Saturday, May 31, 2008


Jihad by any other name is still Jihad

By de Andréa

When it comes to “jihad,” why is it so difficult for so many of our government officials to grasp what is obvious to anyone who has perused the Quran, ( the words and agenda of Allah/Satan), the Hadith (traditions and sayings of Mohammed), and the Sira (biography of Mohammed)? Answer, because they haven’t bothered to take the time to read the enemy’s play book. If our government officials would have read Mine Kampf in the early 30’s we could have avoided the war in Europe. They didn’t read it then and they are not reading it now.

Why are they willing to jeopardize our safety and security as they twist themselves into pretzels trying to “de-link” Islamic terrorism from the Islamic jihadist ideology that gives it life? Answer, because they have been deceived.

A quote from the Director of National Intelligence (DNI): “We try not to refer to 'jihad' as something that’s bad…” God forbid if we should dare to speak the truth about the enemy of God and of the entire world…

This is a stunning, deceptive denial of reality, and it will have serious consequences for us in the near future. 97% of the references to “jihad” in the Islamic holy books refer to warfare against and/or subjugation or the killing of non-Muslims. Only a handful of references refer to “jihad” as a personal struggle to do good. Moreover we must remember that when a Muslim is doing “good” he is doing Allah’s will of militant violent Jihad, it is one in the same. It should be clear to even the most casual student of Islam and Islamic history that the ideology of jihad leads to militant jihad, resulting in violence, terror, and death.

With government leaders so willing to tow a politically correct line, “we the people” must rise up and demand better. ACT for America’s petition calling on Congress to conduct hearings to review extremist materials, such as those decoverd in American Mosques calling for jihad against America, is a very important action to show our elected officials we are not satisfied and we are demanding the truth and we are demanding action. Over 9,000 of you have signed the petition thus far. If you haven’t yet sign it, please click here to review and sign the petition today!

Good Jihad, Bad Jihad, and the IC

By Clare M. Lopez

When the Director of National Intelligence declares publicly that "We try not to refer to 'jihad' as something that's bad," even though he knows that the United States (U.S.) and all of civilized society is engaged in an existential struggle with the forces of Islamic Jihad, it is hard to fathom what he could possibly be thinking.

Only a few short weeks ago, we were told that referring to jihad might somehow legitimize our enemies. Of all of our leaders charged with the defense and protection of our Constitution, DNI Michael McConnell bears a special responsibility to understand clearly the identity of the enemy and the nature of the threat it poses. He also has a professional responsibility to communicate honestly to the American people.

The refusal of DNI McConnell and, apparently, the rest of the Bush administration, to acknowledge the obvious linkage between terror (simply a tool of Jihad) in the name of Islam, and the Islamic faith, goes beyond absurd: it is dangerous to national security because it prevents the U.S.'s top officials from crafting an appropriate strategic policy to defend us. Willful ignorance of the fundamental doctrine of Islamic Jihad, as defined by Islamic scriptures, scholarly consensus, and historians cannot change what is written, what is believed, and what is lived by those who would destroy our Constitutional system and replace it with Sharia. It doesn't matter in the end whether we agree or disagree with the doctrine of our enemies, or judge it good or evil: if that is what guides the enemy's behavior towards us, then that is what we must deal with. It is also irrelevant that more peaceful methods for propagating Islam, such as Da'wa, do exist, or that there indeed is a "Greater Jihad" (the inner struggle to better oneself). Neither Da'wa nor the "Greater Jihad" employs warfare or terror to replace liberal democracy with Sharia. But the "Lesser Jihad" does.

Let it be clear:

"Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the Ummah, the world Kingdom of Islam.” (Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, Reliance of the Traveller, a Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, o9.0, JIHAD, pg. 599)

"Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the Religion of truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book,(Christians and Jew’s) until they pay the Jizya (tribute) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Quran, Sura 9:29)

This is Islamic law; this is sacred, non-abrogated, Islamic scripture. It is doctrine. It cannot be changed. It can be criticized or renounced - but if Muslims do so, they are apostates, subject to the death penalty. It will take much courage and the support of free people everywhere to establish the right to leave such doctrine behind, in the dustbin of history.

What is unavoidable is the current reality of this doctrine for millions of Muslims across the world, including right here in the U.S. The 2007 Holy Land Foundation trial in Dallas, Texas featured a startling collection of documents entered into evidence; among them was the "Explanatory Memorandum" of the Muslim Brotherhood for the destruction of Western civilization (dated 1991).

"The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands..."

With such documents now in the public domain, in addition to such fine works as Andrew G. Bostom's comprehensive collection of primary source documents about Jihad through history, The Legacy of Jihad, there is simply no excuse for not understanding the systematically destructive character of Islamic Jihad for all societies that have ever attempted to stand against it.

So, how could it possibly be that the head of American intelligence does not want to refer to Jihad as something that's bad? Why are U.S. government employees not allowed to speak the name of the Jihadi enemy, or the Mujahedeen troops that slaughter in the name of Islam, or the Caliphate they are fighting to re-establish? It seems that it is alright to speak of al Qaeda (but only as an "aimless death cult") - even though al Qaeda is but one discrete organization of Jihadi terrorists and hardly "aimless." It also appears to be acceptable to speak of the "radicalization phenomenology" - which apparently is what our government thinks is the process by which normal, everyday citizens of the world are turned into suicide bombers. But to refer to the faith-based ideology that every suicide bomber's farewell video claims as motivation for the murder they intend, that hate-filled Friday sermons cite as God-given justification, or that treatises by scholars of the Islamic faith annotate with such exactitude - no, that is forbidden.

Outreach to non-jihadi Muslims is certainly a key component of this war. But we need to show them and all who believe in the values of tolerance and civil society the respect they deserve. A misplaced concern that holds such potential allies incapable of distinguishing between the Greater and Lesser Jihad and thinks an infantilized lexicon that denies the reality we all see will somehow win over hearts and minds betrays an incompetence that is jarring to observe. Neither can fear of the magnitude of this threat be allowed to destroy our faith in ourselves, our abilities, and our values. Dhimmitude (the second-class status of people conquered by Jihad) is a status freely accepted; it does not happen overnight, but is slipped slowly, inexorably over a society that loses its will to resist.

We Americans are not a people to submit to tyranny, whether by infiltration, subversion, or Jihad.

THE BOTTOM LINE: The question is; --- is the sleeping giant going to wake up now while we can sill prevent the Islamic cultural Jihad of America from escalating into Militant violent terrorist Jihad, or are we blindly and lazily going to allow as Europe has and wait until there is no choice but to engage in a so-called civil war with Islam in order to return this Nation of America back to the Judeao Christian free and liberated Country we have come to know a love.

It is up to us as free American citizens to shake our government awake before we have slid too far down the slippery slope of Islamic deception, where the only choice left is the three choices from Allah, to convert to Islam, to be a slave of Islam, or be killed by Islam. I say, we a forth choice and that is to fight Islam, and the time to fight is now.

Please join Brigitte and me in ACT for America a non-profit national issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the ongoing cultural Jihad and internal assault of America, with Islamic Sharia law.

de Andréa

More Information about Brigitte Gabriel, her book, and watch free videos

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Collapse in the War on Terror

The Coming Collapse in the War on Terror

By de Andrea

I will take you back in history just a little, to the year 1941. Imagine if you will, our political and military leaders choosing to fight a war against Nazism but failing to correctly identify the enemy as well as his ideology and threat doctrine. Moreover in the process, one would somehow “legitimize” the name “Nazism.” Not to mention that we wouldn’t want to offend Nazis and make them angry toward us as well as Germans who were not Nazis (and in this case most Germans were not Nazis as most Americans are not Muslims).

As foolish and self-defeating as that would have been in 1941, what we have been seeing, is our government officials using just that approach in dealing with the ideology and threat doctrine of our current enemy, the Nation of Islam.

A while back I wrote an article about this very subject, but I thought it would be good to read the truth from another source, just so you know that I am not standing alone with my opinions.
The following article is written by Joseph Myers of the “American Thinker” and it is a must read…

May 04, 2008 Strategic Collapse in the War on Terror By Joseph Myers

Words matter, and in the global war on terror we are losing the battle of words, in a self-inflicted defeat. The consequences could not be more profound.

Recent government policy memoranda, circulating through the national counter-terrorism and diplomatic community, establishes a new "speech code" for the lexicon in the war on terror, as reported by the Associated Press and now available in the public domain. These new "speech codes" recommended that analysts and policy makers avoid the terms jihad or jihadist or mujhadid or "al-Qaida movement" and replace them with "extremists" and by extension other non-specific terms, in other words at all costs, don’t tell the truth..
The use of these "new words" and rejection of the "old words" is ostensibly designed to avoid legitimating al-Qaida and its followers while mollifying the sensitivities of the larger Muslim community.

This culmination of previous trends does not surprise me at all. This is more than simply dancing on the pinhead of cultural sensitivity---words do have meaning, ideas have consequences.

This policy is a strategic collapse.It does nothing to improve our strategic comprehension of the threat or improve our foreign strategic communications; in fact it reinforces existing conceptual problems and risks confusing our messaging with our own actual knowledge of the jihadist threat.It is a failure of commission, a collapse of competency and reason. It is a collapse of precision and possibly the most profound setback in the war on terror since 9-11, when the global jihad brought itself to our attention.

Clausewitz noted that in war the moral factors are perhaps the most important, and we have just demonstrated we neither have the moral clarity or moral fortitude to comprehend the nature of the war we are in. Dr. Antulio Echevarria of the Army's Strategic Studies Institute stated once that the "US military does not have a doctrine for war as much as it has a doctrine for operations and battles" and we have just demonstrated we don't have the comprehension of this war as much as we can comprehend its operations and battles.

The AP report highlights a level of ignorance and hubris by the functionaries speaking to this topic so grave that it raises my concern about the actual extent that our government is in fact co-opted by our enemies.

War is a complex endeavor, there are no silver-bullet weapons, theories, words or phrases that will disarm our enemies or shape the cultural attitudes of the jihadists or other fellow Muslims. Only how the Islamic world doctrinally perceives and receives the claims of legitimacy of al-Qaida and the rest of the global Islamic movement will determine that outcome -- not any mincing of words by the West.

It is important that we use the right words so that the West and the American people can understand the nature of our global challenge in this war as much as anyone else.

No Global Threat ModelOver the last several years, there have been numerous examples of incredible malfeasance and lack of due diligence in homeland security, prediction and investigations evidenced by the reporting of, for example, Patrick Poole in his Hometown Jihad series.Also the schizophrenic activities of our government in dealing with the Muslim Brotherhood in America that has declared itself engaged in "civilizational jihadist process" to destroy our way of life and replace it with an Islamic model, and repeated examples of one arm of the government attempting to prosecute elements of the Brotherhood while the other half vets their actions and cultural sensitivity programs against the same organizations. Or recall the DHS booth placed next to the Islamic revolutionary organization of Hizb ut-Tahrir at another Islamic conference.

National security strategy is policy and policy implies a theory -- a theory for action. To date we have no concrete theory of action because we have no fully articulated global threat model. We are seven years into a global war with armed combat and many dead and wounded, and yet still lack a common analytic paradigm to describe and model the enemy. It is a stunning failure to propel the country to war without a fully elaborated threat model that clarifies and specifies the enemy and makes clear our true objectives.The lack of a threat model and a theory for action explains our schizophrenia, our failures and homeland security shortcomings.

Understanding the enemy -- "the threat," his threat doctrine and the authoritative statements, sources and philosophy under-girding that doctrine is a primary duty. That is the first step in developing a threat model. It is the vital step in the Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield process, to template enemy doctrine by laying it over the terrain: the physical, human and cultural terrain to understand its manifestations in reality. These are the first relevant questions to be answered for US national security analysis.

Our enemy says he is fighting jihad warfare to extend the Islamic faith; the basis of that claim rests on his exegesis of Quranic and Islamic Law injunctions. Irrespective of whether we or other Muslims accept or deny the legitimacy of his claim, if that is his stated doctrine, then that is the doctrine we must study and comprehend. That is the doctrine that will provide the indicators and warnings of future threats, that is the basis of our threat model.

That fact that other Muslims do not engage in violent jihad bears no relevance to our problem set or the analysis of those who do; it is a distraction and ancillary information that does not contribute to the threat model or understanding the enemy.

The fact is we have already so nuanced this war that we have failed to complete those required analyses. Our national security strategies and plans are so nuanced now as to be useless in terms of understanding the threat, defining it, clarifying it, modeling it. Read them, see if you can distill the enemy and orient on a clear objective. Even in our own strategic planning documents we admit to ourselves that we don't agree on the threat.

This completely contrasts with our well-developed threat model in the Cold War, beginning with NSC-68 and the containment policy, national security courses that taught Soviet ideology and world-view, the Soviet threat doctrine series published by DIA, and then war-gaming against it at our military schools. We understood them intellectually, philosophically, doctrinally from the very top down to the tactical bottom.

Seven years into this war we cannot say the same for the global jihad and have failed the same analytic and policy rigor. That is a serious error of omission.

Submission to MulticulturalismDr. Bernard Lewis, speaking recently at a luncheon and conference in Washington DC, noted that the two greatest shortcomings to understanding the Middle East are the "orthodoxy" of "political correctness and multiculturalism" and the reality that in the face of those driving ideologies, too many sworn to defend have proven themselves wilting lilies.

This new "no jihad policy" is the greatest of example.Let's dissect the government message to show not only its folly, but factual errors that point to a lack of strategic comprehension and due diligence amounting to the level of an ethical failing…

To read this article in its entirety, click on the authors name in my Introduction.

THE BOTTOM LINE: The philosophy that the author has so intellectually articulated in this article can be applied to so many other related issues, such as, the border Issue and the reference to the foreign invasion of illegal aliens as illegal immigrants or worse yet undocumented workers. This misidentification is what contributes to the paralyses of our government to properly and more importantly act constitutionally on the issue. The government is for example, constitutionally mandated to protect the citizens of these United States from a foreign invasion. (This indecently was one of the few main purposes of even forming a central federal government) And yet because of the misidentification of the issue of the open borders, immigration etc, the result is the subsequent out of control influx of anyone and everyone including our enemy into this country at will.
If we are to win this so-called “war on terror”, (another misidentification) it should be called the war against the Nation of Islam as it has been since the year 1099 AD. The truth is that the west has been fighting this war not for 6 or 7 years but for nearly a thousand years and all because we have not yet after all this time, indemnified who this enemy is. We have called this enemy racialism, terrorism, fundamentalism, fascism, insurgents; we have identified them by the names of their tribes and or sects, every possible way we can tap dance around the truth that we can, without actually recognizing the very root of what drives this enemy. If we ever hope to stop this infestation of evil in our culture, we must just as a medical doctor, we must properly diagnose the disease, or just as a misdiagnosed cancer, it will never stop invading us, and it will kill us.

Every Nazi, as it was in the Second World War; it is now every Muslim despite what they say, no, especially despite what they say, has the same ideology. The Quran does not magically read differently for some than others. One, as I have so often said, is either a Muslim and follows the teachings of the Quran and the Hadith, or if one does not, then one is not a Muslim. If one identifies oneself with Islam then one is identifying oneself with the ideology of the Islamic model, and should be considered the enemy of the free world.

The failure to identify this enemy for who and what it is, will eventually lead to the collapse of western culture. We must think and speak the truth no matter whose toes get stepped on, if we want freedom to survive.

de Andréa

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

TIZA Revisited

TV News Crew Assaulted by TIZA School Official

By de Andrea

As you may recall, I published an article on April 16 titled “American Islamic public schools” , as I have so often said, Islam is not going away, moreover the cultural Jihad that exists in America today will eventually escalate into a more militant Jihad tomorrow, until it is a full blown war with Islam, right hear on the streets America.

The following is a letter that I received from “Act for America” regarding the Islamic school in my article, the Tarik ibn Zayad Academy (TIZA) in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota. This is a public school supported by American tax payers and the U.S. Department of Education, for the cultural Jihadist purpose of indoctrinating our kids about the wonderful future of Islam and how America is the great Satan. Please watch the video of a school official attacking a TV journalist. This is an example of the incremental escalation of Islam’s “Cultural Jihad” that I have been warning about. The time to stop it is now before Americans are murdered in the streets.

This belated action taken by the Minnesota Department of Education is a good example of what members of ACT for America can accomplish.

Today it may be a push and a shove, but unless we stop this soon, tomorrow it will be War…

Invoke the forth choice, “fight now”.

de Andréa

Dear De,

This past Monday, a KSTP Television News crew went to the Tarik ibn Zayad Academy (TIZA) in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota, to seek comment from school officials regarding a Minnesota Department of Education letter directing the charter school to change two of its practices that impermissibly advance Islam.

However, instead of obtaining a statement from school officials, the KSTP TV crew was assaulted by two people, one of whom is the director of the school.
To see this stunning video, click on this link below and click on the image in the upper right hand corner:

You may recall that back in March we emailed you news stories containing allegations that TIZA, a tax-funded charter school, was improperly advancing Islam. At the time, the director of the school denied all allegations, but thanks to public pressure, helped in part by our email campaign and the actions of a Minnesota ACT! for America chapter, the Minnesota Department of Education launched an investigation into the practices of the school.

The Department then issued a letter to the school directing the school to correct two practices that amounted to an impermissible advancement of religion.

To see the letter the Minnesota Department of Education sent to the school, click here:

Given TIZA’s denial of the allegations originally leveled against it, and the totally uncalled for and unprovoked actions on the part of the TIZA director against the KTSP News crew, we remain skeptical that the concerns that have been raised will be thoroughly addressed by the school.

What’s more, a new question has been raised: Where has the Minnesota Department of Education been? How could such obvious violations of law regarding religious indoctrination in a tax-funded school be allowed to go on as they have? The Minnesota Department of Education deserves credit for finally uncovering these violations, but it seems unlikely these violations just began recently. Had it not been for public outcry, these violations would be going on unchecked to this day.

What’s more, what other impermissible activities are going on inside the school that the school has successfully hidden from state officials? This is not an unreasonable question to ask of a school whose director would deny all allegations and assault a TV news crew. This is not an unreasonable question to ask of a school which routinely prevents members of the public and the media from seeing what goes on inside the school. What is the school trying to hide?

In conclusion, while we are glad that two unlawful actions by the school have been uncovered, we remain dubious that all the problems have been exposed and that those that have been will be corrected as directed.

Our advice to the Minnesota Department of Education: Over the next six months, schedule some unannounced visits to the school.

And if lack of compliance is discovered then, consequences more severe than a letter would certainly be called for.

ACT for America

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

ACT for America


for America

The time for pondering has past; the time for action has arrived…

By de Andréa

Islam has Infiltrated Europe; now to the point of saturation. If Europe would suddenly wake up to the fact that their countries are no longer their own, and instead belong to the Nation of Islam; moreover, if they now decided they want to recover their countries culture, and get back what they have lost, it would at this point, require a civil war. Europe has approached the same position in history that they found themselves, in approximately the year 1068.

Unless America [the sleeping giant] wakes up real soon, we will also reach the same level of Islamic Infiltration that now threatens the entire European way of life.

I have been studying Islam for approximately 21 years; I have been talking and writing about Islam for nearly 3 years. The time has come for the next step in this fight to preserve America’s freedom.

Action… If we as citizens fail to act now as a free nation, we will be forced to act later as the dhimmah, the people of servitude.

By the year 800 AD, Islam was Infiltrating Europe for the same purpose that it is infiltrating it now, and this was, and is, to establish the “World Nation of Islam”. By the year 1076, 276 years later Islam had saturated most of Western Europe and established Shariah Law; moreover they now had also captured Jerusalem. 23 years after that, the Europeans finally woke up to the realization that Islam was not going to change.

The Crusades were a series of eight military campaigns against Islam that lasted for nearly 200 years during the time of Medieval England. Although the main objective of the Crusades by the Catholic Church was to recapture Jerusalem, it also involved driving Islam out of Western Europe. Therefore the Christians fought not only for control of Jerusalem, but to rid Europe once and for all, of the 300 years of the incremental Islamic infiltration and the ever surreptitious encroachment of “Islamic Shariah Law”...

“Once and for all”…That is what the Crusaders intended. Islam will never change; not ever. After the nearly 740 years since the Crusades, Islam has not changed their agenda of world conquest and domination. You see the so-called “Peaceful Nation of Islam” will exists only when the entire world is Islam and subjected to the oppression of Shariah law.

This is truly history repeating itself. I, and probably you, can do little to save Europe now from repeating its own history. But we can do something to stop this infiltration of Islam from continuing in America.

Islam has already infiltrated our Pentagon, our military, our schools, security agencies, our police departments as well as the FBI and the CIA. They are in our Congress and our Senate. Moreover, they will not stop, unless we stop them.

As Arab Muslims continue to heavily invest in our economy with the money we have allowed them to extort from us through outrageous oil prices and the raising of money through so-call Muslim charitable organizations, they will continue to force our submission to Shariah law and undermine our culture, our republic, our individual rights, and religious freedom.

We must fight back, and we must fight back now. If we do not become aware of this threat and act against it vigorously and immediately, then in the near future we will have to look forward to physically fighting Islam for our very lives in the streets of America.

Just as in the time of the Crusades, Europe has already been reduced to the last resort of having to fight Islam in the streets, even if they chose today to save their countries from the already consuming Islamic bondage of Shariah.

Just in case, any of you would be interested in becoming a part of attempting to save what is left of America for yourselves and your children before it gets to the point of physical militant Jihad, I am looking for a few good men and women to join with me in starting a local chapter of ACT for America in the central North State.

“ACT for America’ is a spin off of American Congress for Truth (A.C.T.) which was started shortly after 9/11 in 2002. Because of the legal tax status of A.C.T. which was intended to be an informational organization, ACT for America is an action organization with a different legal tax status and a goal of action.
Both these organizations were started by a little dynamo of a lady who shall be known as Brigitte Gabriel. Born and raised in Lebanon, she knows first hand what the agenda of Islam is for the West and for the world. After she as a child, was nearly fatally wounded in the bombing of her home in Lebanon, she, and her family literarily lived underground and under machinegun fire off and on for seven years just to survive. Click here to watch free videos of Brigitte telling her story. And Click here to order her book “Because They Hate”, a riveting story about her childhood and boundless knowledge about the agenda of Islam to dominate the West, and ultimately the world. Click here to go to the website of “American Congress for Truth” and Click here to listen and watch a video as Brigitte tells the story of how Islam is now taking over America. And finally click here to checkout the site of ACT for America.

After you have watched the videos and looked at these web sites, please contact me at and let me know if you are interested in information about joining a local chapter of ACT for America. This is the only nation wide organization actively involved in the attempt to save the America that we have come to know and love from the same fate as Lebanon, Indonesia, North Africa, Europe and any and every other country where Muslims have infiltrated their host cultures and governments as they are now doing in the U.S. today. This is not a commitment to join; the purpose is to see if there is an interest in saving this country of ours before we get to the point that we have to decide just how we are going to save our lives. There is absolutely no obligation involved. If you respond I will email some basic Information about joining a local chapter, what you do with it is up to you…

In case you have missed the previous two articles, just click on the title.

Porky Pig --- an example of Shariah Law taking over our culture.

They cooked the books --- the exposure of the lie about “there are only a few Muslim extremists”.

Thank you for your patriotism and you readership, de Andréa

Monday, May 19, 2008

They Cooked the Books

The Gallup-approved science and research foundation, has fraudulently underreported the number of Islamic Radicals, the lie has surfaced.

By de Andréa

The ‘tail’ of deception is the end of truth:

In the several years that I have been studying and writing about Islam, I have repeatedly stated the question-- “ If there are only a very few terrorist Muslims among the reportedly 1 billon plus Muslims in the world, I wonder why we never seem to run out of them?” Here is why…

But before I begin I want you the understand that this so-called research is the entire foundation for the belief that there are “only a very few radical terrorists Muslims” as few a seven percent, which leaves a whopping 90 plus percent as warm fuzzy people that want to live their lives as benevolent and charitable as Christians. This is a tale of lies perpetuated by a Muslim named Dalia Mogahed and a brain-washed academic of Middle Eastern studies John Esposito and blessed by the integrity of the Gallop research foundation.

In a stunning illustration of how apologists for militant Islam have totally distorted the truth, it is now beginning to leak like a wire boat. This is how John Esposito and Dalia Mogahed in a book called “Who Speaks for Islam” a Gallop Press book, made their own data appear to show that there were only a small percentage of “radical” Muslims worldwide. The world depends on the accuracy and integrity of Gallop science and research, and with that trust they deceived the entire Western world using the supernatural doctrine of Muslim Taqiyyah (true lies).

Esposito and Mogahed make the claim that only 7 percent of Muslims worldwide are “radical.” That amounts to about 91 million Muslims. Even though this is no small number, a closer examination of their data however, reveals that the number of those who are “radical Muslim terrorist Wahhabists” is actually more than 450 million, as much as 40 plus percent world wide. This is a long way from the measly 7 percent that the West has been deceptively led by the rein of terror, to believe.

On the inside back cover of books published by Gallup Press there is the following statement:
Gallup Press exists to educate and inform the people who govern, manage, teach and lead the world's six billion citizens. Each book meets Gallup's requirements of integrity, trust, and independence and is based on a Gallup-approved science and research.

Thanks to an admission by a coauthor of Gallup's new bestseller Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think, we are now able to know precisely what Gallup's "requirements of integrity" really are.

Who Speaks for Islam? is written by John L. Esposito, founding director of (the once Christian, now Muslim) Georgetown University's Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim Understanding, and Dalia Mogahed, executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies. As the authors state at the outset, the book's goal is to "democratize the debate" about a potential clash between Western and Muslim civilizations by shedding light on the "actual views of everyday Muslims"--especially the "silenced majority" whose views Esposito and Mogahed argue are lost in the din about terrorism, extremism, and Islamofascism.

In the Gallop research report, they contend, the majority are warm and fuzzy, just like us. They pray like Americans, dream of professional advancement like Americans, delight in technology like Americans, celebrate democracy like Americans, and cherish the ideal of women's equality like Americans. In fact, the authors write, "everyday Muslims" are so similar to ordinary Americans that "conflict between the Muslim and Western communities is far from inevitable."

All Muslims are terrorists or they support terrorism
If in fact, the approximately 60 percent majority of the self described Muslim population is as the previous paragraph says, warm fuzzy teddy bears, then this 60 percent majority of self described warm fussy Muslims are not Muslims at all. If they identify themselves with Western Christian culture rather than the Muslim culture, then they are anything but Muslims, or they are liars. And because of the doctrine of Taqiyyah (Islamic deception) taught in the Quran I would rationally have to choose the later.

This means that if one is truly a Muslim then one believes in the Quran, this is the foundation of Islam. Moreover, if one believes in the Quran then one is truly a radical terrorist Wahhabist Muslim. This in turn means that all Muslims are “Terrorist Jihadists” and are our enemy. This incidentally is exactly what I have been saying for twenty years and very few have listened. I hate people that say I told you so, but I told you so. So hate me if you want to, I don’t tell the truth to become popular.

The real debate about the "clash of civilizations" is about whether a determined element of radical Muslims could, like the Bolsheviks, take control of their societies and lead them into conflict with the West. The question often revolves around a disputed data point: Of the world's 1.3 or so billion Muslims, how many are real Muslims? If the number is relatively small, then the fear of a clash is inflated; if the number is relatively large, then the nightmare could mean the demise of Western Culture.

One could also take a lesson from Lebanon who from the time of their independence from French Colonialism in the 1940’s was a Democratic Christian nation, that is until these same lies and the infiltration of Cultural Jihad by Islam took control in the 1970’s

What gives Who Speaks for Islam? its aura of credibility is that its answers are allegedly based on hard data, not taxi-driver anecdotes from a quick visit to Cairo. The book draws on a mammoth, six-year effort to poll and interview tens of thousands of Muslims in more than 35 countries with Muslim majorities or substantial minorities. The polling sample, Esposito and Mogahed claim, represents "more than 90 percent of the world's more than 1.3 billion Muslims.” To back up the claim, the book bears the name of the gold-standard of American polling firms, “Gallup”.

The answer to that all-important question, the authors say, is 7 percent. That is the percentage of Muslims who told pollsters that the attacks of September 11, 2001, were "completely" justified and who said they view the United States unfavorably--the double-barreled litmus test devised by Esposito and Mogahed to determine who is radical and who isn't. The fundamental problem here is that either Esposito or Mogahed obviously know nothing about Islam, the Quran or their basic ideology, or they purposely cooked the book, so to speak. Dalia Mogahed herself is a Muslim, another classic case of the deceived deceiving the world.

The authors don't actually call even these seven percent "radicals," however; the politically correct term they use is "politically radicalized," which implies that someone else is responsible for turning these otherwise ordinary Muslims into bin Laden sympathizers. By contrast, Muslims who said the 9/11 attacks were "not justified" they term "moderates.” A moderate by definition is one who avoids the truth, neither one side nor the other. Or, could they possibly be, a liar???

More than half the book is an effort to distinguish the 7 percent of extremist Muslims from the "9 out of 10," as they say, who are moderates and then to focus our collective efforts on reaching out to the fringe element. With remarkable exactitude, they argue: "If the 7 percent approximately 91 million of the “politically radicalized” continue to feel politically dominated, occupied and disrespected, the West will have little, if any, chance of changing their minds.” There is no need to worry about the 93 percent because, as Esposito and Mogahed have already argued, they are warm and fuzzy, just like us.

There is much here to criticize. The successful purpose of this book is to blur any difference between average Muslims around the world and average Americans, and the authors rise to the occasion at every turn. Take the very definition of "Islam.” From Karen Armstrong to Bernard Lewis--and that's a pretty broad range--virtually every scholar of note (and many who aren't) has translated the term "Islam" as "total submission to Allah. ” But "total submission" evidently sounds off-putting to the Western and American ear, so Esposito and Mogahed offer a different, more melodious translation--"a strong commitment to God"--that has a ring to it of everything but accuracy. This by the way is the doctrine of Taqiyyah (the deception of Islam) showing through the semantics.

Or take the authors' cavalier attitude to the word "many." How many is many? Thirty percent of the vote won't get Hillary Clinton nominated for president, but it would be a lot if the subject were how many Americans cheat on their taxes or beat their wives. At the very least, one might expect a book based on polling data to be filled with numbers. This one isn't. Instead, page after page of “Who Speaks for Islam”? contains useless and unsourced references. They list tiny states that don't even rank in the top 25 of Muslim majority countries. Twice they say their 10 specially polled countries collectively comprise 85 percent of the world Muslim population; in fact, the figure is barely 40 percent.

These problems would not matter much if the book gave readers the opportunity to review the poll data on which Esposito and Mogahed base their judgments. Alas, that is not the case. Neither the text nor the appendix includes the full data to a single question from any survey taken by Gallup over the entire six-year period of its World Poll initiative. We, the readers, either have to pay more than $20,000 to Gallup to gain access to its proprietary research or have to rely on the good faith of the authors.

Or, more accurately, we have to rely on Gallup's good name--the "integrity, trust and independence" cited above. Public comments by Mogahed at a luncheon at the Washington Institute on April 17 show exactly what that is worth. Here's the context: As the event was about to close, Mogahed was pressed to explain the book's central claim that radicals constitute 7 percent of the world's Muslim population. A questioner focused on the critical distinction between the 7 percent of respondents who said the 9/11 attacks were "completely justified" and the other 93 percent. How many of those 93 percent, Mogahed was asked, actually answered that the attacks were "partly," "somewhat," or even "largely" justified? Were those people truly moderates?

In her answer, Mogahed refers in pollster code to numbers ascribed to the five possible answers to the poll question about justifying 9/11. Although she and Esposito never discuss the details of this question in their book, they did expound on them in a 2006 article in Foreign Policy magazine, which described a five-point scale in which "Ones" are respondents who said 9/11 was "totally unjustified" and "Fives" those who said the attacks were "completely justified."

In that article, she and Esposito wrote: "Respondents who said 9/11 was justified (4 or 5 on the same scale) are classified as radical." In the book they wrote two years later, they redefined "radical" to comprise a much smaller group--only the Fives. But in her luncheon remarks, Mogahed admitted that many of the "moderates" she and Esposito celebrated really aren't so moderate after all.

So, after the dust settled and the gun stopped smoking, there it was. Mogahed publicly admitted they knew certain people weren't moderates but they still termed them so. She and Esposito cooked the books and dumbed down the text. Apparently, by the authors' own test, there are not a hundred million radicals in Muslim societies but more than five times that number. They must have shrieked in horror to find their original estimate on the high side of assessments made by scholars, such as Daniel Pipes, whom Esposito routinely denounces as Islamophobes. To paraphrase Mogahed, maybe it wasn't the most technically accurate way of doing this, but their neat solution seems to have been to redefine millions of people off the rolls of radicals.

The cover-up is even worse. The full data from the 9/11 question show that, in addition to the 13.5 percent, there is another 23.1 percent of respondents--300 million Muslims--who told pollsters the attacks were in some way justified. Esposito and Mogahed do not utter a word about the vast sea of intolerance in which Muslims operate.

And then there is the more fundamental fraud of using the 9/11 question as the measure of "who is a radical.” Amazing as it sounds, according to Esposito and Mogahed, the proper term for a Muslim who hates America, wants to impose Sharia law, supports suicide bombing, and opposes equal rights for women but does not "completely" justify 9/11 is .a "moderate."

Could the smart people at Gallup really believe this? Regardless, they should immediately release all the data associated with their world poll and open all the files and archives of their Center for Muslim Studies to independent inspection. With a dose of transparency and a dollop of humility, the data just might teach something useful to the world's six billion citizens. But probably not, who can now trust any of the data collected by these two incompetent frauds. Or…maybe they are not incompetent at all, just maybe it was their intention to deceive the world. After all, Ms. Mogahed is a Muslim isn’t She???

THE BOTTOM LINE: That being said, I could have saved the world from a lot of trouble and deception by suggesting that everyone in the West just buy a Quran and read it for themselves. This is the guidebook for Islam; this is their source document for their religious theocracy. It reads the same whether one is a Christian, a Buddhist, or a Muslim. At any rate, one would soon discover that if one calls themselves a Muslim, then one is compelled to join the Jihad of Islam to bring the world under the rule of the Caliph and Shariah law--- period… It would be clear to a third grader, or especially a third grader because he may not yet have been deceived. Or then again maybe they have, these days it would depend on what school they attended.

The point being, is that if one is a Muslim, then one is either a Jihadists terrorist who would kill you and your family and your friends and your neighbors if they got the chance. Or…one is a supporter in some way of one who will ---- or…one is not a Muslim. This is not rocket science as they say.

Wake up America…

de Andréa

Thursday, May 15, 2008

Porky Pig

Among all the other bans and accommodations that Europe and America have already been subjected to under the surreptitious encroachment of the coming Islamic subjugation of the west, is the banning of the lowly Western Pig.

By de Andréa

No, this did not just recently occur in Europe. It already happened several years ago. I’m talking about America --- you see, we are just a very few years behind the UK and the rest of Europe in our eventual domination by Islam’s Shariah laws.

It may seem like a small thing to give up pork, pork products, and Miss Piggy, but trust me now…It won’t stop there, as a matter of fact it will never stop until we are all Muslims, or slaves subjected to Shariah law or the more preferable choice, death. That is unless we choose a fourth option now, and we stop it ourselves.

The enablement of political correctness may soon be tallying yet another casualty: 'the pig'. Increasingly as America and the rest of the Western world continues to accommodate the demands of the infiltration of Muslim theocracy. Pork food products are being singled out for removal from dining tables as well as pig-related trinkets banished from the desks of office workers.

If this allowed to continue, good ole' American food, such as barbecue replete with hot dogs and ribs and the typical American breakfast of eggs, bacon and sausage, will eventually be seen by Islam as grounds for militant Jihad in the Streets of America.

This would of course include outright censorship of pig depictions in drawings, pig references in literary works and pig portrayals in movies as well. Could the well-known, cartoon figure Porky Pig become a cultural embarrassment of our unenlightened past as we fear to utter the "P" word? Shhhhhhh

Though the notion may seem more appropriate for a comedy routine, an increasing number of pig-related incidents, accommodations, and Muslim demands in the recent year’s, point to an uncertain future for our porcine friend and its place in our economy, culture and our culinary traditions.

In October of 2005, the United Kingdom, clearly further along on the road to dhimmitude (the subjugation of Infidels) due to its proportionally large and subsequently more visibly Muslim population, banned piggybanks as promotional gifts from its banks. At about the same time, government social welfare offices called for the removal of all pig paraphernalia, including pig calendars, toys, and accessories from employee desks. These new government regulations were ostensibly implemented to accommodate Muslim Shariah law and so as not to offend Muslim patrons. It is now against the law in the U.K. to offend people with your own culture in your own country.

Should you be one of the deceived, and believe that this casualty of Western culture could not possibly come to pass in the sleeping giant of America; well… pay close attention and turn on your lights.. In the United States in 2007, several school districts removed pork products from their cafeteria offerings. Dearborn, Mich., schools for example, banned pork completely to avoid the possibility that Muslims students might unknowingly eat it. The district later added special Shariah legal halal foods to its menu to cater to the demands of its Muslim population. A public elementary school in San Diego that offers Arabic, single-gender classes and Muslim-only organized prayer, no longer offers pork to any of its students. And in Oak Lawn, Ill., a Muslim dominated city counsel where the administration is debating elimination of Christmas holiday celebrations; pork has already been banished from the school lunchroom. I don’t know about you but I may not be quite ready to go to war right now over barbecued ribs, but if they ban Miss Piggy, well that no doubt is grounds for a revolution, or a civil war or something.

All kidding aside, this may seem like a petty issue but I can assure you that it is not. First this is a very far reaching part of our economy and more importantly a part of our American culture that I am not so willing to give up, this is my country and not the nation of Islam. Not yet anyway.

Orthodox Jews, who follow kosher laws that prohibit the consumption of pork, have never demanded such special considerations for their chosen dietary habits nor have Jews feared accidental pork ingestion. They privately moderate their consumption according to their religious observances and often consume food prepared at home according to prescribed regulations. So you see, this is entirely unnecessary in the process of exercising ones rights and the freedom to practice ones religion. But this, my fellow Americans, is not the purpose of these demands by Islam. The purpose is to incrementally and completely replace our culture with that of the Islamic culture taught in the Quran.

Contrast the Jewish religious exercises to how Muslims and their dietary habits are treated. In April 2007, a 13-year-old middle school boy was suspended; his behavior was labeled as a hate crime for eating a ham sandwich at a lunch table with a group of Muslim students. That same month, Muslims started a Face book group, "Fight Against Pork in Frito-Lay Products.” The more than 1,800 participants sought to pressure the company to remove pork enzymes from its cheese seasonings.

Last year, Somali Muslim employees at a St. Louis Park, Minn. TARGET store refused to handle pork products, citing religious reasons. TARGET made special allowances for Muslim employees, who now scrutinize customer purchases and can call for assistance when a pork product appears at their check stand. Presumably, the Muslim employees knew they would be encountering bacon and pepperoni pizza when they signed on for their jobs and have no problem collecting a salary paid out of profits from pork sales.

This year, the popular story, The Three Little Pigs, was banned in a primary school in the United Kingdom as the school's administration thought references to pigs might offend Muslim pupils. Another school removed all books containing stories about pigs, including the talking pig 'Babe' from classrooms following complaints from Muslim parents. In 2007, a UK church school production of The Three Little Pigs was renamed The Three Little Puppies to maintain multi-cultural sensitivities. Ironically, the pig is mentioned often in the Quran as a derogatory reference to Jews. If the Muslims really had their way the pig characters would remain and the story would be renamed the three little Jews. Muslims believe that one can disrespect anyone or any culture except Islam.

In further pig accommodation to Muslims, Fortis Bank in the Netherlands and Belgium dropped its pig mascot. Knorbert the pig was eliminated after seven years with a statement from a bank spokesperson that "Knorbert does not now meet the requirements that the multicultural society imposes on us."

A recent BBC report described how pork butchers are gradually being put out of business as Turkey adopts a more fundamentalist Muslim character. Pork slaughterhouses are being closed in record numbers to accommodate Shariah law countrywide.

In 2004, a Muslim-owned investment company, Arcapita (formerly Capital Crescent Investments) acquired the 1,200-unit Church's Chicken chain. In 2005, Arcapita, with a net income of $70.5 million and assets worth $1.2 billion (2004), enjoined a franchisee from selling pork products. In correspondence with the franchisee, the corporate owners cited violation of Shariah law as the reason for prohibiting the sale of bacon, ham and sausages. The restaurant owners were thereby forced to surrender to corporate demands and operate under Shariah law.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Where will this end? It won’t, unless you stop it. Will the words "pork barrel spending" and "porker" be eliminated from the vernacular? Will Piggly Wiggly supermarkets be forced to change its name and re-brand its products? This could all be quite amusing if the implications weren't so grave.

Earlier I said this seemingly petty issue is very far reaching, the pig is an icon of American culture, a culinary tradition and an important component of our economy. While high grain prices and competition from Chinese imports are recognized as the two greatest threats to the industry, hog producers are overlooking a larger threat to their livelihood looming on the horizon.

Pork production is a vital part of the U.S. economy, producing more than 22 billion pounds of meat annually, contributing almost $40 billion to the GNP, and employing more than 500,000 workers in pork-industry related jobs. In addition, important pork co-products include heart valves, skin grafts for burn victims, gelatin, plywood glue, cosmetics, and plastics. At 28% of total world production, the U.S. is the second largest pork producer after China, which produces close to 50% of the world total. Pork ranks third in U.S. meat production behind beef and chicken and average yearly per capita consumption is about 50 pounds.

The momentum to alter America's dining habits and cultural traditions to suit Muslim religious habits will continue, American liberty, freedom, and culture will be threatened. Laughable though it may seem on the surface, Arab petrodollar profits now have the heft to use an economic, backdoor approach to implement Shariah law in the United States against the will of the public. Moreover this only scratches the surface.

Watch very carefully for the next two up and coming articles:

“They Cooked the Books” ---an article about the source of the fraud regarding the false propaganda that radical terrorist Islam is just a very small percentage of the 1, 3 billion Muslims world wide.

“ACT for America”--- a once in a life time chance to receive information regarding a nation wide organization that is bent on saving what you have left of your American Culture and freedom. The question is… Do you care enough about saving your culture or freedom to join???

de Andréa

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

The Muslim Peanut Gallery

Yes a Muslim named Jibril Hough, a spokesman for the Islamic Center of Charlotte NC, a local terrorists recruiting organization there, says that Congresswoman Sue Myrick’s “Ten Point Plan” to wake up America to the threat of Islamic terrorism, is nothing more than a new McCarthyism, or Myrickism. As Muslims, we have become expendable, so that politicians like Myrick can seek political gain.'

By de Andréa

On the 29th of April I posted an article titled Imams Proselytize Our Troops . In it I included Congresswoman’s Myrick’s “Ten Point Plan” with a plea to contact your Representative and Representative Myrick. If you haven’t done that yet I strongly suggest that you do that pronto. It is a small thing that anyone can do to help fight our enemy ‘the Nation of Islam’.

As predictable as the sun coming up over Mecca, a spokesman for an Islamic organization in NC has condemned Congresswoman Sue Myrick’s “Ten Point Plan” to wake up America to the threat of Islamic terrorism.

Also from his empty prognostication is his “condemnation” makes no attempt to refute the plan or make a factual case against it. The reason, as so aptly pointed out below, is that Jibril Hough the Muslim spokesman cannot refute the plan. Thus, the “condemnation” consists of the same tired, worn-out, name calling and ad hominem attacks that are standard fare for Islamic Jihadists. It’s an age-old propaganda technique – if you can’t refute the message, kill the messenger.

We should be encouraged by this lame attempt to smear the honorable Congresswoman. It should motivate us to work even harder to spread the truth about the threat of Islamofascism far and wide! The more people see the truth, the more they will recognize that those who try to defend Islam’s agenda have nothing to offer except, well… fear-mongering and name-calling.

Posted by Jihad Watch, Robert Spencer who wrote the book “Infiltration” writes
Shock horror: Muslim leader condemns Myrick anti-jihad plan!

"'Myrick's latest attempt at fighting terrorism is nothing more than a fear campaign,' said Jibril Hough, a spokesman for the Islamic Center of Charlotte. 'It is nothing more than a new McCarthyism, or Myrickism. As Muslims, we have become expendable as politicians like Myrick seek political gain.'

"Myrick said she wants the group to give a point-by-point rebuttal of her plan."
Yes, that would be most interesting. What could Jibril Hough say? Let's go through the Myrick Plan and see:

1. Investigate all military chaplains endorsed by Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was imprisoned for funding a terrorist organization.
Alamoudi is doing 23 years for funding jihad terrorism. Is it possible that some of the military chaplains he endorsed shared his jihadist views? Can Jibril Hough explain why not?

2. Investigate all prison chaplains endorsed by Alamoudi.
Same question as for #1.

3. Investigate the selection process of Arabic translators working for the Pentagon and the FBI.
An FBI whistleblower has reported that Arabic translators there cheered the 9/11 attacks. Can Jibril Hough explain why this should not be a cause for concern?

4. Examine the non-profit status of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations has had several of its officials convicted on jihad terror-related charges, and was named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas funding case.
Can Jibril Hough explain why its tax-exempt status should not at least be examined?

5. Make it an act of sedition or solicitation of treason to preach or publish materials that call for the deaths of Americans.
Objections, Mr. Hough?

6. Audit sovereign wealth funds in the United States.
If these funds may be used to conduct warfare against the U.S., what exactly is Mr. Hough's objection?

7. Cancel scholarship student visa program with Saudi Arabia until they reform their text books, which she claims preach hatred and violence against non-Muslims.
It is demonstrably true that they do.
Does Mr. Hough endorse this?

8. Restrict religious visas for imams who come from countries that don't allow reciprocal visits by non-Muslim clergy.
This is simply in the interests of mutual tolerance and understanding, is it not, Mr. Hough?

9. Cancel contracts to train Saudi police and security in U.S. counterterrorism tactics.
Given ongoing Saudi financing of the global jihad, what exactly is Mr. Hough's objection?

10. Block the sale of sensitive military munitions to Saudi Arabia.
Same question as #9.
But I doubt that Hough will provide a point-by-point refutation, for the same reason that John Esposito will not debate me. What can they say?

THE BOTTOM LINE: A column titled "Muslim condemns Myrick plan” written by Jim Morrill appeared in the Charlotte Observer .In it he writes that Myrick said she wants the Muslim group to give a point-by-point rebuttal of her plan. "I'd be glad to have a dialogue with them," she said. "The whole point is that we're trying to get people to work together."

Myrick's proposal has also drawn criticism from the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations, another terrorists supporting organization that has infiltrated our government. One of her proposals is to investigate the group's nonprofit status.

It does bother me somewhat that Myrick seems to indicate that Muslims and the US government may be able to work together, but at least it may draw attention to the facts, and that is that Islam is surreptitiously infiltrating our culture, not to assimilate and become part of the American dream of freedom and liberty, but to undermine it and ultimately castrate our culture and transform it into an “Islamic State”.

I believe only good can come from true investigation as long as the agenda is to discover the truth and then to uncompromisingly remove the infection of Islam from our society, just has we would have if this were to have taken place with Nazism in the 1940’s.

Fortunately for some unknown reason we were able to at least comprehend that to allow Nazis to infiltrate our culture and our institutions of learning as well as our government while we were a war with them was probably not a good thing. However somehow we seem to have lost that ability to reason and think rationally.

So we now, while we are at war with this very dangerously underestimated enemy we are so blinded by our own perverted philosophy of political correctness and multiculturalism that we employ our enemy, we hire them to teach our children their perverted culture, we allow them to hold high possessions in our government, we allow them to raise money in our own country for their evil agenda of destruction, we even allow them to operate military training camps within our borders.

Please help to stop this insanity, write you Federal representatives, and at least let them know that you know what is going on. And then join Brigitte and I in Act For America and stop this cancer of Islam from becoming our demise.

de Andréa

Monday, May 12, 2008

Make Nice With a Muslim

Make nice with a Muslim and lose your life…

By de Andréa

For years, Great Britain and other countries of Western Europe have bent over backwards to accommodate the growing Muslim population within their borders. It has been nearly an “article of faith” that the multicultural tolerance of Muslims, even militant Muslims, would reform, promote peace and inter-faith dialogue, and thereby diminish the possibility of terrorist attacks.

How did that work out for them? Read on…

This “article of faith” has proved to be a deceptive illusion.
Over a year ago, Britain’s Daily Mail ran an article entitled “Multiculturalism drives young Muslims to shun British values.” The article noted that a study had found that Multiculturalism, while well-intended, to project a show of acceptance, has instead backfired and alienated an entire generation of young Muslims it has encouraged them to become increasingly pro-Wahhabistic … growing numbers sympathize with fundamental teachings of Islam found in the Quran, with more than six in ten admitting they want to live under Islamic Sharia law in Britain…a large percentage said they `admired’ organizations such as al Qaida…While this should be no surprise to those who know and understand the agenda of Islam as documented in the Quran, it is still a big disappointment to those who are deceived into believing that if we just show our sense of Christian benevolence and fairness then Islam will be Christian and benevolent to us as well. Ho ho ho, and you believe in Santa Claus as well do you???

Last December, Germany’s Der Spiegel ran an article about Muslims in Germany titled “Interior Ministry warns of the increase in the fundamentalism of Muslims.” Any student of religious history and the doctrines of Islam understands why this is the case. What we in the West regard as a high virtue and benevolent (or tolerance and accommodation) Islam regards as weakness and an implicit if not explicit acknowledgement that Islam is superior and we are inferior. The harder the West tries to accommodate Islam, the more it is seen by Muslims as weak and inferior. So by making nice to a Muslim may eventually get you killed, this is because while we ignorantly believe that we are being benevolent Christians, we instead become enablers of evil and terrorism.

This is why, in spite of everything Great Britain has done to accommodate Islam, to the point of the Archbishop of Canterbury stating that the imposition of Shariah law in Britain is “unavoidable,” Islamic militancy in Britain grows, and the threat of terror increases. This is especially evident in the Israeli Palestinian conflict, what the world doesn’t seem to want to face is the fact that Israel supports the Palestinians to a fault. Israel supplies Gaza with all of its water and power, Palestine totally depends on the benevolence of Israel, Israel has given concession after concession and the Palestinians shows their appreciation by attacking them. This is because Islam instead of seeing the Israelis as their helpful benefactors they see them as week and so they deserve to be annihilated. Accepting the concessions is simply a means to an end, and that end, is world domination and death to those who oppose. .

Contrary to the hopes and best intentions of those seeking to accommodate Islam, the reality is proving an axiom the West in general and America in particular must come to acknowledge: The tolerance and benevolence of Islam’s intolerance will simply enable and promote more Islamic intolerance and an increased drive to implement violent Jihad, Shariah law and the establishment of an Islamic State.

This incidentally is what it took the historical Christian Crusaders of western Europe 300 years to finally come to terms with and begin to fight back, giving birth to the notorious Crusades at the beginning of the last millennium. They had an excuse for their ignorance, they had no history to fall back on to help them understand, but what may I ask is our excuse, complacency maybe, vaingloriousness, narcissism, lazy-ignorance, deception or is it just plain, “I don’t care”. It is likely a combination of all.

British police and security agencies are now monitoring more than 30 individual terrorism plots, said Home Secretary Jacqui Smith. "We now face a threat level that is severe, like never before. It's not getting any less, it is actually growing. We task the police and the security agencies with protecting us ... They are monitoring 22,000 individuals. There are 200 networks. There are more than 30 active plots that we know of," she said.

Smith faces a tough task steering the controversial provisions through parliament. The opposition Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties have both said they will vote against extended detention. Labor backbenchers are also threatening to rebel and vote down the clause in the Counter-Terrorism Bill that indicates a growing tendency to give in to Islamic demands, which will of course simply spark new and more demands. "We can't wait for an attack to succeed and then rush in new powers," Smith said. "We've got to stay ahead”.

Britain has seen a marked increase in militant Islamist plots since it increased its exercise of multicultural attitudes. In 2005 four British suicide bombers killed 52 people in London. Other attempts have been thwarted by police or failed when devices did not detonate. "Since the beginning of 2007, 57 people have been convicted on terrorist plots," said Smith. "Nearly half of those pleaded guilty, so this is not a figment of someone’s imagination. It is a real risk, and a real issue that we need to respond to."

THE BOTTOM LINE: If you are wondering why I refer so much to what Islam is doing in Britain, it is because it will also work out the same for us. It is because, looking at Britain is like looking into a mirror; we will see ourselves just a short time away. But because of our arrogant ignorance we are easily deceived by Islam’s lies. Are some in the west beginning to stir out if this coma of sleepy ignorant blind deception? I certainly hope so, but if this is true, we still have a long way to go before we even begin to push back against this encroaching evil that threatens our culture and the future of our liberty.

de Andréa

Friday, May 09, 2008

Rebuttal to comment of “Muslims Against Sharia”

For original article and comment, Muslims Against Sharia . click here.

By de Andréa

First, my warm fuzzy beguiled Muslim reformers; I always welcome comments from around the world, especially from self-described, so-called non committed, middle of the road, moderate, friendly, Christian and Jew loving Muslims. Secondly, I do know something about Islam, 20 years of independent Islamic studies. The difference between me and the academically indoctrinated “Professors of Middle Eastern Studies” is that I haven’t been deceived by the madrassas with the Muslim doctrine of ”Taqiyyah” which is best translated into English as “True Lies”. Moreover because I have not been blinded by Islamic deception and politically correct multiculturalism as most of the West has, I see right through your deceptive charade. That being said, to set the record straight…

In response to the intro of your comment about “addressing all of my statements being a waste of time”, you are so correct; at least we begin with agreement.

As for the first of two of the statements that you did address: “The Ten Commandments and the teachings of Christ are the basis of Christianity” And your subsequent response: “Sharia is not the basis of Islam”. I, as well as my readers would sure be interested to know, after removing all the evil verses that you propose, as well as the elimination of oppressive Sharia law, just what does Islam have left that is uniquely Muslim? As for the inquisition, it was brought by an unreformed Catholic Church, doing much the same as Islam, forcing religious theocracy on the world. It was an ecclesiastical tribunal or institution of the Roman Catholic Church for combating or suppressing heresy this was not a biblical principle or teaching. While world wide Jihad and the forced conversion to Islam or death, is a Qu’ranic teaching.

The second statement or in this case question: “Have you written a new Quran for Muslims”. Bear [ing] in mind that when Christianity (meaning the Catholic Church) was reformed the Bible was not re written”. And your response: “Actually, yes, we have. And if your research skills did not suck just as bad as your knowledge of Islam, you would have notices the tab Koran on the top of the same page from which you lifted our manifesto. As for the Christian reformation, bear in mind that the Bible is not supposed to be taken literally, but the Koran is.”

So where do I begin? How about with “Actually, yes, we have”. No, actually I think I will save that for last. I think I will start with…. “And if your research skills did not suck just as bad as your knowledge of Islam, you would have notices the tab Koran on the top of the same page from which you lifted our manifesto”. I must confess you are absolutely correct; I did not search every cobweb on your site, as I suspect you did not on mine. But I see now that you have rewritten the Quran. It should in my opinion however, be called the “New Quran” or the Reformed Quran, to distinguish it from the old original Quran written by your god Allah, this could be why I did not “notices” it. And then the last part of your comment: “As for the Christian reformation, bear in mind that the Bible is not supposed to be taken literally, "but the Koran is.” This is an interesting comment coming from a Muslim stating what the Bible is and or how it is to be taken or understood. Not literally you say, do you mean the whole Bible, or just certain parts. For example when it says that Jesus rose from the dead on the third day after His crucifixion, is that to be taken figuratively or literally? No I believe the Bible should in general be taken quite literally but not necessarily legalistically as the Quran is. There are some prophecies and the Revelation of John which are somewhat symbolic as opposed to literal, but those are obvious, to Christians anyway.

Now, I like to save the best for last as the saying goes, and that was the original Question: “Have you written a new Quran for Muslims. Bear [ing] in mind that when Christianity (meaning the Catholic Church) was reformed the Bible was not re written”. To which your response was, “Actually, yes, we have”. Moreover now that I see that Yes you have, even though I have to confess I haven’t read it in its entirety and compared it with the original one that your god Allah gave to Muhammad your prophet. Which by the way brings up another nagging question; and I really do hate to be a nag, (not really) but because you say that “but the Koran is” meaning that it is to be taken literally, what does Allah say about scratching out all of his laws and his complete agenda for world domination and how Muslims are to convert, or kill the Infidel/Kuffaar. Oh yes and also the Dhimmah or the Dhimmitude of the children of the book like me. Didn’t think I knew that did you?

I know for example if Christians would just decide to change Jehovah God’s words because they no longer believed them, He would likely strike us dead and I wouldn’t blame Him. I sure wouldn’t want anyone to change my words just because they didn’t agree with them. Or like ‘ya-all’ did, and think Allah’s words are just old fashion and out of touch.

You see the [Holy Spirit] and the [Father] Jehovah God and his [Son] Jesus Christ is the same God and is the same yesterday today and forever. And God’s whole plan is so simple even a Muslim can understand it. God loves you and I so much that he sent that part of Himself that is His son to pay the price which is eternal death for us. He, Jesus, was crucified for Jews Muslims Christians and everyone else for all of our sins so that we might live with Him forever in eternity, even though we don’t deserve it. And the good, simple, and easy part is, we don’t have to do anything, because it’s already been done, yes, even for Muslims. Just acknowledge your sins and receive the gift of eternal life that God has for you because Jesus paid your debt. Trust me no one else has to die or commit suicide, Jesus died for all of us. Even for you...

And let us not forget your closing: "We sincerely hope that the next time you make a pathetic attempt at providing your "scholarly" opinion and accuse someone of lying, you would research the subject, so you would not come off like a complete moron and Islamophobic degenerate.With no respect at all,Muslims Against Sharia "

As you can see I did take the time to address all of your comments, because I don’t think it is a waste of time. As far accusing you of lying I don’t blame you for being upset, no one likes to be called a liar. But you see I just can’t believe a real Muslim, a child, and a follower of Allah would change his god’s words and teachings just because they have become unpopular or old fashion. Maybe you are not a real Muslim, maybe you are someone I call a MINO “Muslim In Name Only” If you are trying to get rid of the bad in Islam and replace it with good then you might just look into Christianity instead, It’s simple, the price had been paid, the ticket has been bought, all you have to do is claim it.

I know that I have offended you, but I have offended you with the truth, and of course my arrogance, but then you would not have expected anything less of me. I love you because Jesus loves you…

de Andréa

Thursday, May 08, 2008

MI5 Surveils Muslim Met police

MI5 the British Security Service, commonly known as MI5 Military Intelligence , section 5, is the United Kingdom’s counter-Inelegance and security agency and is part of the intelligence machinery alongside the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS or MI6), has suspicious Muslim infiltrators of the Met Police under surveillance.

By de Andréa

Reminiscent of how the FBI is expanding its Islamic "sensitivity training” of its agents, and its goal of hiring at least 900 terrorist Muslims to be FBI agents, you may recall a series of articles I posted sometime back and the Hezbollah mole that had infiltrated both the FBI and CIA. As if right on cue, what pops up in Great Britain’s Daily Mail, but a story about al Qaeda spies working as police officers in the Metropolitan Police force?

This elementary problem doesn’t surprise me a bit, but it apparently is a brain scratcher for both the British and the U.S. Governments. I mean the word ‘dahaa’ is a perfect word to use at this juncture.

If you haven’t read Infiltration, by Paul Sperry, I highly recommend you get a copy, read it, and send it on to your favorite secret agent man.

In case you are wondering why what is going on in the government of The U.K. should be of any interest to the citizens of the U.S., it is because if this is happening in Scotland Yard, you can bet the same infiltrators of Islam are busy doing the same thing here in our own front yard, more importantly we are just turning a blind eye to this systematic destruction of our culture.

The West is not likely to lose a war on the battle-field against al-Qaida, but as in Europe, unless we wake up our slumbering deceived government, we can and will lose the battle that surreptitiously wages on right here in our own country, despite our excellent intelligence and Homeland Security.

MI5, targets four Met police officers 'working as Al Qaeda spies'
Warning: Terror moles reportedly work in the Met. Four police officers in Britain's top force are reportedly under close secret service surveillance after being identified as Al Qaeda spies.

MI5 is said to have homed in on the "sleeper" agents passing secrets from Scotland Yard to the terror group in recent weeks. The suspected spies are believed to have used methods similar to those employed by the IRA in the 1970s as they infiltrated the police and the Army in Northern Ireland.

Police began searching for spies after July 7 attacks, all four are understood to be Asians living in London and are feared to have links both with Muslim terrorists in Britain and worldwide terror groups, - and including Al Qaeda training camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

MI5 chiefs reportedly believe the suspected moles have been planted as sleepers - agents under deep cover - to keep Al Qaeda informed of anti-terror raids planned by London's Metropolitan Police.

Secret service agents are said to be monitoring the suspects, who work at different London police stations. A Yard spokesman said: "All police officers and police staff, upon joining the Metropolitan Police Service and during their careers undergo a range of security checks. “ These are robust and vary accordingly to the type and sensitivity of the individual postings.

"We take matters of security very seriously and if any issues arise about individuals, they may be subject to further assessment. "This could lead to restrictions being put in place relating to where an individual may work within the organization or could lead to their dismissal.” "If there are people within the police force feeding information to terror groups this needs to be stopped.

"Since the names came to light there has been a non-stop effort to find out everything about their backgrounds." The officers' names apparently emerged during a low-profile investigation into police force infiltration which has been going on since the July 2005 London bombings.

Last year MI5 believed there were up to eight police staff—uniform and civilians with links to extremist groups. Now agents, helped by anti-terror police, are understood to be watching the four suspects - who work at different police stations around London - around the clock while searching for the vital evidence needed to make arrests.The officers' every move at work is being monitored along with their phone calls, it was claimed.

MI5 believes other sleeper cells are trying to infiltrate public services across Britain in order to gain vital intelligence. Even exiled cleric Omar Bakri has revealed how Muslim terrorists were working at the heart of the NHS and other vital services. Failed asylum seeker Omar Altimimi was jailed for nine years last July for keeping manuals on detonating car bombs. Before his conviction he had applied to work as a cleaner for the Greater Manchester police.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Some of the problems with hiring or rather not hiring Muslims whether it is the UK or the USA is that one is accused of being institutionally racist, as in the Stephen Lawrence public inquiry report. MP Patrick Mercer, Tory terrorism advisor, said: "This discovery by MI5 comes as no surprise to me.

Recruiting Muslims into key public sector organizations while we are at war with Islam is nothing short of insanity. US Homeland security agents are reportedly sifting through Muslim bank account transactions. Our own security procedures have to be toughened before it is too late If you are a young Pakistani of English origin and you feel you want to do something for the cause of Islam, what better way than to join the enemy and attack from within?

If a terrorist is a Muslim, and a Muslim is a terrorist isn’t a terrorist just a terrorist no matter who he is? Then why don’t we just hire Osama ben Lauden to be an advisor to the Joints Chiefs of Staff? Or are some terrorists more terrible the others?

IF this were 1941 we would logically and rightly not be allowing the immigration of Muslims, moreover we would likely be rounding them up and either deporting them all, or putting them into camps, but then, this is not 1941…

de Andréa