Ezra Levant and Pamela Geller on the ‘Zombie Mohammad judge’ scandal

This is truly scandalous:  for a judge in the USA to brandish a holy book of any kind inside the courtroom and apply religious lawinstead of upholding the laws of the land is beyond the pale.

Note:  more has been written about Mark Martin, the ‘Zombie Mohammad judge’ and, apparently, he is indeed a convert to Islam.  This in itself is irrelevant:  it is his actions which count, not his religious convictions.  I raise the point only because in the video, Pamela Geller asserts that he is not a Muslim.  Therefore, I include this link so people can judge for themselves what to think.

Thunderf00t: YouTube starts banning ‘religiously offensive’ videos

He’s right.

The Grand Jihad

Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, were found responsible for 9/11 attacks

Bloomberg reports:

“In Havlish,   et   al.   v.   bin   La den,   et   al. , Judge Daniels held that the Islamic Republic of Iran, its Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei, former Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, and Iran’s agencies and instrumentalities, including, among others, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (“IRGC”), the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security (“MOIS”), and Iran’s terrorist proxy Hezbollah, all materially aided and supported al Qaeda before and after 9/11.  “

This is all well and good, but what does this truly mean?

Will the representatives of the Iranian regime who enter the U.S.A. be arrested and held accountable?

Will they – at least – be expelled from the US and will all representatives of the Government of Iran be prevented from entering the US, including to attend the UN, ehich is physically located there?

Because if they are not then what is the point of even going through with this exercise?

“A Black Day for Austria”

Do you remember the case of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, the Austrian woman who had the courage to speak truth about Islam?

Her criminal conviction for disrespecting Islam had just been upheld…

Europeans are increasingly legislating dhimmitude!

Where will this end?

When can raising charity money for orphans land you in a ‘re-education camp’?

When you live in a land ruled by Sharia!

Zilla of the Resistance has the story.

(Check it out and have a listen to the music:  I rather like the tune I suspect is the ‘swing classic’ ‘Clementine’ done in Indonesian punk – a definite improvement over the original!)

Via:  BCF

Quite apart from this story, it is important for us, Westerners, to understand that in lands ruled by Sharia, ‘charity’ does not work the same way it does in our part of the World.

This does not mean that Muslims are not charitable people:  not at all!

And it does not mean that in countries with Muslim populations, people do not perform charitable acts for the sake of helping their fellow human beings, regardless of race or creed.  They do – and we have many stories of Muslim women helping Westerners (men, women and children) who were in Japanese prison camps during WWII!

Rather, as Sharia rules every single aspect of life of those unfortunate to live under its oppression, so it has very specific and rigid rules for ‘charity’.

Let me illustrate this with an example:  following the Tsunami a few years ago, people in Bengal (I refuse to use the new colonial name for the country) were upset that many Western charities got volunteers on the ground and started providing aid.  The Bengali fear was that these aid groups were there trying to steal their children…

Many in the West were perplexed by this:  why would the people there refuse aid, willingly provided without any strings attached?

Because right now, Bengal is under Sharia.  And Sharia strictly differentiates between ‘Muslim charities’ and ‘non-Muslim charities’.

It is forbidden, under Sharia, for Muslim charities to help non-Muslims – and for non-Muslim charities to help Muslims (though, to be honest, non-Muslim charities do face a lot of regulatory interference under Sharia and are thus prevented from being as effective in providing aid as Muslim charities are).  Therefore, when non-Muslim charities attempted to aid Muslims in Bengal, the response among the population was confusion and fear – and, ultimately, rejection of much help.  The problem was finally resolved by the non-Muslim charities simply giving the money and aid materiel to Muslim charities, who then operated on the ground…

Another ‘perplexing’ example came even more recently, during the terrible flooding in Pakistan.  Even as money poured into the county through Red Cross, there were appalling stories of whole non-Muslim families starving – even in regions where food aid was plentiful.  Again, people in ‘The West’ could not make heads-or-tails of this and many wrote these stories off as propaganda.

Not so.

The primary channel for the aid funds was The International Red Cross.

In Sharia countries, the Red Cross partners with its affiliated Islamic charity, the Red Crescent, and channels all aid through it.

In Pakistan, which is for all practical purposes governed by Sharia, the Red Crescent operates as an Islamic charity under Sharia does.  That means that Mosques are used as the centres from which the aid (from food on down) is distributed.

To most of us, this does not seem particularly odd:  Mosques serve as community centres, so they are centrally located and accessible.  Plus, they have the room to store the supplies to be distributed, so this would be a logical place to distribute aid from, right?

Plus, under Sharia, the Red Crescent is only permitted to distribute aid through a Mosque.  So, it is not just the ‘logical’ course of action, it is the only permitted course of action.  And the Red Crescent did make various statements to the effect that everyone who came to them for aid, received aid!

So, what was the problem that caused the non-Muslims to starve?

Under Sharia, a non-Muslim may not enter a Mosque!

Not being permitted to enter the place from which the aid from Western countries was being distributed, non-Muslims could either starve or convert to Islam…

I suspect there is a lot more about ‘charity under Sharia’ we just don’t know…

MEMRI TV: American Muslims Demonstrate in Solidarity with Occupy Wall St.

Remember the videos from April, the Egyptian crowds shouting “the people want to topple Wall Street”?

Consider it when you warch this video from New York:

 

Ezra Levant speaks up for women

Because a person’s a person, no matter how small!

…or how female…

…or how Muslim…

 

 

Thunderf00t: My real name is…

This is disgusting!

Yes, there are some people who abuse anonymity on the internet.

Then there are others who eschew it – they believe that attaching their real-life name to an online communication will add weight and respect to it.  This is, to some degree, true:  if their real-life name has some earned public credibility, attaching it to their online persona will add credibility to the online persona.

BUT!!!

Name is just a label.

If a person has built up his or her credibility using an online persona – truly built up credibility – by time and time again providing solid, verifiable, quality information, then their real-life name is really quite irrelevant.

To the contrary:  it is a very useful shield!

Journalists who publish in traditional media have an organization that stands behind them and offers them at least a modicum of protection should they become threatened by those who wish to silence them.

Online communicators do not have this luxury!!!

But ‘online’ is not the beginning of ‘anonymous protest speech’!

No, nowhere near…  Even the most basic bit of research into the history of anonymous protest speech demonstrates brings us to Colonial North America.  Printing presses were used to print anonymous pamphlets which were distributed and which informed the public of facts that the government did not want known and which fostered the atmosphere necessary for the fight for independence.

In fact, most of the works by America’s Founding Fathers were originally published as anonymous pamphlets!

So, let’s not go down the role of silly posturing:  anonymity is essential for free speech!

(Sorry if I am not particularly coherent in this post – I am so angry as I write this, I can hardly keep myself calm enough to type!)

To hear that Thunderf00t’s real-life name has been ‘outed’ by an Islamist group (which claims to be made up of ‘moderate Muslims’), that his job has been threatened, that his address has been published – and now, that his family members are being threatened with physical violence…THAT IS AN OUTRAGE!!!!

I guess all we can do is spread the word…

…and hope for the best.  Because I am at a loss for what else to do to help him.

 

P.S.:  It took me a second viewing to pick up pn it, but it does seem that the online Islamists just may have attracted the attention of ‘Anonymous’.  THAT would be interesting, to say the least!

Thunderf00t: ‘DOC DROPPING’ Dawahfilms