Skip to comments.Punishment includes Islam indoctrination
Posted on 10/30/2002 11:11:36 PM PST by JohnHuang2
click here to read article
As would all true followers of the Almighty.
"Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men."
Acts 5:29 KJV
Canada is a lost cause and their elitist leaders will be wondering what happened when the fit hits the shan.
After all they were just trying to be "inclusive". Of everybody but their own citizens...
Countries that are today plagued by Mohammedan violence:
Nothing to see here. Move along.
"Such a man ... will spread confusion and disorder on the earth," the book says. "He will without the least compunction, shed blood, violate other men's rights, be cruel to them, and create disorder and destruction in the world. His perverted thoughts and ambitions, his blurred vision and disturbed scale of values, and his evil-spelling activities would make life bitter for him and for all around him."
That's a spot-on evaluation of a Muslim if you ask me.
Canadians Unite! Your leaders have capitulated.
Reminds me of the two definitions of "peace" circulating in "radical" circles during the Cold War.
One was "the absence of conflict."
The one popular with communists was "the absence of resistance to communist philosophy and policies."
Substitute "muslim" for "communist" and you have the new, improved daffynition (and, no, that's not a typo).
I suppose this post will qualify me for a muslin "reeducation camp" somewhere.
I'll take the jail time...
Not far at all. Remember James Ujama, that paragon of Islamic virtue now incarcerated for, among other things, trying to organize an Al Qaeda training camp in Oregon? Well it seems ol' James was arrested after starting an altercation at a Seattle Kinko's store in 1999. He eventually pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct charges, and was ordered to seek anger control treatment. Well, Ujama sought treatment, alright.
Among the documents seized at his arrest is correspondence filed with the Seattle court on Oct. 26, 1999 -- at about the same time Ujaama was allegedly promoting the jihad training camp idea. It reads:
"This letter is to confirm that Mr. Earnest James Ujaama has successfully completed 16 hours of anger management classes and counseling.... Mr. Ujaama was extremely patient, and showed kindness and courtesy to our staff and clients [at] all times. He was particularly energetic, outgoing, and willing to help. In short, Mr. Ujaama was outstanding to have work with us and will be missed sorely by all of us."
The letter satisfied the U.S. court's requirement. It was signed by Al Qaeda recruiter Abu Hamza, Finsbury Park Mosque, London.
Death To all Tyrant's !!
Snuff Saddam, NOW !!
The RATS Are In Disarray...Eradicate The Rodents !!
Fire Democrats, Hire Republicans !!
GWB Is The Man !!
The Second Amendment...
America's Original Homeland Security !!
Freedom Is Worth Fighting For !!
Let's Roll !!
Molon Labe !!
Mohammedi Is Counsel to a Group Accused of Condoning Terrorism BY BENJAMIN SMITH- A member of the citys Human Rights Commission is under fire for his position at a group that has been accused of condoning terrorism, and has peddled conspiracy theories about the September 11 attack.
Omar Mohammedi is general counsel to the New York chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations. He was appointed October 15 to be one of 14 members of the citys Human Rights Commission, charged with enforcing the citys anti-discrimination laws.Jewish leaders including another member of the Human Rights Commission yesterday criticized the appointment, while an Islamic group has launched a petition drive in support of Mr. Mohammedi.
The mayor is making a mistake, said a spokesman for the American Jewish Committee, Kenneth Bandler. This is an organization that condones terrorism and its officials should not be appointed to any government commission.Mr. Mohammedi, a lawyer who specializes in employment discrimination, did not return phone and e-mail messages.
A spokesman for Mayor Bloomberg, Edward Skyler, defended the appointment.We are appointing an individual, not an organization, Mr. Skyler said. This guy has never said a controversial thing in his life. Hes about as controversial as milquetoast.Mr. Skyler said the citys Department of Investigations had vetted Mr. Mohammedi, and the city also ran his name past federal officials at the State and the Treasury Departments.
Mr. Mohammedis main role with the Council on American Islamic Relations, CAIR, has been in aiding Muslims who have been questioned by the federal authorities. He has been very helpful in defending those whose rights have been trampled, said Al Haaj Ghazi Khankan, head of CAIRs New York chapter.
While Mr. Mohammedi has not been at the center of controversy, CAIR has long attracted criticism. People linked to the Palestinian militant group Hamas, which is on the State Departments list of terrorist organizations, founded the group in the early 1990s. Although its officials say they dont support terrorism, CAIR officials have defended Hamas and the Lebanese group Hezbollah.
Mr. Khankan did not return calls seeking his organizations positions on the Middle East conflict, but he was quoted in the Jewish Week last October making fine distinctions between Hamass killing of Israelis above and below the military age of 18.
Those who are below 18 should not be attacked, he said.The group has also circulated a petition calling on the federal government to unfreeze the finances of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development,
which has been accused of funneling money to Hamas. Mr. Skyler said CAIRs New York chapter is not as controversial as the national chapter. CAIRs most visible function in New York is defending Muslim civil rights. It has also lobbied against smoking and gay marriage.But one long-time critic of CAIR in Washington, Steven Emerson, called City Halls distinction ludicrous.
Thats like saying that the New York chapter of the KKK is not as controversial as the national chapter, he said.The New York chapters Web site displays an unusual response to the September 11 attacks, a letter to the editor of the New York Times written last October 5. The letter, which CAIR suggested its members send the paper, questions whether Mohammed Atta and other Muslims were responsible for the attacks and speculates on who really benefited echoing theories that the Bush administration or the Israelis orchestrated the attacks.
The important questions are: Who is impersonating these three Muslim Arabs? Why are Muslim Arabs been implicated in this terrorism? And, who could benefit from this horrific tragedy?
:it asks. Definitely mainstream Muslims by the consensus of Islamic religious scholars since the dawn of Al-Islaam could NOT be the culprits.CAIR was also the co-sponsor of a forum at Brooklyn College in 1998 where a crowd chanted No to the Jews, descendents of the apes.Another member of the Human Rights Commission, Rabbi Haskell Lookstein, yesterday raised questions about Mr. Mohammedis appointment.
If in fact CAIR does have close ties to known terrorist organizations, then the presence of its general counsel on the Human Rights Commission of New York City would seem to me very problematic, said Rabbi Lookstein.
The most elementary human right is the right to live and not to be blown to bits.Mr. Mohammedis ties to CAIR appear initially to have passed under the radar of most Jewish organizations. However, CAIRs national office sent out an appeal on October 17:Representatives of the pro-Israel lobby are pressuring officials to withdraw the appointment of Omar T. Mohammedi to the New York City Commission on Human Rights, the e-mail said.
Those who oppose Muslim political participation are using falsehoods and distortions to smear Islamic leaders in an attempt to silence our voice in this country. We call on the American Muslim community to send positive messages of support for Mr. Mohammedis appointment to New Yorks mayor and Commission on Human Rights, read the statement, quoting CAIRs executive director Nihad Awad.Mr. Skyler said the city received 200 letters in support of the appointment, and only one in opposition.A spokesman for the main office of CAIR in Washington, Ibrahim Hooper, called the controversy over Mr. Mohammedis appointment old news.
There were some objections raised from segments of the pro-Israel lobby, and they were basically rejected, he said. We think hes qualified, and obviously the city thought he was, too.
(U.N Human Rights Commission in very State now just look in your state phone book)
3/4 in U.S. want less Arab immigration Despite recent poll, government continues program 'importing Islam'
More than three-fourths of Americans want U.S. immigration laws tightened to allow fewer immigrants from Arab or Muslim nations into the country.
Instead, Washington pays to move Muslims to the United States.
According to a recent Worldviews 2002 survey, 76 percent of Americans say that "based on the events of Sept. 11, 2001, U.S. immigration laws should be tightened to restrict the number" of Arab or Muslim immigrants.
Also, 77 percent said they favored restricting immigration "in order to combat terrorism."
"Outside the terrorism context, opinion also tilts toward decreasing immigration in general, suggesting that the 9-11 attacks may have fueled a broad reaction against 'outsiders,'" said the survey.
Yet, under the (U.N) Refugee Act of 1980, the government's Office of Refuge Resettlement has set aside some $159 million in fiscal year 2002 for the resettlement of "refugees," including those from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Egypt and Somalia.
As of Aug. 27, 1,119 people have resettled this year from Afghanistan; one from Egypt; 446 from Iran; 216 from Iraq; three from Lebanon; 112 from Somalia; 381 from Sudan; and three from Syria.
"Of special concern [to Americans]," said the Worldviews survey, "is controlling and reducing illegal immigration, which 70 percent say should be a very important goal of U.S. foreign policy."
Additionally, said Worldviews researchers, despite press reports of rising anti-Americanism overseas, "Europeans and Americans are in broad agreement when it comes to the war on terrorism, Iraq and a host of other international issues."
Worldviews is a joint project between the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations and the German Marshall Fund of the United States, both U.S.-based public-policy organizations.
Meanwhile, Project USA, an immigration-reform group, reports that since October 2001 just a month after 9-11 the U.S. has spent about $17 million per month on resettling an average 1,671 refugees from around the world.
"Part of that money is disbursed in the form of outright cash payments to individual refugees, at least 20 percent of whom are Muslims," said an analysis issued by the group earlier this month.
"In other words," said the analysis, "even though an overwhelming percentage of Americans think that there should be less Muslim immigration to the United States, the federal government and the refugee-resettlement industry are importing Islam at $10,000 per Muslim."
The group says "the very first step in the war on terror is to end illegal immigration."
"The lack of serious effort to secure U.S. borders and enforce immigration law undermines administration claims that concern for the safety and security of the American people is driving the looming war with Iraq," said the analysis.
The Worldviews survey also said Americans' attitudes about Islam have become more wary since 9-11.
"The proportion of the public calling Islamic fundamentalism a critical threat to vital U.S. interests has jumped 23 points to 61 percent, putting it in seventh position out of 20 threats ranked," said the survey.
Additionally, "four out of 10 Americans say that the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon 'represent the true teachings of Islam' 'to a great degree' (21 percent) or 'to some degree' (18 percent)."
Despite new concerns about Muslims and Arabs, however, only slightly more than one in four Americans (27 percent) say they believe a "clash of civilizations" between Islam and the West is inevitable.
So would I.
And I would compile a list of Muslim crimes through history while in jail to pass the time.
That would require several life sentences!
And let them lock me away, while they enjoy the life of a Ceausescu?
I don't think so...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.