“Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the (Jews) people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers.” — Yusuf al-Qaradawi, spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, 2009.
'Hasa Diga Eebowai" is the hit number in Broadway's hit musical "The Book of Mormon," which won nine Tony awards last year. What does the phrase mean? According to the Urban Dictionary it is a Ugandan phrase, translated literally into English as "F**k you, God!"
The "Book of Mormon" — a performance of which Hillary Clinton attended last year, without registering a complaint — comes to mind as the administration falls over itself denouncing "Innocence of Muslims." This is a film that may or may not exist; whose makers are likely not who they say they are; whose actors claim to have known neither the plot nor purpose of the film; and which has never been seen by any member of the public except as a video clip on the Internet.
So let's get this straight: In the consensus view of modern American liberalism, it is hilarious to mock Mormons and Mormonism but outrageous to mock Muslims and Islam. Why? Maybe it's because nobody has ever been harmed, much less killed, making fun of Mormons. This can be said about Christians and Jews. One of the most Anti-Semitic books every published was the “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” purporting to describe a Jewish plan for global domination. I have never heard of Jews rioting in the street. Or when a Crucifix is displayed in a bucket of urine at an art exhibit paid for by the National Endowment for the Arts Christians did not riot and kill people. When a statue of Virgin Mary was displayed covered in dung and the popular film the Da Vinci Code suggested Jesus had sex with Mary Magdalene and produced a child Catholics did not burn images of Tom Hanks and protest in the street of Hollywood or San Francisco. When Bill Maher constantly mocks Catholics, Jews, and Christians they do fire-bomb the studios of HBO.
This is for two reasons. 1.) American Christians, Jews, and Mormons believe in the First Amendment, and 2.) Christians, Jews, and Mormons are able to ignore these blasphemous attacks, shake their heads in disgust, and walk away believing in their religion and pray for forgiveness for the offenders.
On the other hand those professing to believe in the religion of peace will not tolerate any mocking or disrespect of Islam. They believe that those who mock and disrespect Islam should be killed, their property confiscated, and they should riot in the streets burning flags, attacking embassies, firebombing newspaper offices, and blowing up buildings and school buses. Yes this is truly a religion of peace.
Pamela Geller is the founder, editor and publisher of Atlas Shrugs.com and executive director of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) and Stop Islamization of America (SIOA). She is the author of Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance (WND Books) and The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America with Robert Spencer (foreword by Ambassador John Bolton), (Simon & Schuster). She is also a regular columnist for World Net Daily, Andrew Breitbart's Big Government and Big Journalism, the American Thinker, and other publications.
Pamela Geller received the Annie Taylor Award for Courage in 2010 from the David Horowitz Freedom Center. In October 2011, the United States Marine Corps presented her with the flag flown on September 11, 2011 over Camp Leatherneck, "amid the battlefields of Afghanistan during decisive operations against enemy forces in Helmand Province."
In a recent blog she stated:
“This is what voices for freedom have to live with for speaking in defense of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion and individual rights.
The media sanctions the motive (blasphemy laws under the sharia) and invariably targets innocent civilians not the violent jihadists. Eric Allen Bell has gone into hiding
Islamic Supremacists Seek to Settle Score by Framing Filmmaker September 20, 2012, FrontPage Magazine.
What if there was one historical figure that just simply could not be lampooned? I’m not talking about a George Orwell book now. I’m talking about reality. What if people in the free world, who had the right to free speech, would not dare lampoon this figure, because so many people on the planet had become brainwashed into thinking he was a “prophet”? Maybe this seems just too mind-numblingly absurd to even entertain, but what if – what if the fear that these people would be offended, and then hurt you, or kill you, kept everyone silent – kept everyone afraid to poke fun at the imaginary holy man and to shudder in fear at the thought of exercising their right to free speech?
Is there even a word for something so absurd, so incredibly ridiculous? In fact there is. It is called being “Sharia-compliant.”
Here are a few reason why Islam should not be considered the Religion of Peace.
The mosque and state are not separate.
To this day, Islamic nations that are deeply rooted in Sharia, like Iran and Saudi Arabia, 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).
Jihad may be waged against injustice or an unjust nation, as Islam defines the terms.
Classical texts say Islam is justice, and no Islam is injustice. Therefore, a "just war" can be waged against a nation or people who do not submit to Islam.
Yet we are told in the 1990 Cairo Declaration of Human Rights, which is based on sharia, that humane rules must be followed (Article Three). Does that article offer hope that modern Islam can move past old Islam? Maybe.
However, the Quran, sacred traditions, classical law, and historical Islam contradict or balance out some elements in Article Three. Would there be a conflict between the old Islam and modern Islam if war broke out? Many Islamic clerics issue fatwas (religious rulings) to wage jihad.
Jihad may be waged to spread Islam and force conversions -- a holy war.
Yet we have been told for many years now that holy wars and forced conversions were never done in Islam. That's a myth imagined by Westerners.
A captive in jihad may be executed, enslaved, ransomed for money, exchanged for other prisoners, or released freely.
Quran 47:4, 33:25-27, and 4:24 say these things (and the last option -- free release — is positive). Yet we are told that in a jihad today, everything must be done humanely and justly.
However, as stated before, the back-up article, this fourth item, and the next four items in this list balance out that claim. One must ask whether there be a conflict between old Islam and modern Islam in the event of a war.
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.
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 sharia but outlaws wanton destruction of property. Once again, would there be any conflict between old Islam and modern Islam in a war today?
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 one or the modern one?
The Quran promises gardens for martyrs dying in jihad.
Throughout the Quran, Muhammad promises the men in his fledgling Muslim community that if they die fighting for Allah and for him, Allah will reward them with a "virgin-rich" garden (Quran 44:51-56; 52:17-29; 55:46-78).
Reference: Martyrdom and the Sword
A second-class submission tax, called the Jizya, 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, or (3) keep their religion, but pay a tribute or submission tax, the Jizya, 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."
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).
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 mean 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.
Reference: Freedom of Religion
Blasphemy laws, including imprisonment or execution, may be imposed on critics of Islam or Muhammad.
These verses should be read in historical sequence, as follows, for they show that as Islam's military power increased, the harsh treatment of mockers and critics also intensified: 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, and often their names, who were assassinated for mocking Muhammad and the Quran.
Reference: Free Speech
Perhaps, if Obama gets reelected he will offer a proposed Constitutional Amendment that will change the language in the First Amendment to:
“Congress shall make laws respecting all religions, and prohibiting the free exercise thereof, except Islam; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, except when petitioning against Sharia Law.”
I am sure the liberal press, Obama, and Hilary will support this change 100%