Posts
Just as I was starting to believe that none of my articles were being read or even noticed, I recently received two messages through Facebook. Two Mohamadans reminded me why I compose and publish the truth about the evils of Islam and why it must be destroyed. Mohamadans have sent me two types of correspondence. One, usually from females, consists of gushing praise for Islam and Mohamad (May he burn in Hell forever) along with claims that I do not understand Islam. The other type, usually from males, includes vulgar insults and threats of violence, usually of a sexual nature. This month, I have received an example of each.
The first example arrived from a savage calling himself "Bakor". On the tenth of June, at 3:18pm, I received this bilge from this foul-mouthed barbarian. It appears exactly in the same form in which I received it.
"hi this message is actually something else intended
FUCK YOU BITCH MUTHA fucka!!!!! if you dare say a thing about islam again i will pound the fuck out of u!!!!!!! and make u suck my dick like a pretty boy that u r! and PS ur pic doesnt represent islam just PAKISTAN and they are worth more then u bitch"
Later that day, I replied,
"My picture represents Islam since it has been used by Mohamadans for centuries in reference to the fictitious lunar deity called Allah. Pakistan is not the only Islamic wasteland which features the crescent moon. Malaysia, Algeria, Turkey and several other hellholes also display it on their flags as does the Red Crescent Organization. Obviously, you need to do some research, you ignorant savage.
I will continue to speak the truth about Islam, Mohamad (May he burn in Hell forever) and the morons like you who adhere to his insane rantings. I dare you to try to stop me. If you attack me, I would enjoy reducing you to a whimpering and bloody stain on the ground!
Unlike you, I have zero interest in homosexual activity so take your offer of fellatio to the other perverts who flock to your mosk. You should stick to what is your expertise: raping little boys and being sodomized by pigs. Burn in Hell alongside the criminal who fabricated your ideology!"
The following day I found this message in my inbox on my Facebook page from Yasmin Adam on June 11 at 8:39am:
"ur profile pic is very provoking
and i'm really sad that there's ppl like u in the world coz terrorists come out from ppl like u who hate a religions and act like fanatics ewww i'm disgusted seriously u such a racist"
Here is my reply on June 12 at 12:24am:
"Terrorists do not come from people who support democracy, advocate for equal rights for women and extol capitalism like myself."
"I dare you to provide any evidence of my supposed racism. Name just one shred of proof that have criticized or discriminated against anyone because of his/her race!
"I am really sad that naive and dishonest people like exist to apologize for true terrorists who propagate Islam."
This is how she answered on June 12 at 11:51am:
"ur profile picture show that u support racism
i'm not going to tell u "O islam is a great religion blah blah blah" coz i don't care what u think of islam or muslims
but it just piss me off that When u attack black people,they call it Racism. When u attack Jewish people,they call it Anti-semetism. When you attack women, they call it Sexism. When you attack homosexuality,they call it Intolerance. When u attack ur country,they call it Treason.But when u attack islam u want to call it democracy??"
So I started dismantling her warped vision of the world, distorted by Islamic disinformation on June 12 at 12:15pm:
"Islam is an ideology, not a race. Therefore opposition to Islam has no connection to racism. Mohamadans consist of various races.
"Yes, criticism of Islam is an expression of democratic freedom. Under democracy, a government derives its power by consent of the citizens and the will of the majority to choose its leaders. One of the most important God-given rights is the freedom of speech.
"Under Islam, a government derives its power by adherence to the rantings of a seventh century Arabian criminal and brutally crushing anyone who does not hold those views. Anyone differing with the lunacy spouted by Mohamad (May he burn in Hell forever) is oppressed, threatened or killed in an Islamic regime.
"Islam consists of totalitarianism, misogyny, terrorism, pedophilia, violence and other despicable traits. So why do you defend an ideology that promotes dictatorship, wife-beating, polygyny, sex with pre-pubescent girls plus murder, rape and robbery of non-believers?"
She tried soft-peddle Islam at this point on June 12 at 4:23pm:
"o-k-a-y may i knew from where u learned that?
i'm a muslim girl who live in a muslim country and let me tell u how we live
i have two sisters they r both married to the guy they love and by their choice
and about polygyny it's a choice if the wife didn't agree then she can get divorce
and about the governmet thing all the governmnets everywhere is assholes they lie and manipulate with their people
and don't u dare insult muhmad (peace be upon him) coz u know nothing about him, u r just a guy who is blind with hate and it really kills me to hear what u just said about my religion
I'M A MUSLIM AND I'M NOT A TERRORIST"
At this point, I decided to inundate her with quotes taken straight from Islamic texts to expose her to what her ideology truly supports on June 13 at 11:55pm"
"I learned about the various evils spouted by Mohamad (May he burn in Hell forever) by reading a Koran and other Islamic texts. Simply by pointing to verses from the Koran and other sources, I will enlighten you about your ideology.
"Have you ever even read any of Mo's (MHBHF) rantings? I do not mean mindlessly reciting or memorizing verses in an archaic dialect of Arabic which very few Mohamadans understand. I refer to reading the Koran or other Islamic texts in a language in which you can read and comprehend.
"The difference between a democratic government and an Islamic one is that under democracy, any laws can be changed by the citizens. Under an Islamic regime, no one is allowed to institute a law that contradicts whatever Mo (MHBHF) ordered or forbid. Islamist justify their terrorism, misogyny, totalitarianism, pedophilia, violence and other despicable crimes by pointing to the words and deeds of Mo (MHBHF).
"Regarding divorce women have no freedom to dump a husband for his polygyny since Mo (MHBHF) restricted their freedom to divorce (Hadith Bukhari vol.7 no.121,122 p.93 and vol.7 chapter 93 vol.7 no.130 p.99) In fact, Mo authorized polygyny. So you accept the practice of allowing Mohamadan men to have simultaneous sexual relationships with multiple wives and slaves while a Mohamadan woman must remain monogamous to this man (Koran 4:3)? Do you like being viewed as a piece of property which Mo (MHBHF) did in Koran 2:223 or as an animal as he did in Hadith Tabari Vol 9, Number 1754 ? Do enjoy the idea that your testimony must be corroborated by another woman to be considered equal to the testimony of just one man (Koran 2:282 and Hadith Bukhari 6:301)?Are you happy with receiving only half of an inheritance of a male relative (Koran 4:11)? So you consider yourself as inferior to men as Mo (MHBHF) proclaimed in Koran 2:228 and 4:34?
"I will continue to insult Mo (MHBHF) and all the weak-minded sheep who blindly adhere to his evil rantings. I will never stop until everyone in the world has been liberated from his totalitarianism. Which is more deplorable, for you to feel "killed" from reading the truth about Islam and its fabricator (MHBHF) or for you and other Mohamadans to kill those who disagree with your ideology?
ISLAM IS TERRORISM!"
Yasmin's pathetic whimper came like this on June 14 at 5:49am:
"well,it still hurt when u say this bad words but i trust my ppl so much and i LOVE my religion and i won't give up on my ppl and again i don't care what u think and islam will propagate around the wold isn't it amazing how there's ppl like u who hate islam and say bad things about it but there's ppl still convert !
anyways thank u for the good talk u just made me believe more in my religion ^_^ i'll pray for u"
She sent to me a link to YouTube.com for a recording entitled "Fuck You" by Lily Allen.
In conclusion, I concluded this exchange like this earlier today:
"I am not amazed that barbarous men and feeble-minded women convert to Islam. This ideology is well suited for their mental and moral deficiencies. The same sort of moronic savages have always embraced other forms of totalitarianism too.
"Many Mohamadans have renounced Islam. Those with enough strength of character and wisdom realize the absurd insanity of Mo's (MHBHF) rantings. Of course, they are not as highly visible as sheep who are seduced by Islam. Also, the ex-Mohamadans live in fear of murder by jihadis determined to enforce Mo's (MHBHF) commandment to kill anyone who abandons Islam.
"I am not surprised that you cannot refute any of the statements which I made exposing the numerous evils of your ideology. You may choose to continue your blissful ignorance instead of confronting the appalling crimes advocated and celebrated by your fellow Mohamadans. However, you only perpetuate the self-destructive insanity.
"By the way, your feebly vulgar link made me laugh. This pathetic attempt at a response shows how meager is your level of cerebral functioning after years of Islamic brainwashing."
In closing, I would like to thank both Bakor and Yasmin. You two numskulls have encouraged me to further pursue the obliteration of Islam.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Return to Their Place of Origin
Helen Thomas' comments regarding Jews supposedly occupying Arab lands provided some provocative suggestions. This White House reporter demands that one group of people should return to their place of origin. In order to remain honestly consistent, why is she not demanding the expulsion of recent infiltrators into the United States of America, Canada and Europe?
Thomas' comments included the desire for Jews to return to Poland and Germany. One can rightfully ask where should the Sephardim go? What would be the fate of Jews who left, often expelled involuntarily and under threat of violence, from Yemen, Iran, Morocco and other Islamic nations? Also, what about the Jews living in the territory surrounding Jerusalem for centuries despite the Islamic conquest and subsequent oppression?
So where are Thomas' calls for the removal of outsiders who have been encroaching into the country of her residence? Mohamadans have been infiltrating the United States of American for decades. They have been granted citizenship despite violating standards mandated by Congress as essential for gaining citizenship. The Immigration and Naturalization Act of bars anyone espousing a totalitarian ideology in Section 313 under Title III of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. Considering that Islamic governance is based on enforcing the whimsical utterances of seventh century dictator and his successors instead of consent of the citizens and will of the majority, Islam clearly demonstrates its totalitarian foundation. Additionally, anyone engaging in polygamy or intending to do so cannot legally naturalize under Section 212(10)(A) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. However, Islam explicitly permits polygamy while considering a man with several simultaneous marriages as the role model for human behavior. Therefore, one can logically assume that anyone adhering to Islam does so in opposition to representative democracy and its ideals.
While discussing the topic of people returning to their place of origin, Helen Thomas should follow her own demands. She has one of two options. First of them is for Helen Thomas to leave the United States to go back to Lebanon, the place of her parents' birth. Otherwise, she must return to her other homeland where she was better suited in her role of hostess of "Tales from the Crypt".
COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT JUNE 2010
Thomas' comments included the desire for Jews to return to Poland and Germany. One can rightfully ask where should the Sephardim go? What would be the fate of Jews who left, often expelled involuntarily and under threat of violence, from Yemen, Iran, Morocco and other Islamic nations? Also, what about the Jews living in the territory surrounding Jerusalem for centuries despite the Islamic conquest and subsequent oppression?
So where are Thomas' calls for the removal of outsiders who have been encroaching into the country of her residence? Mohamadans have been infiltrating the United States of American for decades. They have been granted citizenship despite violating standards mandated by Congress as essential for gaining citizenship. The Immigration and Naturalization Act of bars anyone espousing a totalitarian ideology in Section 313 under Title III of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. Considering that Islamic governance is based on enforcing the whimsical utterances of seventh century dictator and his successors instead of consent of the citizens and will of the majority, Islam clearly demonstrates its totalitarian foundation. Additionally, anyone engaging in polygamy or intending to do so cannot legally naturalize under Section 212(10)(A) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. However, Islam explicitly permits polygamy while considering a man with several simultaneous marriages as the role model for human behavior. Therefore, one can logically assume that anyone adhering to Islam does so in opposition to representative democracy and its ideals.
While discussing the topic of people returning to their place of origin, Helen Thomas should follow her own demands. She has one of two options. First of them is for Helen Thomas to leave the United States to go back to Lebanon, the place of her parents' birth. Otherwise, she must return to her other homeland where she was better suited in her role of hostess of "Tales from the Crypt".
COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT JUNE 2010
Friday, May 21, 2010
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Out of Sight, Not out of Mind
A recent press release has faded too quickly from the national consciousness. Like fireworks, some news stories burst into public view then fade immediately upon the explosion of another event. In contrast to the awesome beauty of fireworks displays, this announcement deserves a glaring spotlight to expose one of the most awfully ugly aspects of Islam. (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/07/health/policy/07cuts.html?partner=rss&emc=rss)
The American Academy of Pediatrics decided to change its previous opposition to any medically unnecessary procedure performed on the genitals of a girl. Its members indicated that the federal law barring such procedures should be modified to allow some form of restricted cutting of female genitals. Their argument supposes that families will take their girls outside of the United States in order to lacerate them if not allowed to undergo genital mutilation in the USA. Does the AAP consider the words of Mohamad (May he burn in Hell forever) in the Hadith of Umm ‘Atiyyah condoning cutting female genitalia as superseding proven gynecological evidence of the harm of female genital mutilation? Such compromise at the expense of girls’ physical and mental health reeks of acquiescence to Sharia-creep.
The line of reasoning of the proposed change in policy stands out as tragically laughable. A counter analogy that I would offer is the advice to leave the doors and windows open in one’s house for the benefit of burglars. Following the rationale of the AAP, burglars are just going to break into houses anyway. Why not make it easier for them? With this type of submission to their demands, the results would end less destructively. Sure, the appliances, jewelry and other valuables will be stolen but at least the burglars will not be prosecuted and homeowner will not incur the cost of replacing damaged doors or windows.
Any form of female genital mutilation is a totally unnecessary procedure. It not only robs the victims of sexual pleasure it also interfere with proper functioning of female excretory system. This criminal act involves intentionally damaging or amputating a healthy organ and surrounding vital tissue. One has to wonder if Islamists would endorse castration for a lustful man who refuses to control his sexual impulses. Given that Islam’s inventor felt no need to rein in his libido, why would those following his ideology have such concerns?
This inhumane butchery follows in the vein of misogyny rampant throughout Islam. The Mohamadan mentality rooted in Sharia holds a woman responsible for all perceived problems related to sexuality. If she is raped, she must prove herself innocent with the testimony of four male witnesses. The burden falls on women to wear suffocating and dehumanizing outfits in order to hide themselves from the gazes of men. Instead of teaching boys to respect women as equal members of humanity, Islamists consider women as inherently inferior. Boys are indoctrinated into viewing females as either subordinate family members or as inferior objects created for their sexual gratification. Of course, all of this negativity directed toward the feminine half of humanity originated in the mind of and out of the libido of Islam’s fabricator (May he burn in Hell forever).
This tradition of savagery occurs solely for the benefit of Mohamadans who believe that its victims will not commit fornication or adultery. Apparently these Neanderthals never considered other, non-sadistic alternatives. A few come to my mind. First of all, the marriage of pre-pubescent or teenage girls to men twice their age or older would certainly motivate a girl to rebel by seeking affection of someone else. If women are allowed to choose their own husbands, they are much less likely to try to seek extramarital relationships with men. Women’s fidelity is easier to secure if their husband respond in kind. Why should a woman feel compelled to remain monogamously loyal to her husband while he is allowed to engage in de facto debauchery under the guise of polygyny and unrestricted sexual activity with his female slaves or servants called "concubines"?
As long as men view the Koran and Islamic texts as the guide to proper treatment of women, atrocities like FGM will continue. If Mohamadan men want to dabble in some radical measures to maintain the loyalty of their wives, perhaps they might consider thinking of a wife as equal partner in a relationship, not merely as an inherently inferior outlet for their sexual urges. If Mohamadan men want to engage in some further extremism, they could include some flowers and breaks from domestic drudgery from time to time. I am sure that women would appreciate that "outside of the Koran" type of thinking.
Islamists and their useful idiots relish attempts of conflation of female genital mutilation and circumcision. No scientist would make an analogy between circumcision and FGM unless he is hopelessly blinded by devotion to every word in Islamic texts. Circumcision involves the cutting of a section of superficial skin. This procedure does not obstruct normal functioning of the incised area. For the women and uncircumcised men in my readership, I relate circumcision to the removal of an earlobe. Obviously, the ear’s appearance would be altered. Nevertheless, the functioning of the ear would not be damaged or destroyed. Normal hearing would continue despite such a superfluous procedure. The hygienic benefits resulting from circumcision have been discussed for decades and will probably be up for debate in the foreseeable future. However, clitorectomies or any cutting of female genitals provides no benefit to the victim, only pain and degradation.
A clear-thinking person must certainly wonder about the silence of feminists on this issue. The mere discussion of anything short of totally unrestricted abortion at any point of a pregnancy fully funded by taxpayers elicits shrieks of ”misogyny” from the National Organization for Women and its cohorts. Where are demonstrations in the streets demanding harsher penalties for those mutilating the genitals of girls? Why are no feminists protesting outside the offices of the Council on American-Islamic Relations and those of other Islamists clamoring for those groups to condemn publicly all forms of female genital mutilation? Does the feminists’ fear of jihadist reprisal override their often bellowed concern for women’s health and choice? Apparently, feminist allegiance to political correctness precludes any criticism that Mohamadans would label as "Islamophobic".
The AAP’s acquiescence to Islamic barbarity must never be tolerated. Georganne Chapin, executive director of an advocacy group called Intact America, rightfully illuminated the situation. She stated, “There are countries in the world that allow wife beating, slavery and child abuse, but we don’t allow people to practice those customs in this country. We don’t let people have slavery a little bit because they’re going to do it anyway, or beat their wives a little bit because they’re going to do it anyway.” It behooves us to take heed of her words to spare any more girls this cruel indignity and severely punish those who inflict such torture.
COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT MAY 2010
The American Academy of Pediatrics decided to change its previous opposition to any medically unnecessary procedure performed on the genitals of a girl. Its members indicated that the federal law barring such procedures should be modified to allow some form of restricted cutting of female genitals. Their argument supposes that families will take their girls outside of the United States in order to lacerate them if not allowed to undergo genital mutilation in the USA. Does the AAP consider the words of Mohamad (May he burn in Hell forever) in the Hadith of Umm ‘Atiyyah condoning cutting female genitalia as superseding proven gynecological evidence of the harm of female genital mutilation? Such compromise at the expense of girls’ physical and mental health reeks of acquiescence to Sharia-creep.
The line of reasoning of the proposed change in policy stands out as tragically laughable. A counter analogy that I would offer is the advice to leave the doors and windows open in one’s house for the benefit of burglars. Following the rationale of the AAP, burglars are just going to break into houses anyway. Why not make it easier for them? With this type of submission to their demands, the results would end less destructively. Sure, the appliances, jewelry and other valuables will be stolen but at least the burglars will not be prosecuted and homeowner will not incur the cost of replacing damaged doors or windows.
Any form of female genital mutilation is a totally unnecessary procedure. It not only robs the victims of sexual pleasure it also interfere with proper functioning of female excretory system. This criminal act involves intentionally damaging or amputating a healthy organ and surrounding vital tissue. One has to wonder if Islamists would endorse castration for a lustful man who refuses to control his sexual impulses. Given that Islam’s inventor felt no need to rein in his libido, why would those following his ideology have such concerns?
This inhumane butchery follows in the vein of misogyny rampant throughout Islam. The Mohamadan mentality rooted in Sharia holds a woman responsible for all perceived problems related to sexuality. If she is raped, she must prove herself innocent with the testimony of four male witnesses. The burden falls on women to wear suffocating and dehumanizing outfits in order to hide themselves from the gazes of men. Instead of teaching boys to respect women as equal members of humanity, Islamists consider women as inherently inferior. Boys are indoctrinated into viewing females as either subordinate family members or as inferior objects created for their sexual gratification. Of course, all of this negativity directed toward the feminine half of humanity originated in the mind of and out of the libido of Islam’s fabricator (May he burn in Hell forever).
This tradition of savagery occurs solely for the benefit of Mohamadans who believe that its victims will not commit fornication or adultery. Apparently these Neanderthals never considered other, non-sadistic alternatives. A few come to my mind. First of all, the marriage of pre-pubescent or teenage girls to men twice their age or older would certainly motivate a girl to rebel by seeking affection of someone else. If women are allowed to choose their own husbands, they are much less likely to try to seek extramarital relationships with men. Women’s fidelity is easier to secure if their husband respond in kind. Why should a woman feel compelled to remain monogamously loyal to her husband while he is allowed to engage in de facto debauchery under the guise of polygyny and unrestricted sexual activity with his female slaves or servants called "concubines"?
As long as men view the Koran and Islamic texts as the guide to proper treatment of women, atrocities like FGM will continue. If Mohamadan men want to dabble in some radical measures to maintain the loyalty of their wives, perhaps they might consider thinking of a wife as equal partner in a relationship, not merely as an inherently inferior outlet for their sexual urges. If Mohamadan men want to engage in some further extremism, they could include some flowers and breaks from domestic drudgery from time to time. I am sure that women would appreciate that "outside of the Koran" type of thinking.
Islamists and their useful idiots relish attempts of conflation of female genital mutilation and circumcision. No scientist would make an analogy between circumcision and FGM unless he is hopelessly blinded by devotion to every word in Islamic texts. Circumcision involves the cutting of a section of superficial skin. This procedure does not obstruct normal functioning of the incised area. For the women and uncircumcised men in my readership, I relate circumcision to the removal of an earlobe. Obviously, the ear’s appearance would be altered. Nevertheless, the functioning of the ear would not be damaged or destroyed. Normal hearing would continue despite such a superfluous procedure. The hygienic benefits resulting from circumcision have been discussed for decades and will probably be up for debate in the foreseeable future. However, clitorectomies or any cutting of female genitals provides no benefit to the victim, only pain and degradation.
A clear-thinking person must certainly wonder about the silence of feminists on this issue. The mere discussion of anything short of totally unrestricted abortion at any point of a pregnancy fully funded by taxpayers elicits shrieks of ”misogyny” from the National Organization for Women and its cohorts. Where are demonstrations in the streets demanding harsher penalties for those mutilating the genitals of girls? Why are no feminists protesting outside the offices of the Council on American-Islamic Relations and those of other Islamists clamoring for those groups to condemn publicly all forms of female genital mutilation? Does the feminists’ fear of jihadist reprisal override their often bellowed concern for women’s health and choice? Apparently, feminist allegiance to political correctness precludes any criticism that Mohamadans would label as "Islamophobic".
The AAP’s acquiescence to Islamic barbarity must never be tolerated. Georganne Chapin, executive director of an advocacy group called Intact America, rightfully illuminated the situation. She stated, “There are countries in the world that allow wife beating, slavery and child abuse, but we don’t allow people to practice those customs in this country. We don’t let people have slavery a little bit because they’re going to do it anyway, or beat their wives a little bit because they’re going to do it anyway.” It behooves us to take heed of her words to spare any more girls this cruel indignity and severely punish those who inflict such torture.
COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT MAY 2010
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Lesson Learned Yet?
A series of questions weighs heavily on my mind so I would like to pose them to anyone reading this article. How many more Mohamadans have to plot to kill Americans? Do they need to string together a chain of successful mass murders? Have the recent failed bombing attempts by jihadis lulled the American people into a false sense of security? How much more infrastructure must they destroy? What is necessary for both the majority of Americans and their elected leaders to remove their muzzles and admit who is the enemy and what is their objective?
The attention of the country is focused on the most recent act of jihad. We must take advantage of this spotlight to further illuminate the rancidly totalitarian core of Islam. Politicians in Washington would have a greater inclination to counteract the jihad when their constituents are clamoring for steps to halt and roll back Islamization. The notoriously ephemeral attention span of the general American public must be channeled toward anti-Islamic counteroffensive before the media steers their minds away from the imminent Islamic threat.
We must support those in political positions who are willing to enact measures curtailing Islamists' power and influence. Senator Joseph Lieberman has proposed stripping citizenship from turncoat American citizens who join terrorist organizations (http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/05/05/lieberman-seeks-to-strip-citizenship-of-americans-overseas-with-ties-to-terror-orgs). Representative Sue Myrick has composed a list of countermeasures against Islamists called the "Wake Up America Agenda" (http://www.house.gov/list/press/nc09_myrick/wakeupamerica41808.html). Such initiatives need the support of everyone opposed to Islamization of the United States. The responsibility falls on the American electorate to demand that its representatives take action.
Islamists reveal their inherently totalitarian ideology, both blatantly and subtly. Anyone willing to read Islamic texts cannot escape the unmistakeably clear nature of Islam. Consequently, Mohamadans express notions and support measures which enforce Islamic supremacy. Islam rejects the concept of a government based on the consent of the governed. Islamic rule depends on the whimsical pronouncements of a seventh century Arabian dictator. Equality of citizens under an objective legal code does not exist under Sharia. In a truly Islamic regime, women are inherently relegated to an inferior caste with non-Mohamadans relegated even lower. An absolute monarchy such as Saudi Arabia or a single party dictatorship like the one in Iran are the only options for a country adhering to Islamic governance.
Additionally, we must demand a cessation of the entry of Mohamadans into the United States for the purpose of immigration and naturalization. Their totalitarian ideology dictates that its adherents must subdue non-believers and subjugate the whole world. Section 313 in Chapter 2 of the Immigration and Naturalization Act expressly forbids citizenship for anyone espousing any totalitarian ideology. As previously detailed, Islam clearly falls within the definition of totalitarianism. Therefore, those Americans cherishing their representative democracy must demand the exclusion and expulsion of those who will undermine and destroy the republic.
COPYRIGHT MAY 2010 BY CHARLES KASTRIOT
The attention of the country is focused on the most recent act of jihad. We must take advantage of this spotlight to further illuminate the rancidly totalitarian core of Islam. Politicians in Washington would have a greater inclination to counteract the jihad when their constituents are clamoring for steps to halt and roll back Islamization. The notoriously ephemeral attention span of the general American public must be channeled toward anti-Islamic counteroffensive before the media steers their minds away from the imminent Islamic threat.
We must support those in political positions who are willing to enact measures curtailing Islamists' power and influence. Senator Joseph Lieberman has proposed stripping citizenship from turncoat American citizens who join terrorist organizations (http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/05/05/lieberman-seeks-to-strip-citizenship-of-americans-overseas-with-ties-to-terror-orgs). Representative Sue Myrick has composed a list of countermeasures against Islamists called the "Wake Up America Agenda" (http://www.house.gov/list/press/nc09_myrick/wakeupamerica41808.html). Such initiatives need the support of everyone opposed to Islamization of the United States. The responsibility falls on the American electorate to demand that its representatives take action.
Islamists reveal their inherently totalitarian ideology, both blatantly and subtly. Anyone willing to read Islamic texts cannot escape the unmistakeably clear nature of Islam. Consequently, Mohamadans express notions and support measures which enforce Islamic supremacy. Islam rejects the concept of a government based on the consent of the governed. Islamic rule depends on the whimsical pronouncements of a seventh century Arabian dictator. Equality of citizens under an objective legal code does not exist under Sharia. In a truly Islamic regime, women are inherently relegated to an inferior caste with non-Mohamadans relegated even lower. An absolute monarchy such as Saudi Arabia or a single party dictatorship like the one in Iran are the only options for a country adhering to Islamic governance.
Additionally, we must demand a cessation of the entry of Mohamadans into the United States for the purpose of immigration and naturalization. Their totalitarian ideology dictates that its adherents must subdue non-believers and subjugate the whole world. Section 313 in Chapter 2 of the Immigration and Naturalization Act expressly forbids citizenship for anyone espousing any totalitarian ideology. As previously detailed, Islam clearly falls within the definition of totalitarianism. Therefore, those Americans cherishing their representative democracy must demand the exclusion and expulsion of those who will undermine and destroy the republic.
COPYRIGHT MAY 2010 BY CHARLES KASTRIOT
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Comedy Central’s Capitulation
Last week, a prominent media organization in the United States succumbed to the inundation of Sharia-creep. Comedy Central joined the growing list of dhimmified American companies by caving into threats from jihadis who objected to any negative references to Islam or its fabricator. Not out of respect for all religions did this cable television outlet stifle images of Islam's creator. The hypocritical wimps in the upper echelon of network management censored Trey Parker and Matt Stone’s opus due to politically correct gutlessness.
Trey Parker and Matt Stone had featured Mohamad (May he burn in Hell forever) in an episode which originally was broadcast in July of 2001. Since Islamists had not yet launched the official start of the jihad in the United States, this depiction passed through Comedy Central’s self-imposed censorship. The license to impose Sharia granted to Mohamadans following the terrorist attacks of the eleventh of September 2001 trumped Parker and Stone’s inclusion of an image of Mohamad (MHBHF) in an April 2006 episode. In their recent attempt, they flirted with including an image of Mohamad (MHBHF) in the first half of the two part episode. However, Comedy Central obscured the image of the fabricator of Islam in both broadcasts, including bleeping his name in the latter.
The creators of South Park have not shied away from disparaging other religions. An episode that originally aired on the nineteenth of November in 2003 detailed the origin of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. It featured a musical recounting of Joseph Smith’s acquisition of the Book of Mormon laced with a choral voice-over of "Dumb, dumb, dumb" ; anyone who questioned Smith’s pronouncement was serenaded with a voice-over of "Smart, smart, smart". On the sixteenth of November in 2005, Comedy Central ran of an episode mocking Scientologists’ beliefs regarding the story of the origin of life on Earth in addition to labeling the Church of Scientology’s leadership as solely interesting in financially exploiting its members. A Christmas-related show broadcast in 2002 portrayed Christ as an automatic rifle-wielding avenger who shot and stabbed Iraqis who had kidnapped and tortured Santa Claus. Multiple episodes have blatantly attacked the Catholic Church including showing the College of Cardinals openly admitting to sexual activity with children. Consequently, any claims by Comedy Central about the desire to avoid insulting others’ religious beliefs stand out as disingenuously false.
Americans must question whether or not their media outlets will continue to silence any negative remarks toward or squelch any unflattering depictions of any Islamic-related issues. A dozen jihadis boasting of a supposed Mohamadan revolution cowed a popular and successful cable outlet. The thinly veiled threat of one traitorous American named Zachary Adam Chesser made an entire network cower in fear then acquiesce to the demands of these savages. No longer does public opinion need to be measured in the millions or even in tens of thousands to induce a change in subject matter. The totalitarian ultimatums of a mere handful of Mohamadans suffices to crush the freedom of speech of all Americans. Considering Comedy Central’s continuous kowtowing to jihadis’ threats and burning desire to placate Mohamadans, one should expect the executives of the network to act proactively to forestall any further alleged blasphemy. Therefore, it is a matter of time until the executives behead Parker and Stone in accordance with Sharia, just to be on the safe side.
COPYRIGHT APRIL 2010 BY CHARLES KASTRIOT
Trey Parker and Matt Stone had featured Mohamad (May he burn in Hell forever) in an episode which originally was broadcast in July of 2001. Since Islamists had not yet launched the official start of the jihad in the United States, this depiction passed through Comedy Central’s self-imposed censorship. The license to impose Sharia granted to Mohamadans following the terrorist attacks of the eleventh of September 2001 trumped Parker and Stone’s inclusion of an image of Mohamad (MHBHF) in an April 2006 episode. In their recent attempt, they flirted with including an image of Mohamad (MHBHF) in the first half of the two part episode. However, Comedy Central obscured the image of the fabricator of Islam in both broadcasts, including bleeping his name in the latter.
The creators of South Park have not shied away from disparaging other religions. An episode that originally aired on the nineteenth of November in 2003 detailed the origin of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. It featured a musical recounting of Joseph Smith’s acquisition of the Book of Mormon laced with a choral voice-over of "Dumb, dumb, dumb" ; anyone who questioned Smith’s pronouncement was serenaded with a voice-over of "Smart, smart, smart". On the sixteenth of November in 2005, Comedy Central ran of an episode mocking Scientologists’ beliefs regarding the story of the origin of life on Earth in addition to labeling the Church of Scientology’s leadership as solely interesting in financially exploiting its members. A Christmas-related show broadcast in 2002 portrayed Christ as an automatic rifle-wielding avenger who shot and stabbed Iraqis who had kidnapped and tortured Santa Claus. Multiple episodes have blatantly attacked the Catholic Church including showing the College of Cardinals openly admitting to sexual activity with children. Consequently, any claims by Comedy Central about the desire to avoid insulting others’ religious beliefs stand out as disingenuously false.
Americans must question whether or not their media outlets will continue to silence any negative remarks toward or squelch any unflattering depictions of any Islamic-related issues. A dozen jihadis boasting of a supposed Mohamadan revolution cowed a popular and successful cable outlet. The thinly veiled threat of one traitorous American named Zachary Adam Chesser made an entire network cower in fear then acquiesce to the demands of these savages. No longer does public opinion need to be measured in the millions or even in tens of thousands to induce a change in subject matter. The totalitarian ultimatums of a mere handful of Mohamadans suffices to crush the freedom of speech of all Americans. Considering Comedy Central’s continuous kowtowing to jihadis’ threats and burning desire to placate Mohamadans, one should expect the executives of the network to act proactively to forestall any further alleged blasphemy. Therefore, it is a matter of time until the executives behead Parker and Stone in accordance with Sharia, just to be on the safe side.
COPYRIGHT APRIL 2010 BY CHARLES KASTRIOT
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Did the Earth Move for You?
Hojjat ol-eslam Kazem Sediki, an Islamic prayer leader in Iran, has blamed women’s lack of hiding themselves under oppressively suffocating outfits for an increased number of earthquakes. Conveniently, he overlooked the fact that numerous bare-breasted women on many beaches throughout France have not resulted in calamitous earthquakes in the French Riviera. The resorts along Mexico’s eastern shores and in the Caribbean Sea have not been swallowed by gaping fissures in the ground due to the presence of bikini-clad women. Along the coasts of the Atlantic Ocean and of the Gulf of Mexico of the United States, scantily-clad women have never induced such seismic retribution for decades now. So why exactly are Iranian women the cause of terrestrial rumblings?
This cleric’s remarks are typical of Islamists’ knee-jerk misogyny. The exposure of women’s hair, ankles, arms or faces supposedly causes calamities. Such absurdity makes perfect sense only to buffoons who have been mind-numbed through years of Islamic indoctrination. Who has time to study geology to understand the true causes of earthquakes? These savages certainly do not since they have been pre-occupied with robotically reciting the Koran. Why study an objective science when they can parrot verses which very few of them even understand due to ignorance of the seventh century dialect of the Arabian Peninsula in which Mohamad (May he burn in Hell forever) fabricated the Koranic verses? Anyone with at least a minimal level of scientific education guffawed uproariously upon hearing Sediki’s statements.
Apparently, this numbskull never considered the possibility that his country has experienced earthquakes as punishment for its Islamic regime’s three decades of repression. Certainly a just deity would avenge the frequent stonings of women who report being raped but cannot clear the ridiculous hurdle of proof required by Sharia that four male witnesses observed the crime. Additionally, a wrathful god
would surely punish those who flog women because a few strands of hair peeked through the tents mandated as “appropriate garments” by Islamists like Sediki. Divine retribution is due to the ruling clerics for their continued repression of democracy and secularism advocates.
Such admonishments seem even more hypocritical considering the practice of “temporary marriages” sanctioned by the Islamic regime. Iranian men pay women to sign contracts of marriage which stipulate when their marriage will end and how much the women will receive as compensation. These matrimonial farces often last for just a few days, frequently for a mere hour or two. This institution is de facto prostitution promoted for unmarried young males, especially among those studying to become Islamic clerics in the city of Kom. These arrangements including written documents between the johns and the whores only give a phony veneer of legitimacy in the eyes of the Islamists but not to any clear-thinking person.
Sediki’s ranting has further illuminated the dangerous insanity of the Islamic regime. With such ignorant leaders in charge of this totalitarian regime, how can anyone in the Free World not shudder at the thought of these barbarians safely handling radioactive materials for use in a nuclear power program? Of course, anyone subscribing to the Iranian disinformation about wanting a nuclear power program for peaceful civilian use certainly lacks the wisdom to see through the Iranians’ lies anyway.
COPYRIGHT APRIL 2010 BY CHARLES KASTRIOT
This cleric’s remarks are typical of Islamists’ knee-jerk misogyny. The exposure of women’s hair, ankles, arms or faces supposedly causes calamities. Such absurdity makes perfect sense only to buffoons who have been mind-numbed through years of Islamic indoctrination. Who has time to study geology to understand the true causes of earthquakes? These savages certainly do not since they have been pre-occupied with robotically reciting the Koran. Why study an objective science when they can parrot verses which very few of them even understand due to ignorance of the seventh century dialect of the Arabian Peninsula in which Mohamad (May he burn in Hell forever) fabricated the Koranic verses? Anyone with at least a minimal level of scientific education guffawed uproariously upon hearing Sediki’s statements.
Apparently, this numbskull never considered the possibility that his country has experienced earthquakes as punishment for its Islamic regime’s three decades of repression. Certainly a just deity would avenge the frequent stonings of women who report being raped but cannot clear the ridiculous hurdle of proof required by Sharia that four male witnesses observed the crime. Additionally, a wrathful god
would surely punish those who flog women because a few strands of hair peeked through the tents mandated as “appropriate garments” by Islamists like Sediki. Divine retribution is due to the ruling clerics for their continued repression of democracy and secularism advocates.
Such admonishments seem even more hypocritical considering the practice of “temporary marriages” sanctioned by the Islamic regime. Iranian men pay women to sign contracts of marriage which stipulate when their marriage will end and how much the women will receive as compensation. These matrimonial farces often last for just a few days, frequently for a mere hour or two. This institution is de facto prostitution promoted for unmarried young males, especially among those studying to become Islamic clerics in the city of Kom. These arrangements including written documents between the johns and the whores only give a phony veneer of legitimacy in the eyes of the Islamists but not to any clear-thinking person.
Sediki’s ranting has further illuminated the dangerous insanity of the Islamic regime. With such ignorant leaders in charge of this totalitarian regime, how can anyone in the Free World not shudder at the thought of these barbarians safely handling radioactive materials for use in a nuclear power program? Of course, anyone subscribing to the Iranian disinformation about wanting a nuclear power program for peaceful civilian use certainly lacks the wisdom to see through the Iranians’ lies anyway.
COPYRIGHT APRIL 2010 BY CHARLES KASTRIOT
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)