'There Can Be No End to Jihad' (Straight from the horse's … mouth)

Christianity Today ^ | February 1, 2005 | Anthony McRoy with Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad

[ichabod1]

I don't think that applies to muzzles.

[Fred Nerks]

Oh yes it does. Read the article again. It specifically refers to muslim clerics.

[USF]

Ahh yes, I remember that too, from MEMRI (yet another site I follow).

I remember what struck me at the time was that claim of Australia being discovered by Muslims amongst all that Islamofascist ranting about Zionist plots of global domination. Islamic attempts at historical revisionism is a danger that many in the West don't seem to take seriously enough because they don't understand the motives or consequences. But that's another subject.

You asked about if the Wahhabi clerics are in breach of the ICCPR. I'm no lawyer and thats not my field, but on the face of it it sure looks like it. But in reality, if the institutions within their host nations do not have the will, or the means to act then it's little more than words on a piece of paper.

Perhaps it's an angle that could be exploited in our multifaceted approach against the worse of the Isamofascists one day, and one I have not given much consideration to up until now.

[Fred Nerks]

I personally believe they are in breach - and action in this regard is the way of the future. The West is simply giving them time, and that time will run out. Soon. Reports from the UK regarding new laws providing for unlimited periods of house-arrests are an indication to me that the mind-sets of governments are changing. And change they must, to reflect the wishes of the majority.
There will be no sweeping moves, no loud nor strong announcements, but a gradual reigning in of the most fanatical elements. I'm watching carefully. The news over-all appears encouraging.
Not just in Oz, where the islamic community is turning their back on the radical mufti, but Malaysia has in recent days, deported a large number of muslims back to Indonesia.
Putin seems to be on the right track with the Chechyen terrorists who have asked for a 'truce' - and Norway I believe is also discussing deportations of people who show they have no intention of assimiliation.
It isn't the followers of mohammad that will make the changes, it is us. The West will not give up its treasures, regardless of the bleatings and threats from the Left. I have always been optimistic!

[knighthawk]

Again, speaking objectively as a Muslim scholar, and not inciting such acts, 9/11 was justifiable because America had no Covenant of Security with the Muslims, although Muslims in the U.S. are under a Covenant of Security whereby they may not act militarily against America. Only qualified scholars in fiqh [Islamic jurisprudence] could have planned this — because the 19 used non-Muslim aliases to enter the country (which legally allowed them to act in jihad).

Islam-list

If people want on or off this list, please let me know.

[A Navy Vet]

"Nobody kills Muslims better than a militant Muslim or one of their own "true believers."

Witness the Taliban. Funny tagline.

[BayouCoyote]

bump~

[sheik yerbouty]

If "there can be no end to the jihad", then there must be an end to the jihadisys and that's that!

[lainde]

bump and thanks!

[El Gato]

Nobody kills Muslims better than a militant Muslim or one of their own "true believers."

As we are seeing in Iraq, where the "true believers" are taking out Iraqis, most of them civilians, at an accelerating pace. They *have* learned that trying to take out Americans most often ends with them dead, but not having earned their virgin goats.

[Cindy]

ON THE NET...

http://www.truthusa.com/911news.html
http://www.truthusa.com/911.html

[USF]

Now comes the interesting part... using these people against each other to keep our own casualties down, and keeping their "ummah" divided. ;o)

[VeniVidiVici]

Only one thing can restrict jihad — a Covenant of Security [Treaty]. Non-combatant women, children, elders, clergy, insane, disabled are restricted, and non-Muslim children go to Paradise. However, if such are killed in crossfire or if used as human shields, they become collateral damage.

9/11 was justifiable because America had no Covenant of Security with the Muslims, although Muslims in the U.S. are under a Covenant of Security whereby they may not act militarily against America. Only qualified scholars in fiqh [Islamic jurisprudence] could have planned this — because the 19 used non-Muslim aliases to enter the country (which legally allowed them to act in jihad).

I swear these guys remind me of some computer role-playing game. It's nonsense. Every single bit of it.