• July 2014
    S M T W T F S
    « Jun    
  • Truth about Islam and Shari’a law

  • Blog Stats

    • 57,194 hits
  • Must Read! Click Picture!

  • Must Read: click picture!

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 32 other followers

  • Order the Self Study Course on Political Islam

    Order the Self Study Course on Political Islam

  • We love & support Israel!!!

  • Get Educated & Educate Others!! Click the Picture!



  • Key Strategies for the Counter Jihad!

    Click on image above - read about strategies!

OFFICIAL RELEASE: Statement by Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada in Response to the Situation in Israel

Originally posted on sharia unveiled:

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper 1 (resized)



The following is an official release from:

The Office of Prime Minister Stephen Harper

re: In response to the situation in Israel

Prime Minister Stephen Harper today issued the following statement in response to the situation in Israel:

“The indiscriminate rocket attacks from Gaza on Israel are terrorist acts, for which there is no justification. It is evident that Hamas is deliberately using human shields to further terror in the region.

“Failure by the international community to condemn these reprehensible actions would encourage these terrorists to continue their appalling actions. Canada calls on its allies and partners to recognize that these terrorist acts are unacceptable and that solidarity with Israel is the best way of stopping the conflict.

“Canada is unequivocally behind Israel. We support its right to defend itself, by itself, against these terror attacks, and urge Hamas to immediately cease their…

View original 48 more words

The Vatican Falls for the ‘Interfaith’ Scam

Posted by sharia unveiled on June 28, 2014


14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?  2 Corinthians 6:14 King James (KJV)

by, Ned May / Baron Bodissey | FrontPage Mag | h/t Gates of Vienna

On June 8, 2014 — Pentecost Sunday — the Vatican hosted an “interfaith event” that included prayers by Christian priests, a Jewish rabbi, and a Muslim imam. The occasion was well-publicized in advance by the Holy See as a “pause in politics” that would promote peace between the Israel and the Palestinians.

During his visit to Israel and the Palestinian Authority the previous month, Pope Francis had invited Israeli President Shimon Peres and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to attend the event. Both leaders accepted the invitation, and sat with the Pope while prayers were said and chanted in the Vatican garden.

The imam, however, went beyond the script that had been handed to the Vatican in advance. He included in his chanted prayer verses 284-286 of Sura 2 in the Koran, the last part of which calls for Allah to grant the Muslims victory over the infidels. His words were broadcast live to a television audience, but they were in Arabic, so most non-Muslim viewers had no idea what he had said.


This apparently included the Vatican hierarchy. When someone who did understand Arabic pointed out what had happened, a Vatican spokesman at first denied that any such thing had occurred. Those verses weren’t in the advance script — how could he possibly have said them? No Muslim, especially a respected imam, would ever go back on his word!

Later, when that story became untenable, the Vatican soft-pedaled the added text, saying that there was nothing really wrong with it. To further complicate matters, a doctored tape of the Arabic prayer was released in which the final part of verse 2:286 was edited out. It’s not clear who did the editing, but the altered version certainly did serve the interests of the Vatican.

With the help of Vlad Tepes, I was able to track down a complete video of the prayer from an Arabic television channel and then have it translated (by a volunteer who prefers to remain anonymous) and subtitled. As far as I can determine, the imam’s name was never made public, either by the Vatican or the English-language Arab news sites. I’m told he’s Palestinian, and his distinctive headgear identifies him as having the authoritative credentials of Al-Azhar University:

A German-speaking Jesuit priest, Fr. Felix Körner, made a valiant effort to demonstrate that 2:286 was in full accord with Christian doctrine, and was peaceful in intent. During an interview he said (translated from the German by Rembrandt Clancy):

“This verse, perhaps spontaneously selected by someone who then also recited the Koran from memory, actually fitted very well into the overall context of the Prayer for Peace! There are always three steps in the three religions: We recognise the Creator and praise Him, we recognise our guilt and confess it and we plead for the gift of peace. And all that comes out very beautifully in these three verses of the Koran.


“There is a certain parallel insofar as a quotation torn out of context is particularly easily misunderstood. And if one removes from the text only the reference to unbelievers, one can easily use it as a peg upon which to hang something and then say that an infringement has taken place here. On the other hand we have in this case a Koran recitation which pertains to someone who not only quotes, but recites, and who also says: what I am reciting here is also what I believe. And in the same breath he is also saying: We Muslims, as the Koran precisely tells us, recognise the other religions with their prophets. Therefore from the Muslim side, there was by no means any deprecation or exclusion intended or expressed. Rather it was said: We are bringing here a religious idea, one which welcomes and accepts you all, and naturally in certain Koranic way, tries to set things right again. But there was nothing here which was meant to exclude or rebuff; rather a Koran verse was recited, which is meant to express the highest respect and therefore can also be received as such.” [emphasis added]

But is this interpretation true? Does Islam really “recognize the other religions with their prophets”? Was there really no “deprecation or exclusion intended”?

It’s always unwise to trust a non-Muslim’s interpretations of Islamic scripture and law. Our political are always telling us what Islam means — witness Boris Johnson, David Cameron, and George W. Bush — with less than complete credibility. Now we have a Jesuit priest telling us what Islam does and does not mean.

It’s also unwise to trust a Muslim cleric or spokesman when he explains Islam to a non-Muslim audience. There are very clear reasons for this skepticism, based in the Koran and the hadith (the sayings of Mohammed) and all major interpretations of Islamic law that are derived from those.

So how do we understand what happened at the Vatican on Pentecost Sunday?

We begin with this: last November a well-meaning Pope Francis issued a papal declaration, Evangelii Gaudium, which said among other things that “our respect for true followers of Islam should lead us to avoid hateful generalisations, for authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence.”

Now we’re going to take the advice of Major (ret.) Stephen Coughlin, one of the foremost non-Muslim experts on Islamic law in the United States. If we want to understand Islamic law, Maj. Coughlin tells us: “You must read things written by Muslims who are recognized in the Muslim community as experts in the topic they are writing about, and who are writing for a Muslim audience. If you fail to do that, you are not doing your job.”

Therefore, to provide context for the momentous events of June 8, the following information is instructive. It is derived from ’Umdat al-salik wa ’uddat al-nasik, which is commonly referred to as Reliance of the Traveller when cited in English. This an authoritative source on Sunni Islamic law, because it is certified as such by Al-Azhar University in Cairo. There is no higher authority on Sunni Islamic doctrine than Al-Azhar; it is the closest equivalent to the Vatican that can be found in Islam.

Consider this passage from Reliance of the Traveller, chapter O, o9.0:

Jihad means to wage war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the lesser jihad.


The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:

•Fighting is prescribed for you (Koran 2:216)

•Slay them wherever you find them (Koran 4:89)

•Fight the idolators utterly (Koran 9:36)

In o9.8, Reliance of the Traveller describes the objectives of jihad:

The caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4)… and the war continues until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax…

Now it becomes clear that — contrary to what Fr. Körner said — Islam does indeed deprecate and exclude other religions, specifically including Judaism and Christianity. This deprecation and exclusion goes so far as to mandate warfare against those religions.

We should also bear in mind what Islamic law says about lying. In Book R “Holding One’s Tongue,” §r8.0 “Lying” at r8.2 “Permissible Lying,” Reliance of the Traveller cites the iconic Islamic legal jurist Imam Abu Hamid Ghazali:

This is an explicit statement that lying is sometimes permissible for a given interest… When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N: i.e., when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible) and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.

To sum up: according to an authoritative manual of Islamic law certified by Al-Azhar University — the same University that accredited the imam who prayed at the Vatican — the devout Muslim is obligated to make war against Christians and Jews until they convert to Islam, submit and pay the poll tax, or die.

Since this goal is obligatory, it is also obligatory for the devout Muslim to lie to Christians and Jews about what his religion means, and what it intends, if such lies help Islam achieve the final conquest.

This is why we are ill-advised to take Muslim spokesmen at their word when they describe the peaceful intentions of Islam.

Now hear what Maj. Stephen Coughlin has to say about what happened at the Vatican on Pentecost Sunday. He explains in great detail, using authoritative sources on Islamic law, what the imam was doing when he inserted those three extra verses into his prayer in the Vatican garden:

As you can see, Pope Francis and the leaders of the Catholic Church, not to mention the Jewish representatives from Israel, had the wool deftly pulled over their eyes by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The “interfaith” movement is a Muslim Brotherhood scam designed to soften up gullible Jews and Christians in advance of the inevitable Islamic victory.

The incident in the Vatican garden received very little Western media attention, even though it was one of the most important stories of the decade. We were all too busy paying attention to the more obvious jihad in Syria and Iraq, where Islam is reaching the same goal through fire and blood and slaughter.

What happened at the Vatican is understood (correctly) by Muslims as a great victory for Islam. Using stealth and deception, the Al-Azhar imam penetrated the innermost sanctum of Christendom and claimed it for the Umma.


source(‘s): http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ned-may/the-vatican-falls-for-the-interfaith-scam/


Posted on 28 Jun 14 by Sharia Unveiled

[Editor’s Note: This does not necessarily entail the beliefs, thoughts, or theories of the local Act chapters or the National Act office…they are my beliefs, thoughts and/or theories. Do not forget, according to the "Pope Prophecy" from Saint Malachi...pope 112 from after the prophecy was written was going to be the anti-Christ's false prophet...in studying the Bible's Book of Revelation, we find out the anti-Christ will be Muslim, which coincides with Islamic prophecies of their mahdi...(both the same entity) and the anti-Christ's world religion will be Chrislam...and the Pope is working now to merge Islam with Catholicism...]

ISIS Releases it’s 5-Year Territorial Expansion Plan

Posted by sharia unveiled on June 23, 2014


Map courtesy of: Ayman Mohyeldin | h/t Terri Lynn

Posted on 23 Jun14 by Sharia Unveiled

[Editor’s Note: This does not necessarily entail the beliefs, thoughts, or theories of the local Act chapters or the National Act office…they are my beliefs, thoughts and/or theories. And this doesn't entail the subvert takeover of Western countries...

How can people believe the white washed version of Islam when they state that Islam is peaceful and tolerant...do people think that one can take over multiple countries in five years by just preaching or asking, or do people want to be politically correct (reality shows, PC is in actuality dhimminess, ask Mohammed), or are they just stupid and don't want to rile up the Muslims, for fear of death? you decide.

Sad thing is...the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (Syria) were a part of al-Qaeda, which was created by the Muslim Brotherhood as one of their military arms...the al-Qaeda are primarily Sunni (which aren't as aggressive as the Shia, but they will still kill infidels and Kufars without much hesitance), where the Iraq is primarily Shia (which are more aggressive because they look more at the mahdi coming back and the Shia will be at the top of the list of "good works" in satan's I mean allah's eyes.

This rift between the the Shia and the Sunni could possibly be the feet in Nebuchadnezzar's dream. You see, in verses 41-43 in Daniel 2, it talks about the feet being of "mixed" with clay and iron. Now, something to put together (not saying this the a God given interpretation,  but one of my thinking, the Book of Daniel was written in Aramaic, and in the Aramaic mixed was translated from the word "ereb". Ereb, in Aramaic, according to the Strong's Hebrew Lexicon 6151 and 6152, is Arab. Now the thought to gander here is, the iron in the feet could mean Shia Muslims, because they are like iron when performing oppression and terrorism according to what allah and Mohammed said to do, verses the mirey clay the Shia are mixed with, which could be the "not as aggressive" Sunni. They do not fully get along with each other...case in point...ISIS and al-Qaeda...they started out to be working together, but they separated for differences in religious beliefs.]

What does the Religion of Peace Teach About…A Woman’s Worth Relative to a Man’s


Does Islam teach that a woman is worth less than a man?


Summary Answer:

Absolutely.  The only debatable point is by what degree.

The Qur’an: Qur’an (4:11) – (Inheritance) “The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females” (see also verse 4:176).  In Islam, sexism is mathematically established.

Qur’an (2:282) – (Court testimony) “And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not found then a man and two women.”  Muslim apologists offer creative explanations to explain why Allah felt that a man’s testimony in court should be valued twice as highly as a woman’s, but studies consistently show that women are actually less likely to tell lies than men, meaning that they would make more reliable witnesses.

Qur’an (2:228)“and the men are a degree above them [women]

Qur’an (5:6)“And if ye are unclean, purify yourselves. And if ye are sick or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the closet, or ye have had contact with women, and ye find not water, then go to clean, high ground and rub your faces and your hands with some of it”  Men are to rub dirt on their hands if there is no water to purify them following casual contact with a woman (such as shaking hands).

Qur’an (24:31) – Women are to lower their gaze around men, so they do not look them in the eye.  (To be fair, men are told to do the same thing in the prior verse).

Qur’an (2:223)“Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will…”  A man has dominion over his wives’ bodies as he does his land.  This verse is overtly sexual.  There is some dispute as to whether it is referring to the practice of anal intercourse, which it has been used historically to justify.  If this is what Muhammad meant, however, then it would appear to contradict what he said in Muslim (8:3365).

Qur’an (4:3) – (Wife-to-husband ratio) “Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four”  Inequality by numbers.

Qur’an (53:27)“Those who believe not in the Hereafter, name the angels with female names.”  Angels are sublime beings, and would therefore be male.

Qur’an (4:24) and Qur’an (33:50) - A man is permitted to take women as sex slaves outside of marriage.  Note that the verse distinguishes wives from captives (those whom they right hand possesses).

From the Hadith:

Bukhari (6:301)“[Muhammad] said, ‘Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?’  They replied in the affirmative.  He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her intelligence.’

Bukhari (6:301) – continued – “[Muhammad said] ‘Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?’ The women replied in the affirmative. He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her religion.'”  Allah has made women deficient in the practice of their religion as well, by giving them menstrual cycles. 

Bukhari (2:28) – Women comprise the majority of Hell’s occupants.  This is important because the only women in heaven ever mentioned by Muhammad are the virgins who serve the sexual desires of men.  (A weak Hadith, Kanz al-`ummal, 22:10, even suggests that 99% of women go to Hell).

Bukhari (62:81)“The Prophet said: “‘The stipulations most entitled to be abided by are those with which you are given the right to enjoy the (women’s) private parts (i.e. the stipulations of the marriage contract).'”  In other words, the most important thing a woman brings to marriage is between her legs.

Bukhari (62:58) – A woman presents herself in marriage to Muhammad, but he does not find her attractive, so he “donates” her on the spot to another man.

Muslim (4:1039)“A’isha said [to Muhammad]: ‘You have made us equal to the dogs and the asses’  These are the words of Muhammad’s favorite wife, complaining of the role assigned to women under Islam.

Abu Dawud (2:704)“…the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) said: When one of you prays without a sutrah, a dog, an ass, a pig, a Jew, a Magian, and a woman cut off his prayer, but it will suffice if they pass in front of him at a distance of over a stone’s throw.”

Abu Dawud (2155) – Women are compared to slaves and camels with regard to the “evil” in them.

Ishaq 593 – “As for Ali, he said, ‘Women are plentiful, and you can easily change one for another.'” Ali was raised as a son by Muhammad.  He was also the 4th caliph.  This comment was made in Muhammad’s presence without a word of rebuke from him.

Ishaq 593 – “From the captives of Hunayn, Allah’s Messenger gave [his son-in-law] Ali a slave girl called Baytab and he gave [future Caliph] Uthman a slave girl called Zaynab and [future Caliph] Umar another.” – Even in this world, Muhammad treated women like party favors, handing out slave girls to his cronies for sex.

Ibn Ishaq (693) – “Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu’l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons.”  Muhammad traded captured women for horses.

Al-Tirmidhi 3272 – “When Allah’s Messenger was asked which woman was best he replied, ‘The one who pleases (her husband) when he looks at her, obeys him when he gives a command, and does not go against his wishes regarding her person or property by doing anything of which he disapproves’.”

Tabari VIII:117 – The fate of more captured farm wives, whom the Muslims distributed amongst themselves as sex slaves: “Dihyah had asked the Messenger for Safiyah when the Prophet chose her for himself… the Apostle traded for Safiyah by giving Dihyah her two cousins. The women of Khaybar were distributed among the Muslims.”

Tabari IX:137 – “Allah granted Rayhana of the Qurayza to Muhammad as booty.”

Ishaq 969 – “Men were to lay injunctions on women lightly, for they were prisoners of men and had no control over their persons.” – This same text also justifies beating women for flirting.

Tabari Vol 9, Number 1754 – “Treat women well, for they are [like] domestic animals with you and do not possess anything for themselves.”  From Muhammad’s ‘Farewell Sermon’.

Additional Notes:

The attempt to paint Islam as a pioneering force in women’s rights is a recent one, corresponding with the efforts of Muslim apologists (not otherwise known for their feminist concerns) and some Western academics prone to interpreting history according to pre-formed conclusions.  In truth, the Islamic religious community has never exhibited an interest in expanding opportunities for women beyond the family role.

The fourth Caliph, who was Muhammad’s son-in-law and cousin, said just a few years after the prophet’s death that “The entire woman is an evil. And what is worse is that it is a necessary evil.” 

A traditional Islamic saying is that, “A woman’s heaven is beneath her husband’s feet.”  One of the world’s most respected Quran commentaries explains that, “Women are like cows, horses, and camels, for all are ridden.” (Tafsir al-Qurtubi)

The revered Islamic scholar, al-Ghazali, who has been called ‘the greatest Muslim after Muhammad,’ writes that the role of a Muslim woman is to “stay at home and get on with her sewing.  She should not go out often, she must not be well-informed, nor must she be communicative with her neighbors and only visit them when absolutely necessary; she should take care of her husband… and seek to satisfy him in everything… Her sole worry should be her virtue… She should be clean and ready to satisfy her husband’s sexual needs at any moment.” [as quoted from Ibn Warraq]

A Yemeni cleric recently explained in a television broadcast what it is that makes women inferior and unable, say, to serve as good witnesses: “Women are subject to menstruation, when their endurance and mental capacity for concentration are diminished. When a woman witnesses a killing or an accident, she becomes frightened, moves away, and sometimes even faints, and she cannot even watch the incident.”
During a 2012 talk show on an Egyptian television channel, a cleric slammed Christianity – in part for teaching gender equality: “the Christian religion does not differentiate between women and men, but it confirms their perfect equality: it gives them an equal share in inheritance, it bans divorce, and it bans polygamy.”

The many opportunities denied women under Islamic law, from giving equal testimony in court to having the right to exclude other wives from their marital bed, is very clear proof that women are of lesser value then men in Islam.  Muslim women are not even free to marry outside the faith without being killed by their own families.

Islamic law also specifies that when a woman is murdered by a man, her family is owed only half as much “blood money” (diya) as they would be if she had been a man.  (The life of a non-Muslim is generally assessed at one-third).

Although a man retains custody of his children in the event of his wife’s death, a non-Muslim woman will automatically lose custody of her children in the event of her husband’s death unless she converts to Islam or marries a male relative within his family.  Even the rights of Muslim mothers are subordinate to her husband’s family.

Contemporary Muslims like to counter that Arabs treated women as camels prior to Muhammad. This is somewhat questionable, given that Muhammad’s first wife was a wealthy woman who owned property and ran a successful business prior to ever meeting him.  She was even his boss… (although we’re sure that changed after the marriage).  Still, it is somewhat telling that Islam’s treatment of women can only be defended by contrasting it to an extremely primitive environment in which women were supposedly non-entities.

Homa Darabi was a talented physician who took her own life by setting herself on fire in public protest of the oppression of women in Islamic Iran.  She did this after a 16-year-old girl was shot to death for wearing lipstick.  In the book, Why We Left Islam, her sister includes a direct quote from one of the country’s leading clerics:

“The specific task of women in this society is to marry and bear children.  They will be discouraged from entering legislative, judicial, or whatever careers which may require decision-making, as women lack the intellectual ability and discerning judgment required for these careers.”

Modern day cleric Abu Ishaq al-Huwaini has called for a return of the slave markets, where Muslim men can go to order concubines.  In this man of God’s ideal world, “when I want a sex-slave, I got to the market and pick whichever female I desire and buy her.”

At best, Islam elevates the status of a woman to somewhere between that of a camel and a man.

Muhammad captured women in war and treated them as a tradable commodity.  The immutable, ever-relevant Qur’an explicitly permits women to be kept as sex slaves.  These are hardly things in which Muslims can take pride.


See also: Muhammad’s Hatred of Women

and Myth: Muhammad would Never Approve of Rape

Posted on The Religion of Peace

[Editor's Note: This does not necessarily entail the beliefs, thoughts, or theories of the local Act chapters or the National Act office…they are my beliefs, thoughts and/or theories. Another item concerning women and Islam is something that recently came up in March of 2014 after the 192nd meeting of the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII), the CII Chairman Maulana Muhammad Khan Shirani that stated that women are un-Islamic and noted that women by existing defied the laws of nature, and to protect Islam and the Sharia women should be forced to stop existing as soon as possible. The announcement comes a couple of days after CII's 191st meeting where they dubbed laws related to minimum marriage age to be un-Islamic.

Women are the Muslim man's property...yes, they might love their wives, but ultimately they are property, and thus, the men are allowed to do whatever they like with their wives, beat them, rape them, humiliate them, and even kill them. Their daughters are also their property, so they are allowed to sodomize them (they are allowed to perform regular intercourse because that would de-virginize her and she could not be sold or traded into marriage. (This is one reason that men make their women submissive, make them wear the head gear, stay in the house or go outside when with their husbands or oldest son/guardians...all to make it that other men won't try to take one's "property"), as well as recently giving their daughters to jihad al-nikah or sexual jihad, so they can sexually satisfy the Free Syrian Army (the "freedom fighters" or, in reality, the Al-Qaeda terrorists) before they die.

This goes back to the false Islamic statement from their apologists that Islam has equal rights for women]

H/T to Nox and Friends

15-Year-old Girl Gang-Raped by 38 Muslim Men in Malaysia

Posted by sharia unveiled on May 31, 2014

Malaysia Gang Rape 1

At least 13 people detained after allegations that a 15-year-old girl was gang-raped in the northern state of Kelantan.

by, Al Jazeera | h/t Trop

Malaysian police have detained 13 men and are looking for other suspects following allegations that a 15-year-old girl was raped by 38 men in the country’s northern region.

Astro Awani television and The Star newspaper reported that the assault took place in the northern state of Kelantan on May 20, when the girl was lured to an empty hut reported to be a local drug haunt.

The men took turns to rape her for hours. Police are also investigating whether her 17-year-old friend was also raped.

Media accounts, quoting information from district police chief Azham Otham, said 38 men were involved.

Several of those detained had tested positive for amphetamine, the reports said. The New Straits Times said a man and his two teenage sons were among those detained.

Police said action could have been taken had villagers reported the addicts’ presence, Reuters news agency said.

“It is very disturbing to me that no one in the village was even suspicious when the closest neighbour was a mere 20 metres away,” Otham told The Star newspaper.

‘Extremely worrying’

The alleged attack, one of several brutal cases this week underscoring the violence to which women are being subjected across Asia, sparked outrage among women’s groups.

Politicians from a Muslim party running the region said their proposal to introduce Islamic hudud law, with harsh penalties, would deter offenders.

Suri Kempe, an official with women’s rights group Sisters in Islam, told Reuters that the frequent number of rape cases being reported was “extremely worrying”.

“Boys are being raised in a culture where being masculine means being aggressive, and that it’s perfectly acceptable to use violence to get what you want,” she said in a statement.

Almost 3,000 rapes were reported to the police in Malaysia in 2012, of which 52 percent involved girls aged 16 and below, according to police statistics.

Convicted rapists face up to 30 years in prison and whipping, but many have called for stricter punishment.

source: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2014/05/girl-raped-38-men-malaysia-2014530123312662974.html

Posted on 31 May 14 by Sharia Unveiled

‘Muslim Mafia’ Author: ‘..Muslims Working With Facebook to Silence Critics of Islam..’

Posted by sharia unveiled on May 30, 2014


by, Joe Newby | The Examiner | Thank you to Christopher Collins

On Wednesday, Dave Gaubatz, a former Air Force investigator and author of “Muslim Mafia,” told Examiner.com that he “infiltrated” a Muslim conference held in Detroit earlier this month. While at the conference, he reportedly spoke to a representative of a group known as Muslim Advocates, who said the organization is working “closely” with social media sites like Facebook and Twitter to close down accounts of users critical of Islam.

“They are asking these groups to close the accounts of anyone who is critical of Islam,” he said. “This is considered serious hate speech and should not be allowed on the Internet.”

According to Gaubatz, the representative also said that “anyone critical of Islam and sharia law are haters.” Ditto for those who oppose either the construction or expansion of a mosque in the United States.

“We are experts with deep experience in the courtroom and powerful connections in Congress and the White House,” Gaubatz recalled being told by the Muslim Advocates representative.

“This should be of no surprise to anyone,” Gaubatz said.

Gaubatz also said the conference, which was attended by representatives and leaders from several groups, should have been named the “U.S. Constitution and the 1st Amendment are for MB terrorists and not for American Patriots.” For four days, he said, he stayed at the same hotel as leaders from over a dozen groups that support the Muslim Brotherhood.

He reportedly met and spoke with executives from the Islamic Society of North America and the North American Islamic Trust.

“I was informed that NAIT owned several hundred million dollars of property in America, and has the funding from 400 plus Islamic Centers in America,” he added.

But Gaubatz’ report of collusion between these groups and social media sites like Facebook and Twitter present a clear danger to the fundamental right of free speech and Americans’ ability to freely express themselves online. As we have reported multiple times, Muslim activists have called for global blasphemy bans and an end to free speech in the United States, despite the clear language of the First Amendment.

Last Wednesday, we reported that one page critical of Islam — “Islam Exposed” — was yanked by Facebook after administrators received death threats. Facebook later restored the page, saying it was yanked in error.

On Wednesday, a post at the page advising visitors to avoid hateful speech was removed by Facebook for allegedly violating the site’s community standards. Facebook did not explain why the post was pulled and one administrator received a 30-day ban.

But as we have reported, Facebook routinely turns a blind eye to threats from users with Muslim-sounding names. Last August, for example, Facebook told a conservative female they could not confirm direct threats she received violated their community standards. One threat reported to Facebook was quite specific: “We will kill you.”

Ironically, Facebook has said it supports free speech and reviews all complaints equally.

We contacted both Facebook and Muslim Advocates to verify Gaubatz’ claim and received no reply as of this writing.

Update: A few hours after this article was published, Facebook falsely flagged the link as “unsafe” in what appears to be a bid to keep it from being circulated. We have reached out to Facebook, but have not received a response.

Update #2: Muslim Advocates spokesperson Fatima Khan responded with an email claiming we misquoted their representative, even though we did not. The statement relayed to us was Gaubatz’s recollection, not a direct quote from MA or any of their representatives. We specifically asked Khan about the quote, and about allegations the group is working to shut down social media accounts of those critical of Islam. Khan never responded. The article was flagged by Facebook after our contact with Khan. More on the incident can be seen here.

US State Department Promotes a Muslim Cleric That Backed a Fatwa on ‘..Murdering American Soldiers..’

Abdallah Bin Bayyah.

Abdallah Bin Bayyah.

by, Adam Kredo | The Washington Free Beacon

The State Department’s Counter Terrorism (CT) Bureau promoted on Friday a controversial Muslim scholar whose organization has reportedly backed Hamas and endorsed a fatwa authorizing the murder of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

The CT bureau on Friday tweeted out a link to the official website of Sheikh Abdallah Bin Bayyah, the vice president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS), a controversial organization founded by a Muslim Brotherhood leader “who has called for the death of Jews and Americans and himself is banned from visiting the U.S.,” according to Fox News.

Bin Bayyah is reported to have been one of several clerics who endorsed a 2004 fatwa that endorsed resistance against Americans fighting in Iraq, PJ Media reported in 2013, when Bin Bayyah met with Obama’s National Security Council staff at the White House.

The CT Bureau tweet linked to a press release on Bin Bayyah’s site condemning the kidnapping of hundreds of Nigerian girls by the Boko Haram group.

However, Bin Bayyah himself has been known to back controversial causes.

Bin Bayyah has “urged the U.N. to criminalize blasphemy,” according to reports, and spoke “out in favor of Hamas,” the terror group that rules over the West Bank.

The cleric also issued a fatwa in 2009  “barring ‘all forms of normalization’ with Israel,” according to Fox.

The 2004 fatwa on Iraq stated that “resisting occupation troops” is a “duty” for all Muslims, according to reports.

Terrorism analyst Patrick Poole said that the State Department must more carefully choose the Muslim leaders it promotes.

“This administration is continuing to push extremist clerics like Bin Bayyah as part of a fantasy foreign policy that somehow they are somehow a counter to al Qaeda,” Poole said. “But in Bin Bayyah’s case, it was his organization that issued the fatwa allowing for the killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq and said it was a duty for Muslims all over the world to support the Iraqi ‘resistance’ against the United States that gave religious justification for al Qaeda’s terrorism.

“And [Bin Bayyah] said nothing as his pal Qaradawi issued fatwas authorizing the use of suicide bombings and publicly defended terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and Palestinian Islamic Jihad,” Poole added. “If anything, clerics like Bin Bayyah and [Yusuf] Qaradawi have actively aided al Qaeda.”

The Obama administration came under fire in June 2013 for holding a meeting with Bin Bayyah at the White House.

The cleric was confirmed to have met with members of Obama’s National Security Council at the White House to discuss poverty and global health efforts, according to multiple reports at the time.

Yusuf Qaradawi, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leader who founded the IUMS—where Bin Bayyah served as vice president—has been called a “theologian of terror” by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

Bin Bayyah himself has advocated for the criminalization of “the denigration of religious symbols,” which critics call an infringement on free speech.

A State Department spokesman did not respond to a request for comment on the issue.


Another Muslim Terrorist in the White House:

This Muslim Terrorist SOB was on the “Terrorist Watch List” which banned him entry into the United States, at the same time that Barack al-Husseini Obama invited him into the White House to meet with the US National Security Council:

source: http://freebeacon.com/national-security/state-dept-promotes-muslim-cleric-who-backed-fatwa-on-killing-of-u-s-soldiers/

Posted on 26 May 14 by sharia unveiled

After Murdering His Two Previous Wives a Turkish Man Seeks Wife #3 on Dating Show

Turkish Wife Murderer

Sefer Calinak

by, Reuters | The Daily Star | h/t Trop

ISTANBUL, Turkey: A man who appeared on a Turkish television dating show in search of a new partner shocked the audience by revealing he had murdered his former wife and a former lover.

Sefer Calinak, 62, told Flash TV’s “Luck of the Draw” he had served prison sentences for each of the murders and had been released under an amnesty programme.

“I’m an honest person looking for a new wife,” he told the show, saying he killed his first wife because he was “irritated” by her behaviour and murdered a subsequent partner because he thought she was after his money.

Calinak was asked to leave the show by the host, prompting applause from the studio audience, in an episode which made headlines in Turkish newspapers.

source: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/May-08/255778-turkish-man-seeks-new-lover-on-tv-show-after-killing-two-others.ashx

Posted on 9 May14 by Sharia Unveiled

14-Year-old Child Bride That Was Forcibly Married Poisons the Groom

child-bride-16by, AP | Fox 8 Cleveland | h/t Trop

KANO, Nigeria (AP) — Police say a child bride forced into marriage in Nigeria prepared a poisoned meal that has killed her groom and three of his friends.

They quote 14-year-old Wasila Umaru as saying she used rat poison in the food because she was forced to marry a man she did not love.

The couple was married last week. The 35-year-old groom had invited a dozen friends to celebrate at his village 100 kilometers (60 miles) from the north Nigerian city of Kano over the weekend.

Child marriage is common in Nigeria and especially in the mainly Muslim north.

Assistant police superintendent Musa Magaji Majia said Thursday that the teenage suspect is cooperating with police and probably will be charged with culpable homicide.

source: http://fox8.com/2014/04/11/child-bride-forced-to-marry-poisons-groom/

Posted 12 Apr 14 by Sharia Unveiled

[Editor’s Note: This does not necessarily entail the beliefs, thoughts, or theories of the local Act chapters or the National Act office…they are my beliefs, thoughts and/or theories. Upon looking at the “legal” age to marry a girl if Islamic jurisprudence is when she becomes Bāligh or bulūgh (Arabic: بالغ or بُلوغ‎) which refers to a person who has reached maturity or puberty, and has full responsibility under Islamic law. Now according to Islamic “sacred” text a female can get married when the father (the “owner of the property {the daughter}” according to Islam) allows it, in a lot of cases, it is under nine…remember, Mohammed married Aisha at 6…but they cannot consummate their marriage until after the girl starts having her menstrual cycles…I got this from Ismail Moosa, a Mufti (an Islamic scholar)…

Wa ‘alaykum as salāmu ‘wa raḥmatullāhi wabarakātuhu,

Firstly, it is important to note that a male child becomes bāligh (mature) {maturity is actually sexual maturity…in other words, when they can reproduce} between the age of 12 to 15. If he does not become bāligh in this period, he will automatically be regarded as mature from fifteen. Likewise, it is possible for a female to become mature from the age of nine. Upon becoming bāligh, the qurbāni will be compulsory.

If the child still did not become bāligh, then the preferred view in the Ḥanafi madhab is that the qurbāni will be mustaḥab for him.
و في الولد الصغير عن أبي حنيفة رحمه الله تعالى روايتان في ظاهر الرواية يستحب ولا يجب بخلاف صدقة الفطر و روى الحسن عن أبي حنيفة رحمه الله تعالى أنه يجب أن يضحي عن ولده الصغير و ولد ولده الذي لا أب له و الفتوى على ظاهر الرواية (فتاوى قاضيخان

The Mindset of Muslims

Posted by sharia unveiled on February 25, 2014


by, Abid Ali | Islam Watch

Muslims never read the Qur’an from start to finish with the unprejudiced mind and intent to understand its message. If they do, it will become clear to them that this so-called holy book is not from God, but a fabrication of an evil person and is filled with absurdities and violent incitements. They live in a blissful garden of ignorance, where all their questions are choked by lack of interest to think hard about it. There, they don’t have to think. All they have to do is just believe.

Muslims are not less intelligent or less rational people than anybody else. Their problem is: they somehow manage to put aside their rational thinking when it comes to the Qur’an and Islam. They are satisfied with Islam, and make an abstract ideal image of it in their mind. But that beautiful Islam is THEIR imaginary Islam, not the Islam of Muhammad. That is how Muslims bring themselves to deeply loving Islam. Very few Muslims have read the Qur’an to understand its meaning. Yes they chant it, often in a language that they don’t understand, but few know meaning of what they read. Even fewer are the number of Muslims, who have read the Sira and hadith. The Islam they live is the Islam made up by them. They create the best religion in their mind, and when you tell them the truth about Islam, they see no resemblance of it with the one they have envisioned. Let alone reading and understanding the Qur’an, the majority of the Ummah even do not know the very basics of Islam and Muhammad—for example, they don’t know how many wives Muhammad had, that Muhammad had concubines and slept with them, that he married a six-year-old child and slept with her, that slavery or concubinism is allowed in Islam, and many more such immoralities, insensibilities and inhumanities.

How can they see the truth if they are willing to read only the lies, and refuse to read anything that may create doubt about their belief? Thus, sunk in deception and lies, they tell themselves that if only they had practiced the true Islam, all their problems—social, economic and judicial—will be resolved. They are convinced that the root of their problem is actually the Muslims, not Islam itself.

When I read the Qur’an, I discovered a distinctly different picture than the one I had in my mind. The new picture emerging from the pages of that book was a violent, intolerant, irrational, arrogant religion – a far cry from the religion of peace, equality and tolerance that had been ingrained in my mind.

What would be the reaction of a man who is told that his wife is disloyal to him? How would a child react if he is told that his father is a murderer, a rapist or a thief? A child who adulates his father or a man who loves his wife will not be able to accept it even if all the proofs in the world are shown to him. They would call you a liar and would hate you for hurting him. They would curse you, consider you his enemy, and may even explode in anger and attack you. Or what would be the condition of a man who is dreaming a pleasant dream in his sleep and you wake him up. He would definitely get annoyed. The greater the beauty of the dream, the greater is the pain of the reality. Even though faith is false, it is still sweet. It is very comforting to believe.

It is a natural human tendency to gobble all the praise, no matter how undeserving they may be, and abhor all criticisms. When you tell a person that he looks great, or he is very honest, or he is very just or intelligent, he would generally not mind or question why you say so, but will accept it all without any doubt or question. But when you criticize the selfsame person, even for his betterment, first he would be unwilling to hear them. Even if somehow he hears, he would not accept it, he will raise hundreds of questions, and additionally, there could be frowning and glaring. Similarly, when a Muslim is nurtured with a belief that they are fortunate that they are Muslims, and someday they will go to paradise to live there in peace and tranquility for eternity, they will easily gobble this wishful thinking without any question or doubt. Because it is always pleasant to fantasize a beautiful dream, although it never become a reality.

“A true believer is a person so fanatically committed to a cause that no amount of reality can make him abandon it” –Eric Hoffer

Believing with evidence is knowledge and believing without evidence is superstition. Faith is believing without evidence, so it is superstition. Gullibility and superstition also means believing without evidence. Muslims don’t want to listen or read anything against their faith and assume that their unquestioned belief will be rewarded manifold in the afterlife without ever realizing that unquestioned devotion and belief never lead one to truth or reality. What Muslims assume as ‘Eemaan’ (faith) is actually superstition wrapped in obstinate ignorance and stupidity. It is an art of Self-Deception. One, who is gifted with self-delusion, does not require opium to submerge himself in hallucination. Following or believing some ideology blindly without questioning it is a kind of intellectual slavery. How could the intelligent designer of this universe, of our mind and body, reward stupidity, ignorance and hatred in human beings? Being ignorant and having blind faith can never be rewarded by an intelligent God in heaven. If stupidity and ignorance is rewarded by God, then donkeys will be standing in queue ahead of humans to enter the divine abode.

“Men surrender sooner their rights than their customs and rituals; ridicule knowledge before their beliefs.” – John Stuart Mill

Muslims are truly incapable of questioning the integrity of Islam—maybe because of faith and fear instilled in them. They assume every Islamic teaching, law, and absurdity must be meaningful, transcendental, or rational to God. There must be some reason behind the inhuman and irrational theories or stories which we humans are neither apt to grasp nor are supposed to question, as they are the commands of God, which they have taken for granted. But here, they fail to ponder or realize on what basis they feel so sure of these claims, was it analyzed truth or unanalyzed teachings of their elders, and why God would give such revelation which is beyond the grasp of the majority of the people.

The mind of every Muslim is infused by their elders since childhood with the thought that all non-Muslims—be it the greatest of scientists, philosophers, freethinkers, and theologians of other religions or the common man—are enemies of Muslims, who are eternally engaged in a conspiracy against their religion. Why would anyone be an enemy of particular religion if it does not affect his/her rights is beyond me? Actually, it is Islam that teaches Muslims to be the enemy of the entire world so as to spread its claws of imperialism.

When they hear any critical question against their faith, they believe that there are answers for all the criticisms and questions raised against Islam, but they will never look for those answers nor would they willingly listen to any criticism against their faith which they are very much content and consoled with. Muslims challenge that they will be able to answer all the criticisms, but when you start presenting them with those question, they feel irritated and request you to stop discussing Islam immediately. This has become their instinctive psychological tendency. On one side, people like Zakir Naik boasts and throws challenges about Islam, on the other, Muslims launch Fatwas against such critics, Salman Rushdie and Taslima Nasreen being prominent among them. If you silence the voice critics, then what is the use of challenge to defend the veracity of your faith? Islamic apologists are such runners who even run alone would still be the last one to come (the failure). When Taslima Nasreen last came to Hyderabad (India), she was hit & pushed by a group of Muslims. These are exactly the same behaviour their prophet adopted and practiced. To silence opponents, he even killed female poets. In the name faith (Eemaan), they practice every sort of dishonesty (Be-Emaani). Muslims are the worst among humans to practice dishonesty!


Muslims are such people, who try to defend their religion even without knowing anything about it. They will firmly claim and boast about the integrity of the Qur’an and Muhammad believing that they would be able to answer and satisfy all criticisms and allegations raised, they will depart promising that very soon they will return with all answers, but that day never comes. For a single critical question about Islam, hundred of Muslims come with hundreds of answers. They do it in the hope that if they try to defend their religion by whatsoever means, they will be adored by Allah for defending His religion. They don’t even understand the basic understanding that a religion of the Omnipotent God never needs to be defended by mortal creatures, such as a ‘Man’.

Whenever they come across any book or article critical to their faith, they immediately shut away from it like a witch closes the aperture of light and refuses to read even a single page saying that this is a misrepresentation of Islam, but themselves would never search, verify or confirm their own claim. Their entire life and faith hinges on hear-say.

In his book, ‘Tell-tell Brain’ V. S. Ramachandran argued about various types of psychological blindness and peculiarities, where one of them I can mention is ‘Metaphor Blindness’ in which a patient cannot understand metaphors or figurative statement. Rather, he would always tell you the literal meaning of the metaphor or proverb. Once such a patient was examined with a proverb, ‘Rome was not built in a day’. When Ramachandran asked him the meaning of the metaphor, he kept on telling the literal meaning of the proverb but could tell figurative one, though the person was educated and wise enough to realize it metaphorical sense. Similarly, Muslims suffer from ‘logical blindness’ when it comes to their faith. Even the most educated Muslims talk in such an irrational manner that it is sometimes difficult to believe whether I am talking to sane person or an insane one. Tell a Muslim about the absurdities of other religions, he would understand it like a smart man but as soon as you replace that religion with Islam, he would immediately be in denial mode or agitated. No matter how you condemn other religions in front of Muslims, they would be delighted and conceited. They make fun of myths and legends of all religions, like ‘Ganesha’, who is a deity with trunk or Ravan, a king with ten heads in Hinduism, but when you talk about absurdity of Mi’raj, he would utterly refuse to agree to illogicality behind the story of Borak, Muhammad’s carrier to haven, that was half-mule and half-donkey with pair of wings. However ridiculous this creature is, to Muslims it is absolutely scientific, rational, proven, tested and verified under scientific spirit and research. This blindness is not inborn but is the result of indoctrination by their elders in their childhood. Literally, Muslims says, ‘kill those who say Islam is a violent religion’. Without ever realizing what irony they utter. Even my brothers, who are not so learned and never did research, said to me that it is their week ‘Eemaan’ that they hear something bad about Islam, else they are supposed to kill anyone who utter anything against their religion and prophet.

The lesser Muslims know about the mumbo-jumbo of the Qur’an, the stronger is their faith in Islam. They believe that the Qur’an has so profound assertions that it is not possible for everybody to understand it, thus it must be divinely inspired. They fail to think over why God would send illogical and incoherent message which is inconceivable to most people.

Muslims gulp down all the lies, absurdities and inhumanities inherent in Islam uncritically. They can’t see anything wrong with their faith as they are determined not to see anything wrong with their faith. Because they consider Muhammad above all, the entire world (rather, they consider, conspire to blaspheme him and is enemy of Islam) can be liar but not he. Muhammad, to them, is the perfect example of human being even when they know he was a pedophile, a mass murderer and a rapist. Islam has thousands fallacies, the Qur’an has numerous errors of all sorts and Muhammad committed countless crimes as per the Qur’an, Hadiths and Sira, still they want to silence whoever raises those points–not with rational answers but by violence, killing, persecuting, banning and banishing, which they have been doing since the inception of Islam. They want to kill whoever speaks the bitter truth about Islam. Sometimes they succeed, sometimes not. They ban and try to ban websites and books exposing flaws of their cherished beliefs, and unfortunately they succeed. Unlike believers of other religions, Muslims organize protest march on roads in rage, agitate and burn embassies, blow buildings, blaze libraries, kill people, ban books and websites, thinking that they are doing it for defending and sustaining the truth, without realizing that all these subjects their faith to more question while a little rational answer can defend their faith much better. On top of these, Muslims, on a regular basis, wake up in the early hours of the morning and perform Wodu (Ablution) with the icy winter water, lose precious time and energy in performing Salah five times a day, and in reading the Qur’an (the most absurd and useless book of all times), work outside home hungry and thirsty entire day during the month of Ramadan. The billion-plus Muslims torture themselves in this manner just for a lie, a lie of a sick man. Such hopes are nothing but a sinister self-deception and a waste of life. A billion-plus people are still lost in this arid desert of ignorance, chasing a mirage in the fear of childish stories of a hell with scorching fire and in the hope of a heaven with rivers of wine, milk and honey and swelling bosomed virgins — all the figment of a unspiritual, barbarous and crafty mind of a man greedy for power, wealth and women.

Muslims believe that the reference of the existence of God, Jinns, magic, spell, ghosts and souls in the Qur’an proves that Islam is the true religion and Muhammad was a true prophet of God. The fact is that these were not new ideas brought by Muhammad. The ideas of God, Jinns, resurrection, magic, spell, and souls etc. were already prevalent before Muhammad’s grand-fathers were born. The scriptures of Jews and Christians are the living evidences. It was not difficult to plagiarize and concoct few theories about God, life and death, prayer, Jinns, soul etc. to concoct a new religion in one’s own name. Question for those, who believe Muhammad to be a prophet of God, is: Did Muhammad said something which was not prevalent before him and is now proven by Modern science? I firmly believe there is nothing at all.

The reason of my precisely knowing the Muslim mindset is not only due to my growing up as a Muslim, but also because I spoke with hundreds of them and discussed about Islam, and because I have broken Islam’s blinding spell on me and liberated myself from its mental enslavement.

Posted on 25 Feb 14 by Sharia Unveiled


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 32 other followers

%d bloggers like this: