Monday, January 12, 2009
WE HAVE NO way of determining which Muslims subscribe to pure Islam.
- If they are Muslims, then they subscribe to the whole doctrine set; otherwise, they are Mushrikun or hypocrites.
- If they don't subscribe to Jihad, then they suffer from extreme cognitive dissonance — as out of place as a prude in a whore house.
The reason this matters is that pure Islam is seditious. Islamic doctrine is more political than religious, and its sole political goal is the domination of Islam over all over religions and all governments.
- Islam demands a monopoly on faith, practice and government. It is under a permanent mandate to conquer the entire world so that only Allah is worshiped and 'people of the book' are subjugated, humiliated and extorted.
When Muslims move to a country, a certain percentage of them start agitating for special considerations. They start to organize and influence the nation politically in a way that is good for Islam and bad for freedom and equality. When the percentage of the Muslims in a nation's population becomes high enough, they gain so much political power that freedoms and rights begin to disappear. (Watch this video to learn more.)
- They tend to form enclaves and avoid assimilation, retaining their culture and practices. They complain about any porcine symbolism, contact with dogs, even leader dogs for the blind and demand extra breaks from work for their prayer schedule.
- As their numbers rise, violence begins and increases, as it has in Australia, France & Sweden.
Given all this, until we have a way of determining who is dedicated to pure Islam, no more Muslims should be allowed to immigrate into free countries.
- Any and every believing, faithful, pious Muslim is a threat to civil society because he is obligated to join the Jihad when called. Even if he is not a Salafi, he will always have potential for radicalization under the influence of media, friends and clerics.
Does this seem extreme? It's not as bad as it might seem. We already choose who can immigrate and who cannot. We make the rules. This is our country, after all. We are not under any obligation to allow anyone to immigrate who wants to. They do it with our blessing or they don't do it.So this policy is simply adding to the already-existing filter.
- Filtering out our sworn enemies is common sense. In recent decades, Nazi prison camp guards were still being deported.
This is not racist. Islam is not a race; it's an ideology. The policy of stopping Muslim immigration is simply acknowledging the reality of the Islamic teachings. I know there are Muslims who reject the violent and intolerant verses of the Qur'an. But Islam also teaches taqiyya and we have no way of knowing who is sincere and who is deliberately deceiving us.
- Islam had an Arabic genesis, but conquered Africans, Asians & Europeans, forcibly converting many. It is, in fact, an ideology, not a race; it victimizes people of several races.
- The reality of Islamic teachings is clear on the face of Islam's canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence. Book O, Chapter 9 of Reliance of the Traveller sets forth the rules of Jihad, including its definition. Allah commanded:
- perpetual conquest: outcome oriented imperatives to fight
- pagans until all resistance ceases and only Allah is worshiped on a global scale 8:39
- 'people of the book' until they are subjugated, humiliated and make annual extortion payments 9:29
- genocide: 'great slaughter' is set as a prerequisite to holding prisoners for ransom 8:67
- terrorism: Commanded in 8:12 and exemplified in 33:26 & 59:2
- If you reject Jihad, genocide & terrorism, you are not a good Muslim, you are a hypocrite, and you ought to reject the entire institution.
- 2:225, 3:28, 5:89 & 16:106 are cited as foundations of al-taqeyya
- (unless you indeed fear a danger from them) meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' Ibn Kathir
We should not take the chance, at least until we find some way to discern between people who genuinely reject the political goals of Islam and those who do not. In the meantime, we should stop all immigration into free countries by Muslims while we can. You can get the process started right now by signing this petition.
- There is no real possibility of sorting the hypocrites from the zealots. There isn't much chance of that petition having much effect, either, but it is a way to apply pressure, show solidarity and build a contact base.
Does signing a petition do any good? According to ThePetitionSite (the organization I used to create this petition), the answer is: "Yes — often, but the answer really depends on a number of factors. In general, the more a target organization is impacted by public opinion, the more effective are the petitions. In addition, ThePetitionSite enhances the credibility of online petitions by centralizing signature collection, structuring/regulating signature data collection and output, facilitating communication of petitions via fax, email, etc. and by using fraud-reduction technology. Remember — the effect of a petition usually goes far beyond the actual list of signatures. Journalists write stories about the petitions, signers get inspired to take additional actions, and other "potential targets" conform their behavior to avoid being a target."
Petitions can also exert an influence through two powerful principles of influence: Social proof and commitment and consistency. Petitions have been known to ignite important public debates.
When this petition reaches 50,000 signatures, I will make sure each member of the House and the Senate finds out about it. And I will make sure newspapers and magazines all over the country find out about it. Your signature will make a difference. Sign the petition today: No More Muslim Immigration.
While there are other valid objections to Islam, my objection is based on the violent imperatives to conquest, genocide & terrorism. Islam has long history of rapine, beginning with razzia against returning trade caravans in 623 and continuing through the major conquests and has its modern manifestation in reconquista & terrorism. It is sanctified as outlined above, exemplified in the Jihad hadith of the four major collections and codified in Sharia & Fiqh. Two hadith bring the whole matter to the surface with extreme clarity I will quote the relevant portion of the first and the entirety of the second.
- 446, a gain of only 78 signatures.
When Umar sent the army to the great nations to fight disbelievers shortly after Moe's death, his General was asked, by a Persian General, for the casus beli.
Bukhari Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386There is only one rational conclusion to draw from that: Jihad is their religion. What is Jihad? Examine the definition given in Reliance of the Traveler.
[...]Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."[...]
Abu Dawud Book 23, Number 3455:Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar:
I heard the Apostle of Allah, (peace_be_upon_him) say: When you enter into the inah transaction, hold the tails of oxen, are pleased with agriculture, and give up conducting jihad (struggle in the way of Allah). Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion.
Chapter O9.0: Jihad(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the lesser jihad.
- The above analysis was written by Dajjal.