NY Times Advocates for Sharia Law in America. Really.

NYC Mayor Bloomberg supports the Mosque of Triumph, has defended Islamofacism, suggested Christians and TEA Party members are terrorists, and now comes the NY Times, Amerika's Pravda, supporting the implementation of Sharia Law, which is the exact opposite of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Being against Sharia Law being recognized is “…exactly wrong. The crusade against Shariah undermines American democracy, ignores our country’s successful history of religious tolerance and assimilation, and creates a dangerous divide between America and its fastest-growing religious minority. The knuckleheads at the NY Times link the idea of resisting the implementation of Sharia Law in the US is equal to anti-Semitism.  Them talking about religious tolerance with their record of religious bigotry, anti-Christianity, and anti-Semitism is laughable.

  

Sharia law tells people what clothes to wear. Are you women ready to wear hijabs and be beaten or killed if you refuse? Christians and Jews do not make this demand. How much music will have to taken off the air and censorship of iTunes will result because it doesn’t pass the puritanical test; read for Islamic chanting 24/7? Christians and Jews do not make this demand. Sharia Law’s purpose is to regulate every single aspect of personal and private life. If you don’t obey you will be imprisoned, tortured and murdered. Good grief, they even have morality police.

Listening to Leftists and their official Party, the Democrats, Christianity is worse. The way they attack evangelicals (never defined by them except as a demeaning term), Methodists (Rick Perry), Lutherans (Michelle Bachman), and in a recent article in the NY Times by religious bigot Bill Keller wrote, Rick Santorum is part of a “fervid subset of evangelical Christianity”. Santorum is a plain ol’ Catholic.

The only time Leftists bring up religion, which they are totally ignorant of, is when trying to demean their political opposition and change the subject of their loser record. Their socio-economic world view, when put into practice, has a 100% failure rate 100% of the time.  Because Leftists goal is to make everyone subservient to the State, there’s a natural symbiosis between them and Islamists. The goal is the same, to obey the State; so much for diversity.

This is why the NY Times can publish an article like this and think it actually has merit. 

Islamofacist Cartoons Come to the America

Can you imagine a kid’s super hero series where the super hero’s were Jews and Christians fighting bad guys while promoting Judaic Christian values and beliefs? One could safely bet the secularist, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic Leftists would be having a hissy fit.

Have you even heard that there was a super hero show slated to start this week on “The Hub” which used to be known as “Discovery Kids”? The show is called “The 99”, and has Islamic super heroes. There are 99 of these “heroes”, each embodying an attribute of Allah. It’s an extremely popular show in Islamofacist countries. Burkas, not capes and leotards are the costumes of the day.

This program has passed some sort of Sharia Law board as acceptable fare. I suppose it meets the criteria of acceptable Islamofacism.

There’s also a move to make toys of these characters.

All of this is designed to indoctrinate children into Islam.

President Obama has signed on, and endorses this.

Give my Daffy Duck, Yosemite Sam, and Bugs Bunny.

Or Christian super heroes, Faith, Hope, Salvation, Charity, Forgiveness. Bet those wouldn't even get consideration. 

There has been some push back on this, so the show's launch has been delayed until January. "Production issues" of course. Let's hope the push back is never-ending..  

More detailed info on the show and characters here.

Is Shariah the Same as Jewish Law?

International Christian Persecution

Perhaps the Jurassic Press could spend some time covering these stories, instead of being apologists for Islam and Sharia Law.

A History of Sense and Sensitivity

The argument for the NY mosque is that it's a freedom of religion, first amendment thing. Islam is a combination of State rule and Sharia Law, with little reference given to salvation, love, hope and charity. It's primarily a secular movement with the object of subjugating everyone on the planet to their rule; it has little to do with religion. The second observation is the first amendment states the government will not establish a State Religion, which is opposite the Islamist goal; but it does not say any religion can put up a building anywhere. Zoning and all that.

 In 1984 Cardinal Macharski, archbishop of Cracow, announced to the world that a Carmelite convent would be built on the grounds of Auschwitz. The convent would be converted from what was originally a theater, that was turned into the warehouse where the gas was stored that would eventually be used to slaughter about 1,100,000 of which 90% were Jews, the rest about 83,000 Poles, 19,000 gypsies, and 12,000 Soviet prisoners of war. 


Jews found this extremely offensive, and from the announcement to 1993, there were a lot of arguments between Catholics and Jews. Poles\Catholics said they were also exterminated there, and Jews said not to such an extent as they had been; that the site was sacred ground to them. An agreement was made that the convent would be moved off site within two years. The Catholic Church and the Polish government dragged their feet for several years, but eventually they did get the convent moved. It was wrong of them to delay, and some nasty anti-Semitic things were said by some of the Catholic Church leadership, but still the agreement was fulfilled. The details of the story here. 


The lesson here is respect for the emotions and values of others. The mosque is a disrespectful, even a blatant finger in the eye of America. The Islamofascist Feisal Abdul Rauf  that is heading up the Cordoba Mosque project is connected to terrorist groups, and has said America is an "accessory" to the 9/11 attack, and refuses to say that Hamas is a terrorist organization. With that background he says he's a bridge builder between Islam and the West; indeed, the Bridge of Lies.  Some background on this character here. In addition to being tied to terrorist groups, he has published a book What's Right with Islam Is What's Right with America, but outside America it's title is A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post 9/11. A "dawa" is a stealth jihad; an aggressive promotion and marketing of Islam with the goal of conquering America. The mosque is just that, and only that. Rauf's book was published by two groups financed and supported by the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic Society of North America and the International Institute of Islamic Thought. They and other affiliated terrorist jihad organizations are bent on "destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house". 


A bridge builder indeed. He's using his 'Bridge of Lies' to destroy America, liberty, and Western Civilization. If Islam were the "religion of peace" that it claims to be, it would take a page from what the Catholic Church did in Auschwitz. They exercised good sense and sensitivity.   

Sharia Law Alive in America...Rape and Murder Okay Because of Religious Belief

In my previous entry, I told the horrible, vile and disgusting story of honor killings, that have been accepted in Europe, and is on its way to acceptance here in the US. We have Supreme Court judges that use international law to form their opinions. We have lower court judges that ignore the Constitution all together. We have judges that think Sharia Law should inform our Constitutional law.

Oklahoma recently passed a referendum stating that Sharia law cannot be used when judges form their legal opinions and pass down their rulings. Leftists and the Jurassic Press (redundant, I know) mocked the idea. Of course they don't report on the honor killings, rapes, and beatings going on in this country. They mock and insult the people that are reporting it.

Oklahoma citizens were prescient. A judge has in fact ruled a on a case using Sharia law. Fortunately, the ruling was overturned by the Superior Court. That a judge ruled this way in first place should be a powerful indicator that we are moving from a nation of laws to a nation ruled by men. I can't find the name of this judge, but he should be impeached and disbarred. A husband raped his wife. The judge thought this was okay.

Here's part of his ruling:

"This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did. The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited."

For the record, while gathering info for this, I found out the PC term for rape is "non-consensual sex". Beats Leftist (alleged feminist?) Whoppi Goldberg's "but it wasn't 'rape-rape' when she was defending pedophile and rapist Roman Polanski. This even beats out the new PC term for illegal immigrant, which is a "displaced foreign traveler".

This was an arranged marriage by the way, AKA forced marriage. Still asking, why are Liberals and Feminists (again redundant) silent on this? They think Islamofacism and Sharia law is better than Judeo-Christian values and the US Constitution? Really?

Sharia Law vs The Constitution

From countries that don't allow Christians or Jews, where you won't see churches or synagogues, we have a subculture in Dearborn, Michigan, where Arab and Islamic intolerance is being enforced by local police.

Four Christian Evangelists were outside an Arab cultural even passing out a pamphlet of the Gospel of John and were arrested by a huge number of cops within three minutes of them getting to the street corner, public street corner, for "disorderly conduct".

This wasn't even an Muslim event, it was Arab. Sharia law says you can't proselytize. I guess these cops and the Chief of Police decided to enforce Sharia law instead of Constitutional law. I heard a guy on a talk show today say the guys passing the pamphlet out should have been arrested, because what they were doing could incite violence. Does that mean we shouldn't have free speech because some bad people with a belief in violence, a religion of intolerance and violence, Islam, may take action and hurt people? On the same talk show a woman called in that was a pastor and had gone to a Christian religious event in San Francisco at what sounded like an outdoor venue. San Francisco Mayor and City Council and cops made it as uncomfortable as possible, passed a bunch of laws that restricted the event, plus a bunch of atheists, leftist activists, homosexual groups, feminists...that whole intolerant group...protested and accosted the attendees. None of the protesters were arrested, and none of the attendees thought to file law suits.

Of course the city council, mayor and the rest are cowards; they know Christians won't resort to violence, and usually not sue. They wouldn't act the same if it were an Islamic function. Same way Comedy Central are cowards by mocking Jesus but back down from broadcasting a mild parody of Mohammad.

Here's the vid of what happened. Just amazing. How many cops for these four peaceful citizens?


More info on this can be found on the blog Answering Muslims.

When Muslims and Arabs start showing tolerance and compassion, I'll show them the same. Right now, their goal is to destroy Western Civilization and submit the whole planet to Sharia law by whatever means, often through terror and murder.

"Among religions, Bolshevism is to be reckoned with Mohammedanism rather than with Christianity and Buddhism. Christianity and Buddhism are primarily personal religions, with mystical doctrines and a love of contemplation. Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, social, unspiritual, concerned to win the empire of this world." Atheist Bertrand Russell

Do not believe our politicians that say Islam is a religion of peace. Do not believe the academics that say Islam is a religion of peace. Do not believe the Imam that says Islam is a religion of peace. Islam is the religion of Jihad, and the Koran says to kill all infidels. That would be you if you be Buddhist, Christian, atheist or Jew. Do not believe anyone that says the Torah or Bible advocate the murder of people that don't have the same beliefs. It does not.

Do not believe those politicians and academics and other apologists for for Islam that say Jihad is a personal spiritual quest of Self. There is no Self in Islam. Jihad, pure and simple, is about killing those that are not Muslim and will not submit to Islam and obey Sharia law. There are judges here in the US and Europe that say Sharia law should be incorporated in Western Law. Really? Do you believe women are subhuman? Do you believe Jews are filthy pigs that must be hunted down and killed? Do you believe there is no separation between church and state? Do you really not want free speech?

Koran 5.51: "Believers, do not take Jews or Christians as friends. They are but one another's friends. If anyone of you takes them for his friends, then he is surely one of them. God will not guide evil-doers.".

Koran 9.5-6: "Kill those who join other gods with God wherever you may find them."

Muslims have been killing Jews from the very beginning. Koran 4.160-161: Because of the wickedness of certain Jews, and because they turn many from the way of God, We have forbidden them good and wholesome food which were formerly allowed them; and because they have taken to usury, though they were forbidden it; and have cheated other of their possessions, We have prepared a grievous punishment for the Infidels amongst them".

There's a reason for the rapid increase in the number of Mosques going up in America and Europe. The are the centers for the overthrow of Western Civilization. There is a reason for the building of the mega-mosque and Islamic cultural center within a couple blocks of ground zero.

FDR & Obama- Two Views on War

FDR on War: "The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation. As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.

I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph — so help us God."


Obama on War: As President, I refuse to set goals that go beyond our responsibility, our means, or our interests. And I must weigh all of the challenges that our nation faces. I don't have the luxury of committing to just one. Indeed, I'm mindful of the words of President Eisenhower, who -- in discussing our national security -- said, "Each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs."

Over the past several years, we have lost that balance. We've failed to appreciate the connection between our national security and our economy. In the wake of an economic crisis, too many of our neighbors and friends are out of work and struggle to pay the bills. Too many Americans are worried about the future facing our children. Meanwhile, competition within the global economy has grown more fierce. So we can't simply afford to ignore the price of these wars.

All told, by the time I took office the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan approached a trillion dollars. Going forward, I am committed to addressing these costs openly and honestly. Our new approach in Afghanistan is likely to cost us roughly $30 billion for the military this year, and I'll work closely with Congress to address these costs as we work to bring down our deficit."

The first had the attitude that the US should kill bad guys and destroy their stuff until they were all dead and all their stuff was destroyed or they surrender completely. The second is not setting goals to win against the bad guys and make them submit, he's worried about economic considerations that won't mean a damn thing under Sharia law and the destruction of Western Civilization. I personally know people that actually want Western Civilization to fail, capitalism to fail, and democracy to fail.
One that I see that wants these things, but don't know, is the President of the United States; and that scares the hell out of me.