslim by the time of his death? After he became a warrior for Allah and a Jihadist and politician in Medina, his followers increased rapidly. Converted Muslims who engaged in Jihad shared in war booty taken from non-Muslims. This was not a part of Islam in Mecca where he garnered only about 150 converts in 13 years. It was a part of the appeal of Islam, profit and gain of material goods, land and slaves.

Inhabitants were oppressed and persecuted, rights were stripped away from them and they were forced to become Muslims to relieve the pressure on them and their families. Those that wanted to hold onto their former religion were forced to pay a tax, jizya, for the right to do so. And this came with severe restrictions and punishments if they were violated.

These people became dhimmis and Muslims say they are a protected people, but it is merely protection as though they were one’s property. Their rights were limited and they were second-class citizens at best. They were forced to wear strange clothes so they would not be mistaken for a Muslim. They had to cross the street to allow a Muslim to pass. They were often forbidden to leave their house when it rained because they might step in a puddle of water and a Muslim might step in it later contaminating themselves.

They could not ride a horse but a poorly mule was acceptable and at times they were only allowed to ride it backwards. Christians had to wear funny dunce-style hats to distinguish them from Muslims. The yellow patch Adolph Hitler made Jews wear in World War II was inspired by the yellow cloth Jews were made to wear in some Islamic-conquered countries at various times in history. Christians were allowed to wear a cross around their neck, but it had to be too large to conceal and weigh about 2 pounds. Everything they were demanded to do was meant to humiliate them, as the Qur’an suggested. To escape these torturous demands all they had to do was to become Muslims, so after years or generations, they did just that and the Muslim population increased, not by a desire to embrace Islam, but as a means to escape unreasonable financial and societal demands placed upon them.

These tactics have limited success in today’s modern world so how does Islam grow to the point where a country becomes Islamic? Saturation.  is how.

As the number of Muslims in any given country grows, demands begin to be made that the non-Muslims conform to the edicts of Islam even though they are not Muslims themselves. And some compliance always seems to follow. Closing the swimming pool or an amusement park on a certain day reserving it just for Muslims. Remove offensive symbols, such as crosses, from their view. Remove nativity scenes from areas where a Muslim might see them because it is offensive to them. Demanding that women be allowed to cover their faces for driver’s license photos. All these appeasements and more, make us Sharia-compliant and it makes us behave like Muslims, even when we are not.

As the Islamic population grows, more demands are made, more appeasement follows and Muslims begin to gain power. In today’s world, even with the violence we see in Islamic countries, violence isn’t always necessary.

The immigration into non-Muslim countries by thousands of Muslims in the past few years has seen countries readily forsake their own values and in the name of tolerance, accept Islamic traditions and doctrine and even make excuses for crimes committed by Muslims because it is simply their culture to act a certain way. Sharia Law is at first tolerated, then promoted as acceptable and then allowed to become the law of the land for Muslims.

No-Go Zones, places where Muslims are allowed to govern themselves instead of being ruled by the country’s own law, enable the spread of Sharia-compliant communities. Pieces of their own country are given up freely by governments and slowly the country loses its identity.

By sheer saturation and appeasement, entire countries become Islamic. Turkey, for example, used to be a Christian nation called Anatolia. Slowly over a period of about 400 years, it became what it is today, a Muslim country where over 99% of its people are Muslim and the remaining portion of a percent of the population are oppressed inhabitants.

To deny that it could ever happen in America is to deny the historical record of Islam. Every country that allows Muslim immigrants and tolerates their bigotry against non-Muslims and makes excuses for their culture of oppression and domination, eventually succumbs to the growing Islamic influence and becomes Islamic in the end.

After all, once Muslims numbers grow to a majority through continued immigration and birth rates that are some of the highest in the world, cultures dating back thousands of years die and are replaced by an Islamic society.

No country that allows unbridled immigration of Muslims will survive. Coexistence is a myth. Muslims are taught from their Qur’an that non-believers are the vilest of all creatures and that tricking, lying and deceiving non-Muslims is allowed until all become followers of Allah.

There is a point when this saturation can no longer be quelled. When a country reaches that point, becoming a Sharia-compliant country is inevitable. Their culture, values and society will cease to exist and there is no going back to what they once were.

We are seeing that in the UK, portions of Europe and Africa. Australia is under assault as is America. Islam has one goal, to see every human being either bowing to Allah and His government established, or their extinction. There a can be no middle ground, no compromise, and appeasement must come from the non-Muslims, not from Muslims themselves.

Immigration is Jihad. Every time some Muslim moves to a non-Muslim land, he is practicing what Muhammad did. Muhammad’s migration to Medina marked the beginning of the end for that city. It is not about the desire for a better life but it is done in the name of Islam to conquer that city or that country for Allah, and it works. And in today’s climate of appeasement and tolerance of the most intolerable doctrine on the planet, it will always work.

Refusal to see the historic record of Islam for exactly what it has always been, is suicidal for any culture or society. Islam is a Trojan Horse and once allowed behind the walls, no city can survive.

The Idea of Muslim Loyalty and the Dangers it Poses to America

Although it is slow to gain traction, Americans are beginning to see the signs of a part of the umma, the global Muslim community, which will forever be a thorn in the side of America and consequently that of all Americans. That is the issue of Muslim loyalty, especially Muslims in the military.

Liberals in America don’t see loyalty to ones former homeland or culture a problem. In fact, President Obama calls diversity in America one of our greatest strengths when in reality it is a threat of grave proportions. Immigrants who come to our country to become a part of it, to assimilate and to truly become Americans are not the issue and over the years legal immigrants who gave up their former life to become a part of our culture and society have added much to the development of this nation.

The ones however that come only for the benefits, welfare, special deals and perks while holding onto their citizenship of their birthplace, and who hold to an underlying desire to transform our nation into a mirror of their political philosophy, are a threat to America’s very survival. And nowhere is it becoming more obvious as in the case of Muslim loyalty to Islam and to other Muslims, placing their loyalty to Americans and America itself second.

When choices have to be made, one always chooses in favor of their greatest loyalty, whether it is to simple desire, family, religion, society, humanity culture and tradition, or to a country. We always make decisions based upon our strongest connections and priorities. Muslims have sworn their allegiance to Allah, Muhammad and the Muslim community. When push comes to shove, as it does on national security issues, they will always chose their faith over your friendship or their status as Americans.

In November of 2009, America got its first glimpse into what lengths Muslim Americans will go to when faced with the choice of loyalty to their sworn oath to stand for the United States or to stand against the United States when it clashes with Islamic principles.

Major Nidal Malik Hassan, an Army psychiatrist, had S.O.A. (Soldier of Allah or Slave of Allah depending on who you ask) printed on his business cards. He was known for his radical views against the Iraq war and the actions of the United States against his fellow Muslims and vocalized them in meetings he had while operating as an Army Officer. His rdical views were ignored out of a desire to tolerant of the religion of Islam even though it is an ideology contrary to American values.

During the attack Hassan was reported to have shouted “Allahu Akbar” (God is Great) as he fired his weapon. This was become known to Americans as a battle cry made as terrorists detonate bombs, or as Hassan did, fire their weapons in an attempt to kill in the name of Allah and the defense of Islam against a perceived aggressive enemy.

Sadly, after over a year of “investigation” our government cowardly decided to label Hassan’s killing of 13 people plus one unborn baby and the wounding of over 30 others as “workplace violence”. This exhibits the Obama’s administration’s reluctantly to see facts right in front of them. This is however in keeping with Obama’s mantra that we are “not now or will we ever be at war with Islam”.

With each new terrorist attempt aimed at our citizenry, a great portion of Americans are beginning to see that proclamation as less palatable.

More recently, the American soldier Nasser Abdo has said, “I don't believe I can involve myself in an army that wages war against Muslims. I don't believe I could sleep at night if I take part, in any way, in the killing of a Muslim.”

Abdo is stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky where some 5,000 soldiers are being deployed to fight in Afghanistan against the Islamic Taliban. He has made his choice as to which loyalty he is more commanded to follow. He refuses to go to war against his fellow Muslims even though the ones he is being sent to fight against are actively involved in the killing of his fellow American soldiers. Muslim loyalty trumps American loyalty.

In Abdo’s case he may end up in prison instead of Afghanistan for his “religious convictions”. Watch for liberal organizations to come to his defense as they are prone to do helping anyone taking a stand against America.

Do not soldiers take an oath to defend America if not verbally at least is that not the intent of enlistment in the armed forces in the first place?

What are Muslims taught about oaths in Islam? Islamic traditions found in the Hadith, one of the three sets of writings Muslim faith is based upon, states: “Abu Bakr faithfully kept his oaths until Allah revealed to Mohammad the atonement for breaking them. Afterwards he said, ‘If I make a pledge and later discover a more worthy pledge, then I will take the better action and make amends for my earlier promise’.”

In other words, an oath is good only as long as you don’t later decide there is something better to believe in, making it in effect useless and not worthy to uphold. In the case of military service such switching of loyalties is a threat to our nation security.

Really however, do Muslims ever switch their allegiances? In their hearts did they ever swear to protect America in the first place? Surely they knew where their priorities lay all along.

So what of Muslims serving in the armed forces? In my opinion, based on what I know of Islamic loyalty, I believe that every Muslim soldier who sees himself as a Muslim first and an American second, is a national security risk for sabotage, espionage and even overt attacks against their fellow soldiers.

Is this view supported by the Qur’an? In Surah 5:51 it states, “O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your protectors: they are but protectors of each other. And he amongst you who turns to them is of them. Verily Allah guides not a people unjust.”

Qur’an 3:28: “Let not the Believers take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than Believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that you may guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (to remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.”

There are 14 such verses in the Qur’an admonishing Believers (Muslims) not to take for themselves friends, protectors or even helpers from among the unbelievers and to do so risks the anger and wrath of Allah. The exception being that you can make “fake” friends with unbelievers in an attempt to keep yourself from harm. Deception is widely promoted in Islam.

Qur’an 58:22 shows just how personal it can get. In part it reads: “You will not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred.”

It doesn’t get much more personal than that. This verse says that you will not find love in anyone who rejects Allah or Muhammad, be they father, son, brother or other kin. The line between Muslims and non-Muslims is a pretty well-defined one. Only Islamic apologists who praise diversity at all costs and tolerance of every culture no matter how perverted seek to blur that line.

A Muslim soldier has dual loyalties, on the surface at least. Inwardly they have only one. A true Muslim never swears loyalty to anyone or anything above Allah, Muhammad, or Islam. Counting on their loyalty to America can be a devastating decision as the Fort Hood shootings proved emphatically.

Muslims were however killed in the attacks of 9/11 and the Qur’ans admonishment against Muslims killing Muslims seems to contradict the idea that Islam permits such killings. However, if you will notice a fine detail in the above mentioned verse 5:51 it says that when Muslims choose associations with unbelievers they become “of them”. This phrase erases all obligation to take care not to kill other Muslims. Once they become one of “them” they themselves become fair game.

This principle was defined in Muhammad’s time when a specific attack was planned for nighttime. His officers were concerned that in the darkness innocent children or women might be inadvertently killed. Muhammad told them not to worry about it because they were “of them”. Collateral damage is acceptable in the advance of Islam through conquest as lines of morality are erased. September 11, 2001 proved that.

Should Muslim soldiers then be restricted to non-combative positions so as not to be placed in a position of having to kill fellow Muslims? Even that will not work as working in the food industry, administrative positions, motor pool or hospital workers gives aid in one form or another to soldiers who will be fighting Muslims. They see this as aiding and abetting the enemy. They will be viewed by Islam as coconspirators in the attacks upon Muslims on any field of battle. The only option is not to allow Muslims to serve in the United States Armed Forces in any capacity.

Muslim loyalty does exist, but only for Islam. If a Muslim says he will defend America against his fellow brother, Muhammad calls him an apostate, a traitor and worthy of the same fate as the unbeliever. So why do they continue to call themselves Muslims if they have indeed turned their back on Islamic teachings? Because in their heart they have not abandoned Islam.

Muhammad’s words recorded in Bukhari 8,73,70 makes it plain. “Harming a Muslim is an evil act; killing a Muslim means rejecting Allah”. Simply put, for a Muslim soldier to kill a fellow Muslim is an act of rejecting Allah and without loyalty to Allah, one is not a Muslim.

In Bukhari 1,2,12 Muhammad explains “True faith comes when a man’s personal desires mirror his wishes for other Muslims”. Since a Muslim’s desire is not to be killed, he cannot seek or participate in the killing of other Muslims and still be a man of faith who follows Islam.

Simply put, Islam divided the world into two camps, dar al Islam, the land of submission of which Muslims are a part, and dar al harb, the land of war, everyone else. It is an impossibility for a Muslim to be a part of both worlds, promoting Islamic goals and purpose on one hand and being a participant in war against those very ideals on the other hand.

But can be believe them if they say they are Muslims yet loyal to America? Hardly. Islam is deceptive is anything at all. The principle of Taqiyya, Sacred Deception, allows for Muslims to lie to non-Muslims in the advancement of Islam. We have already seen that an oath is little more than a convenient lie told to deceive since the oath can be retracted when another better idea or cause comes along. Muslims are forbidden to lie, cheat, steal from, harm or kill fellow Muslims. The courtesy does not however extend to you and I as unbelievers and kafirs.

Therefore, although Muslim loyalty does exist, it pertains only to loyalty to Islam and the umma, the global Muslim community. As such allowing Muslims to serve in the protection of the American ideal, society and community is like unquestioningly hiring known spies and saboteurs to fill our ranks. It is absurd and suicidal.

So it appears that the Obama mantra that we are not at war with Islam is as foolish as it is untrue. We are at war with Islam and every American Muslim (forgive the contradiction in terms) soldier in uniform is an enemy soldier behind our lines and needs to be treated a such.

Until and unless we treat Islam as the political philosophy it is, rather than as simply another religion, we will never be successful in the war against terrorism or in the effort to save America as the last free country in the world. It is a fight we cannot afford to lose and one we cannot win with the ranks of our armed forces filled with those loyal only to our enemy.

Burning the Qur'an - The Right Statement Made in the Wrong Way?

The proposed Burn the Koran Day being held by the Dove World Outreach Center is drawing a great deal of attention and correctly placed criticism not only in Florida and America, but worldwide.

I understand the intent of Pastor Terry Jones and his determination to express his view that “Islam is of the Devil”, which is the title of his book on the subject. But there are other things to consider as well, such as the overall goal of this action.

The Qur’an is probably one of the most respected holy books of any religion and it also has the distinction of being probably the most reviled as well. Islam is becoming more of a polarizing subject as Americans ponder the building of an Islamic community center near ground zero and the building of an Islamic-shaped crescent memorial at the site of the Flight 93 airplane crash site.

Muslims go to great lengths to express respect for their book. Their hands must be washed and clean before it is handled and some have been imprisoned in Islamic countries for not treating it respectful enough. A Christian minister had a hand and foot cut off because he spoke about the Qur’an with disrespect. Muslims take this symbol of Islam very seriously.

However, the greatest mistake that Jones’ Church will make is not the actual burning the Qur'an. It is that by doing so they are placing themselves in a position where their exposure of Islam will not be heard or respected after this.

In effect, the truths about Islam that the Dove World Outreach Center will seek to make people aware of will not be heard by those who need it the most. Pastor Jones’ ministry will be forever shaded by perceived bigotry and religious intolerance. In that, Dove World Outreach is aiding the cause and advancement of Islam instead of hindering it.

Anyone that knows me understands that I believe the truth of Islam should be exposed. The fact that it is more of a political system rather than a legitimate religion is one of those truths that we must face in order to effectively confront the threat of Islam in America, although we as a country have yet to do so.

My fear is that the burning of the Qur’an will be counterproductive and do more harm than good. I would imagine that the last thing Pastor Jones wants to do is to aid in the advancement of Islam in the United States.

But this action of burning the Qur’an, even though protected by freedom of speech, isn’t the wise thing to do. It has been said that just because someone has a ‘right’ to do a thing does not mean that doing that thing is the right thing to do.

Much more exposure of Jones’ ideas would be accomplished by a devoted promotion of his book, publication of his sermons on the subject, and the mass distribution of tapes, DVDs and CDs which would disseminate his convictions in far more detail. In effect, his truest expression of his freedom of speech would be to promote more of that – actual speech.

American General David Petraeus, in saying that burning the Qur’an will be used as a possible tool for justification of further attacks upon American troops abroad, is certainly true. The idea that Islamic radicals need a reason to harm Americans is a bit naïve though. Admittedly, burning Islam’s holy book does add more fuel to the already blazing fire.

We should also consider the ramifications of allowing the threats of violence by Muslims around the world to curb free speech where Islam is concerned. Stopping the burning will add to a feeling of victory felt by Islamic radicals but that is the lesser of the two evils, especially in light of the fact that burning the Qur’an will have no positive effect in the fight against the philosophy of Islam.

Promoting the fight against Islamic ideology in a dignified and effective manner is far more important than a single sensational expression of free speech. In this case, not exercising free speech may be the greatest example of free speech after all. Just because someone has a right to say something does not always mean it needs to be said, especially when it is said in inflammatory ways.

All adults who are married learned a long time ago that even the right thing said in the wrong tone will get us into hot water. Burning the Qur’an is an example of the right thing being said in the wrong way.

There are many more effective, valid and dignified ways to expose Islam. After the Qur’an go up in flames on 9/11 in Gainesville, Florida a statement will certainly be made by Dove World Outreach Center. However, the many other statements they could have made in the future will not be possible as they will not be heard nor received, and that is the biggest tragedy of all.

Clearing Up The Confusion Behind the NYC Mosque

With all the confusion surrounding the building of New York City’s Ground Zero mosque, willful blindness seems to prevail. Granted that the building site is over 2 blocks from actual Ground Zero, but a part of one of the planes ended up inside the abandoned building on 9/11. That makes it in my opinion a part of Ground Zero.

The White House has said that the building of the mosque is a “local” issue, forgetting that all of America was attacked on that September morning, not just New York City. This seems to be a fact that NY politicians are willing to over look as they pander to Islam’s whims and wished.

The argument being made by some, mainly Liberal Democrats & Islamic apologists, is that the proposed NYC mosque is not being built on hollowed ground at all since it is a couple of blocks away, like that really makes any difference. ALL America is hallowed ground and I re-emphasize, all of America was attacked on 9/11.

Are we to suppose that had the attack been made Memphis, TN or Lexington, KY that it would simply be their concern. Apparently that perspective might be taken by national leaders as we saw how the devastating floods of Nashville were ignored while Liberal politicians clamored to send aid to Haiti and more recently to Pakistan.

We all know how our national government responded to the Katrina disaster and yet the State Department is currently using our taxpayer money to send a radical Muslim around the Middle East to find funds for the mosque.

Some may disagree with the term radical as opposed to the White House position that he Feisal Abdul Rauf is a “moderate” Muslim. Yet as he still refuses to label Hamas a terrorist organization, and as he has written in his book that this mosque is seen as an outreach tool to advance Islam in America, and since he supports Sharia Law being implemented in the U.S., I find it very difficult to call him a moderate.

Basically I have trouble with the term “moderate Muslim” anyway. A true, practicing Muslim believes the words in the Qur’an are the infallible, incorruptible word of Allah as spoken to Muhammad through the Angel Gabriel and as such cannot be revised or changed. Why change that which is perfect?

To become a Muslim, one must recite the Shahada which is "ASH-HADU ANLA ELAHA ILLA-ALLAH WA ASH-HADU ANNA MOHAMMADAN RASUL-ALLAH". Translated it means "I bear witness that there is no deity (none truely to be worshipped) but, Allah, and I bear witness that Mohammad is the messenger of Allah".

A true Muslim also believes that Muhammad is “an excellent model of conduct” (Qur’an 33:21) and an “exalted standard of character” (Qur’an 68:4). All true Muslims are likewise Muhammadians, accepting his example as the purist form of adherence to Allah’s bidding and instruction.

Why is it so important for Islamic apologists to demand acceptance of the myth that Islam is a “Religion of Peace”? Think about the alternative. If Extremists did not hijack the peaceful religion in an attempt to make it violent, then it is in fact violent in nature and our war against terrorism actually IS a war on Islam.

This is a frightening thought to those who would rather ignore 1400 years of historical evidence in an attempt to morph Islam into a sort of modern, watered-down version of simply a benign religious movement promoting peace for all.

Easily seen, this was not at the core of Islam nor was it the motivation of Muhammad who called for, and initiated jihad to promote, Islamic supremacy. Muhammad’s dying words were that all Jews were to be driven from Arabia, and in the following years they were. His last campaign was design to do the same thing to the Christians and though he died before initiating it, his followers have carried on that fight as well for centuries.

It would have been a wonderful revelation if Muhammad had instructed his followers that after his death they were to extend a loving out reach to all people everywhere and use love, compassion and tolerance as a means to bring people to Allah. However, since that is not the truth, his actual instruction negates once again all previous peacefulness from Islam.

The practice of “Abrogation”, the nullifying of former instructions of Allah and previous verses in the Qur’an that conflicted with later revelations, in effect replaces the “peaceful” Muhammad with the warrior Muhammad. Abrogation also replaces the peaceful verses of the Qur’an with the ones calling for punishment of all non-Muslims for their rejection of Allah and his prophet. Whatever came later is the final word of Allah and Muhammad. It trumps all other revelations, instruction or decrees. Period. End of discussion.

That is why the life and practices of Muhammad is of paramount importance in Islam and cannot be neglected in any attempt to understand the philosophy. Based on this truth and the eternal reverence of Muhammad and the Qur’anic text, moderate Muslims exist only in the identity of those who deny Muhammad, deny the instructions of the Qur’an, and question the incorruptible word of Allah. For those I have only one question: What makes you think you are Muslim?

If Islam is radical then all true Muslims are radicals as well, and no apology by wishful thinking political leaders or laymen can ever change that. Islam can only be changed from within, and since such an act would be construed as offensive to Allah and Muhammad, such an individual would probably not live long in an Islamic country. Deviating from the eternal word of Allah carries a death sentence so how can true reform ever become a reality when its advocates are certain to be labeled apostates and have a fatwa (religious proclamation) sworn against them?

When a cartoonist who dares depict Muhammad in any form is targeted for murder, how far would one get who tries to discredit the word of Allah or Muhammad by saying they are less than perfect and need changing? Reform of Islam is simply not possible.

There is one possibility however, and that is to change the “appearance” of Islam to seem peaceful and tolerant. This is done by Taqiyya, a form of Sacred Deception allowed and promoted by Muhammad and Allah so as to advance Islam by resenting a false face before non-Muslims. We see this every time a Muslim on TV claims Islam is a religion of peace or that vocal clerics proclaiming jihad and death to America are not representing the “true” Islam. In all actuality, they are representing it faithfully as commanded by Allah and his prophet Muhammad.

So where does that leave us on the New York City Ground Zero mosque issue? With one understanding, one which recognizes that the “hijackers” of Islam former President George W. Bush referred to that carried out the attacks on America on 9/11/01 do not exist. They were in fact following 1400 year old, unchangeable, perfect orders from Allah and his prophet to “…strike terror into the hearts of the kafirs because they worship others besides Allah, which He gave them no permission to do. Their home will be the Fire, a terrible resting place for the evildoers”. (Qur’an 3:151)

“Moderate” Muslims might say this verse is not correctly interrupted and that such actions are not really required of Muslims. Their Hadith Bukhari 4,52,46 tells a different story. Muhammad said: “A Muslim holy warrior, fighting for Allah’s cause is like a person who does nothing but fast and pray. Allah promises that anyone killed while fighting for His cause will be admitted without question to Paradise. If such a holy warrior survives the battles, he can return home with the captured property and possession of the defeated”.

And what of the Muslim who refuses to fight in Allah’s cause? Muhammad said according to Hadith Muslim 020,4696 that “the man who dies without participating in jihad, who never desired to wage holy war, dies the death of a hypocrite”.

As we understand it, a hypocrite is one who says one thing and acts not in accordance with that believe. Therefore to say one is a Muslim and yet to not desire to participate in jihad makes one a hypocrite. So much for the moderate Muslim.

Some apologists try and deflect the issue by saying the NYC mosque has nothing to do with 9/11 but is merely the Muslim people exercising their right to practice religious freedom. If the NYC mosque has nothing to do with Ground Zero, why do some Muslims say it is a monument to honor the dead of 9/11 attacks? Why did they want to open in on 9/11? That would be a strange coincidence.

Are not “houses of worship” built in areas where there are people to attend them? Why then is the preferred building site of the NYC Ground Zero mosque lower Manhattan where no Muslims live, especially considering the fact that 100 other, more conveniently located mosques, already exist?

David A. Paterson, Governor of New York, sought to diffuse the tension surrounding the issue by offering Muslims another piece of ground farther from Ground Zero to build on and they flatly refused. Why, if it has nothing to do with Ground Zero and the site of the 9/11 attacks?

Also, if the mosque is meant to build bridges between the religions, why are not a Christian Chapel or a Jewish Synagogue being incorporated into it? Why does the design not have a Cross or a Star of David on it if the mosque is considered to be a symbol of multi-cultural outreach? Simple. It is not a symbol of out reach but a symbol of Islamic victory over a destroyed piece of American real estate and a place where the lives of almost 3,000 Americans were murdered in the name of Allah and Islam.

All the arguments you are hearing and will continue to hear while this debate ensues in defense of the mosque, is pure Taqiyya, statements of deception designed to make uninformed non-Muslims think it is a religious issue and not a political one. If we can be convinced it is religious freedom being assaulted by those opposing it, then the country will fall in line to promote the building of it. America is all about religious freedom, unless of course, you are promoting Christianity, which has been under attack by Liberals for decades aided by the ACLU and others.

We all know that it is forbidden to place a Christmas manger scene on government property such as a public park or courthouse square because of the myth of “Separation of Church and State”. That makes it even more curious when you discover that taxpayer dollars are used to build foot baths in airport so Muslims can wash their feet before they travel as commanded by their religion. What happened to that so strongly enforced separation in those cases?

If people understand that Islam’s building of the NYC mosque is a political statement, as is evidenced by the facts stated above, and not so much a religious freedom issue, then it should be treated as a foreign political system seeking approval to build a headquarters in the United States. As such it must be denied.

Islam has spread through the ages based on ignorance. Conquered individuals were prohibited from studying the life of Muhammad, (the Sira), and forbidden to read the Qur’an. Islam is designed to keep those it wants to conquer ignorant of its methods and goals. It wants us to rely on what they say and ignore our instincts, and never to question the wisdom of Islam.

In America, we sometimes have the nasty habit of wanting to know the truth and the facts concerning issues that confront us. Sometimes we are mislead by silver-tongued rhetoric and don’t follow our gut. Sometimes we follow the hapless crowd and want to see “history” made at all costs.

We are learning that such adherence to following without questioning is dangerous and leads us down roads we would not have chosen to travel had we only questioned what was being handed us to believe.

America is under assault by Islam all across the nation. Until and unless we refuse to follow the dictates of Political Correctness and question what we are told not to question, we will continue to stumble in the dark, watching our country being dismantled right before our eyes and we won’t even know what happened.

I am certain you have been admonished before, as Thomas Jefferson said, to question with boldness. Only them will Taqiyya be seen for what it is and the truth about this mosque, and about Islam in general, be exposed for the anti-liberty and anti-freedom philosophy it is.

This is about more than a single building being built upon a particular block in New York City that will never be seen by most Americans. It is about the liberty and freedom that is being assaulted daily in every city in America, aimed at every individual in America, by a system that would happily steal those qualities that make America what it is today if we would allow it through our ignorance.

Refuse to be ignorant and refuse to be silent. Your freedoms are at state. America is at stake. Islam, Sharia Law in incompatible with the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights and our much cherished freedom. The only thing necessary for the evil of Islam to triumph is for true Americans to remain silent and do nothing.