How Can People Be So Stupid? Rotating Header Image

October, 2010:

Even A Broken Clock Is Correct Twice A Day. Soros Recommends Legalizing Pot

Oct 28th, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

I never thought I would agree with anything said by the loony billionaire George Soros. But, I never used to think that any president could be worse than Jimmy Carter. Obama proved that idea wrong, and George Soros’ recent coming out in support of legalizing marijuana gave me another lesson in humility. Of course, as a libertarian, I don’t think that most drugs should be “illegal”. Lets face it, “fighting” drugs is just a revenue source for the FBI, DEA, and local police forces. Just like prohibition did not prevent people from getting alcohol and only served to line the pockets of the gangsters, people who want to smoke weed are going to get it and smoke it. And, from what I have seen (and I certainly don’t claim much knowledge in this area) the effects of marijuana on a person’s life is probably much less than the effects of alcohol.  In any case, since people are going to get it and smoke it, it seems only natural that government should make it legal and tax it, as proposed by Arnold Schwarzenegger and California’s Proposition 19. It is estimated that if marijuana was legalized and taxed that California, alone, could raise over $1 billion in tax revenues. Even today, with marijuana illegal, it represents $14 billion in income to California residents, but no federal or state tax revenue is realized on that income since it is illegal. (And, lets remember that much of that $14 billion is almost certainly going to “homeless” and “unemployed” “workers” who are sucking at the teat of mother California for welfare, unemployment benefits and food stamps. In fact, at $14 billion, marijuana, today, while illegal, far surpasses the legitimate, taxable income from California wine merchants, who make a paltry $2 billion in income from selling wine.)

Now, lets look at the situation in Mexico. Mexico, by any rational standard, is a failed state. (It is not much different than Pakistan, except that (fortunately) it is not a Muslim nation and it does not have nukes.) Over 30,000 Mexicans have been killed in the last 2 years, alone, in drug-related violence. Police are quitting because they are outgunned by the drug lords. Even the United States government is putting up signs in parts of the United States that warn people to not be in certain areas because they are dangerous. Thus, again, the United States government is shunning it’s responsibility of protecting it’s citizens and bowing to foreign pressures. (In this case, drug gangs and lords.)

The powers that be exported many of the good American jobs to China, India, Indonesia, Viet Nam, and other countries a few years ago. Those jobs are not coming back. America is facing the highest unemployment since the Great Depression. (And, don’t believe the “official” figures of about 10%; the real unemployment rate is closer to 20%, because many of the unemployed are not reported, or have ceased being reported because they just gave up or lost unemployment benefits, or retired early.) If marijuana was legalized, it would represent the ultimate “work at home” business. But, unlike most internet “work at home” scams involving “medical transcription” or selling “male performance enhancement pills”, this could really offer employment opportunities, since virtually anyone could set up a marijuana farm in their basement,  attic,  or spare bedroom. And, as long as prices remain high, they could make a pretty good living, thus having to pay pretty good taxes. Of course, once it is legalized, the price would drop dramatically, but that would have the effect of neutralizing Mexican drug cartels, as well as domestic drug gangs. It would also take a huge burden off the prison system in the United States, which is clogged with people arrested for petty drug crimes.

So, I say legalize pot. We need all of the entrepreneurs that we can find. It would be nice if those entrepreneurs were involved in new technology, but the democrats have destroyed the educational system in the United States to the point where we don’t produce many thinking people, much less entrepreneurs. We need to produce at least some people who make more in income than they consume from the public teat.

Muslims Desecrate Bibles. Where Are The Christian Rioters?

Oct 28th, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

Of course, we would not expect any, since Christians are not 7th century Barbarians, like a significant percentage of Muslims appear to be. This story took place in a Catholic school in Malawi. It seems that the Gideons gave free copies of the New Testament to any students at the school who wanted them. Although at a Catholic school, in a predominantly Christian nation, the Muslim students went on a rampage. (They must just like to go into a rage, no matter what the cause.) (In this part of the country, apparently the Muslims comprise 75% of the population, so I guess they consider the people at a Catholic school to just be dhimmis who should “respect” Islam.)  The article reports:

Although the school’s director had made it absolutely clear that no New Testaments were to be given to the Muslim pupils and that in no way was any student obliged to take a copy of the book, there was a subsequent uproar on the part of some Muslim youths, who tore up the New Testaments, threw them, howling at their teachers, and then threw the torn-up pages out onto the streets.

Some of the pupils, who live in a nearby Islamic hostel, denounced the New Testament distribution to their religious leaders as an “insult to Islam” and claimed they had been forced to accept them. Which in the following days resulted in Catholics fearing violent attacks by Muslim groups, said the priest.

Moreover, in a subsequent report by the local daily, ‘The Nation’, of which ACN has secured a copy, the events were falsely portrayed as though the copies of the New Testament had been distributed to the Muslim pupils as well. No Christian witnesses were interviewed in the report and none of the Muslims interviewed were actual eyewitnesses of the events. It was also asserted in the report that it was the parents of the pupils who had torn up the books.

Later in the article, Father Chimbwanya made a very astute observation about the danger this type of activity portends.

Father Chimbwanya went on to explain to ACN that “the behaviour of the youths has been an indicator of a danger in our midst. Normally, the Primary school youth in Malawi would not have the courage to tear up any book in the presence of their teacher, let alone a Holy Book. My conclusion is that there must be some awful training given to these youths which if left unchecked, means that we may have dangerous militants in Malawi in the near future.”

He is exactly correct. Once the Muslim population reaches a critical mass in the whole country, they will expect the country to officially become a Muslim nation and live under Sharia rule, which is exactly how Islam has been spread for over 1300 years.

Great Debate Between Pamela Geller and Ground Zero Mosque Proponents

Oct 24th, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

It is no secret that I oppose the Islamist, supremacist mosque that Imam Rauf wants to build at ground zero. The fact that morons like Obama and Mayor Bloomberg supposedly don’t get it (the opposition to the mosque) is astonishing. Of course, it is all about their desire for votes and their fear of “offending” anyone. Never mind that 3000 people were butchered at the ground zero site by Islam. The people who committed that atrocity were, by any rational account, some of the best, and most pious Muslims, in the world. They did as Mohammad commanded.

But, these politicians want and need votes, so they sugarcoat the issue with claims that “they” (Muslim Brotherhood) have the “right” to build a mosque at ground zero. OF COURSE THEY HAVE THE RIGHT; but that DOES NOT MAKE IT RIGHT.

It all became very clear when an obscure pastor in Florida wanted to have “burn a Koran day” and burn a few Korans. In a normal world, you would say, so what? A goofy Christian pastor wants to burn a few Korans, so what? But, it was blown up into an international incident, with everyone from General Petraeus to Hilary Clinton to Barack Obama chiming in that it was “wrong” for him to do it, and actually spending their time, and taxpayer money, to do everything possible to convince him to stop. Personally, I think we need more “burn a Koran” days, and more things like “Everybody Draw Mohammad“. But, what was the problem? If he had declared that he wanted to burn a few Bibles, would the world have taken notice? Of course not. The only reason his proposal attracted attention was because many people feared that Muslims the world over would go into their usual “riot and pillage” stage.

Well, who is to be blamed for that? The person who wants to publish a cartoon or burn a Koran, or the morons who go into the rape, riot, and pillage stage at the slightest provocation? Of course, any sane person knows that it is the latter. Clearly we are not dealing with normal, healthy, rational people when we are dealing with Muslims. Muslims go into riot mode at the slightest provocation, while the people of the civilized world just shrug off perceived insults, like the “piss Christ“.

So, we have a debate on Fox News between various people, including Pamela Geller of the Atlas Shrugs blog, and Ahmed Rehab of CAIR. (I call them the Conspiring Assortment of Islamist Reactionaries, but they are officially know as the “Council on American Islamic Relations”.) They were an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism funding case, but that footnote has apparently been stupidly removed by the Obama justice department in the last few days, just as the Muslim Brotherhood (the parent organization) officially declared war on the West.

He debates Pamela Geller in this Fox News video. It is very interesting and well worth viewing.

By the way, if you want to know what Rehab was talking about in connection to Mohammad Condoms, I have it here. It was clearly a joke; much like a Saturday Night Live skit. But, I guess Rehab thought it was some sort of serious commentary. Maybe he needs “rehab”.

Germany and the Failure of Multiculturalism

Oct 22nd, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

Germany and the Failure of Multiculturalism is republished with permission of STRATFOR.

By George Friedman

German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared at an Oct. 16 meeting of young members of her party, the Christian Democratic Union, that multiculturalism, or Multikulti, as the Germans put it, “has failed totally.” Horst Seehofer, minister-president of Bavaria and the chairman of a sister party to the Christian Democrats, said at the same meeting that the two parties were “committed to a dominant German culture and opposed to a multicultural one.” Merkel also said that the flood of immigrants is holding back the German economy, although Germany does need more highly trained specialists, as opposed to the laborers who have sought economic advantages in Germany.

The statements were striking in their bluntness and their willingness to speak of a dominant German culture, a concept that for obvious reasons Germans have been sensitive about asserting since World War II. The statement should be taken with utmost seriousness and considered for its social and geopolitical implications. It should also be considered in the broader context of Europe’s response to immigration, not to Germany’s response alone.

The Origins of the German Immigration Question

Let’s begin with the origins of the problem. Post-World War II Germany faced a severe labor shortage for two reasons: a labor pool depleted by the devastating war — and by Soviet prisoner-of-war camps — and the economic miracle that began on the back of revived industry in the 1950s. Initially, Germany was able to compensate by admitting ethnic Germans fleeing Central Europe and Communist East Germany. But the influx only helped assuage the population loss from World War II. Germany needed more labor to feed its burgeoning export-based industry, and in particular more unskilled laborers for manufacturing, construction and other industries.

To resolve the continuing labor shortage, Germany turned to a series of successive labor recruitment deals, first with Italy (1955). After labor from Italy dried up due to Italy’s own burgeoning economy, Germany turned to Spain (1960), Greece (1960), Turkey (1961) and then Yugoslavia (1968). Labor recruitment led to a massive influx of “Gastarbeiter,” German for “guest workers,” into German society. The Germans did not see this as something that would change German society: They regarded the migrants as temporary labor, not as immigrants in any sense. As the term implied, the workers were guests and would return to their countries of origin when they were no longer needed (many Spaniards, Italians and Portuguese did just this). This did not particularly trouble the Germans, who were primarily interested in labor.

The Germans simply didn’t expect this to be a long-term issue. They did not consider how to assimilate these migrants, a topic that rarely came up in policy discussions. Meanwhile, the presence of migrant labor allowed millions of Germans to move from unskilled labor to white-collar jobs during the 1960s.

An economic slowdown in 1966 and full-on recession following the oil shock of 1973 changed labor conditions in Germany. Germany no longer needed a steady stream of unskilled labor and actually found itself facing mounting unemployment among migrants already in country, leading to the “Anwerbestopp,” German for “labor recruitment stop,” in 1973.

Nonetheless, the halt in migration did not resolve the fact that guest workers already were in Germany in great numbers, migrants who now wanted to bring in family members. The 1970s saw most migration switch to “family reunions” and, when the German government moved to close that loophole, asylum. As the Italians, Spanish and Portuguese returned home to tend to their countries’ own successive economic miracles, Muslim Turks became the overwhelming majority of migrants in Germany — particularly as asylum seekers flocked into Germany, most of whom were not fleeing any real government retribution. It did not help that Germany had particularly open asylum laws in large part due to guilt over the Holocaust, a loophole Turkish migrants exploited en masse following the 1980 coup d’etat in Turkey.

As the migrants transformed from a temporary exigency to a multigenerational community, the Germans had to confront the problem. At base, they did not want the migrants to become part of Germany. But if they were to remain in the country, Berlin wanted to make sure the migrants became loyal to Germany. The onus on assimilating migrants into the larger society increased as Muslim discontent rocked Europe in the 1980s. The solution Germans finally agreed upon in the mid-to-late 1980s was multiculturalism, a liberal and humane concept that offered migrants a grand bargain: Retain your culture but pledge loyalty to the state.

In this concept, Turkish immigrants, for example, would not be expected to assimilate into German culture. Rather, they would retain their own culture, including language and religion, and that culture would coexist with German culture. Thus, there would be a large number of foreigners, many of whom could not speak German and by definition did not share German and European values.

While respecting diversity, the policy seemed to amount to buying migrant loyalty. The deeper explanation was that the Germans did not want, and did not know how, to assimilate culturally, linguistically, religiously and morally diverse people. Multiculturalism did not so much represent respect for diversity as much as a way to escape the question of what it meant to be German and what pathways foreigners would follow to become Germans.

Two Notions of Nation

This goes back to the European notion of the nation, which is substantially different from the American notion. For most of its history, the United States thought of itself as a nation of immigrants, but with a core culture that immigrants would have to accept in a well-known multicultural process. Anyone could become an American, so long as they accepted the language and dominant culture of the nation. This left a lot of room for uniqueness, but some values had to be shared. Citizenship became a legal concept. It required a process, an oath and shared values. Nationality could be acquired; it had a price.

To be French, Polish or Greek meant not only that you learned their respective language or adopted their values — it meant that you were French, Polish or Greek because your parents were, as were their parents. It meant a shared history of suffering and triumph. One couldn’t acquire that.

For the Europeans, multiculturalism was not the liberal and humane respect for other cultures that it pretended to be. It was a way to deal with the reality that a large pool of migrants had been invited as workers into the country. The offer of multiculturalism was a grand bargain meant to lock in migrant loyalty in exchange for allowing them to keep their culture — and to protect European culture from foreign influences by sequestering the immigrants. The Germans tried to have their workers and a German identity simultaneously. It didn’t work.

Multiculturalism resulted in the permanent alienation of the immigrants. Having been told to keep their own identity, they did not have a shared interest in the fate of Germany. They identified with the country they came from much more than with Germany. Turkey was home. Germany was a convenience. It followed that their primary loyalty was to their home and not to Germany. The idea that a commitment to one’s homeland culture was compatible with a political loyalty to the nation one lived in was simplistic. Things don’t work that way. As a result, Germany did not simply have an alien mass in its midst: Given the state of affairs between the Islamic world and the West, at least some Muslim immigrants were engaged in potential terrorism.

Multiculturalism is profoundly divisive, particularly in countries that define the nation in European terms, e.g., through nationality. What is fascinating is that the German chancellor has chosen to become the most aggressive major European leader to speak out against multiculturalism. Her reasons, political and social, are obvious. But it must also be remembered that this is Germany, which previously addressed the problem of the German nation via the Holocaust. In the 65 years since the end of World War II, the Germans have been extraordinarily careful to avoid discussions of this issue, and German leaders have not wanted to say things such as being committed to a dominant German culture. We therefore need to look at the failure of multiculturalism in Germany in another sense, namely, with regard to what is happening in Germany.

Simply put, Germany is returning to history. It has spent the past 65 years desperately trying not to confront the question of national identity, the rights of minorities in Germany and the exercise of German self-interest. The Germans have embedded themselves in multinational groupings like the European Union and NATO to try to avoid a discussion of a simple and profound concept: nationalism. Given what they did last time the matter came up, they are to be congratulated for their exercise of decent silence. But that silence is now over.

The Re-emergence of German Nation Awareness

Two things have forced the re-emergence of German national awareness. The first, of course, is the immediate issue — a large and indigestible mass of Turkish and other Muslim workers. The second is the state of the multinational organizations to which Germany tried to confine itself. NATO, a military alliance consisting mainly of countries lacking militaries worth noting, is moribund. The second is the state of the European Union. After the Greek and related economic crises, the certainties about a united Europe have frayed. Germany now sees itself as shaping EU institutions so as not to be forced into being the European Union’s ultimate financial guarantor. And this compels Germany to think about Germany beyond its relations with Europe.

It is impossible for Germany to reconsider its position on multiculturalism without, at the same time, validating the principle of the German nation. Once the principle of the nation exists, so does the idea of a national interest. Once the national interest exists, Germany exists in the context of the European Union only as what Goethe termed an “elective affinity.” What was a certainty amid the Cold War now becomes an option. And if Europe becomes an option for Germany, then not only has Germany re-entered history, but given that Germany is the leading European power, the history of Europe begins anew again.

This isn’t to say that Germany must follow any particular foreign policy given its new official view on multiculturalism; it can choose many paths. But an attack on multiculturalism is simultaneously an affirmation of German national identity. You can’t have the first without the second. And once that happens, many things become possible.

Consider that Merkel made clear that Germany needed 400,000 trained specialists. Consider also that Germany badly needs workers of all sorts who are not Muslims living in Germany, particularly in view of Germany’s demographic problems. If Germany can’t import workers for social reasons, it can export factories, call centers, medical analysis and IT support desks. Not far to the east is Russia, which has a demographic crisis of its own but nonetheless has spare labor capacity due to its reliance on purely extractive natural resources for its economy. Germany already depends on Russian energy. If it comes to rely on Russian workers, and in turn Russia comes to rely on German investment, then the map of Europe could be redrawn once again and European history restarted at an even greater pace.

Merkel’s statement is therefore of enormous importance on two levels. First, she has said aloud what many leaders already know, which is that multiculturalism can become a national catastrophe. Second, in stating this, she sets in motion other processes that could have a profound impact on not only Germany and Europe but also the global balance of power. It is not clear at this time what her intention is, which may well be to boost her center-right coalition government’s abysmal popularity. But the process that has begun is neither easily contained nor neatly managed. All of Europe, indeed, much of the world, is coping with the struggle between cultures within their borders. But the Germans are different, historically and geographically. When they begin thinking these thoughts, the stakes go up.

Read more: Germany and the Failure of Multiculturalism | STRATFOR

Gay Military Issues Miss The Point: Soldiers Should Not Be Forced To Be Exposed To Aids

Oct 20th, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

OK, here we go. I can hear the objections even as I write this. “What a racist you are! How atrocious you are, equating aids to the gay population!” Of course, just like we all know that “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslim”, we know that the truth of the situation is that most people with aids are gay men. I knew this years ago, and still remember reading the book The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS: How a Tragedy Has Been Distorted by the Media and Partisan Politics by Michael Fumento. Of course, it was not a popular book back then, since speaking the truth is often not politically correct.

For years we have been hearing how “wrong” it is to block the noble gay people from serving their country in the military. While we have been pilloried with stories about how great some gay people are, and American children are repeatedly taught how great it is that “Billy has two daddies and Sally has two mommies” (never mind that nobody can read or write beyond what used to be a 4th grade level), nobody talks about how Billy might not want to help Johnny after Johnny got shot, because Johnny just might give Billy aids, because Johnny is gay and has aids! The truth is simple; most people with aids are gay men. Period. (Except for Africans, but that situation is a whole other catastrophe being spread by religious morons, like “Mother Theresa”, that are more concerned with spreading religious dogma than in helping humanity, by denying the use of condoms to the poor, stupid, and uneducated.)

Lets face it. If you are in the service, you are going to be in close, intimate contact with other human beings. That was one reason for not allowing women into the service. Men and women would have to function in close proximity to each other without feeling sexual feelings. Of course, today, women can serve in the military. And, everybody knows that there have been sexual issues; many have resulted in problems, like pregnancy and jealous rivalries. But, that has been glossed over, and we will ignore it for now. Just imagine that men and women serve equally in the military, and there is never a problem between them because of sexual attraction.

But, when we talk about gays serving in the military, we have another problem. Not only is there the problem that Juan may be lusting after Billy as he takes a shower, but now Billy has to be honestly worried for his life if Juan gets shot, or otherwise injured in a way that involves bleeding.

Just think. 30 years ago, if you went to the doctor, or nurse, they took your blood. Period. Now, they generally wear rubber gloves, unless they know your medical history thoroughly. Why is that? Well, as you know, it is because they are afraid that you might have aids and will give it to them. The simple fact of the matter is that most of the people in the United States who have aids are gay men. Get over it! But, if you are in the military, you must be prepared to help your fellow soldier who may be injured and bleeding. But, are you, as a soldier, issued rubber gloves in case you ever have to help your fellow soldier when they are bleeding? No. Thus, soldiers, while naturally expected to come to the aid of their fellow soldiers when they are injured, are being asked to take their own lives even more into risk by helping a fellow soldier because that soldier may be a gay soldier with aids.

No, you won’t here it expressed this way by the government. You certainly won’t here this in the main stream media. After all, they can’t even explain the motivation of Maj. Nidal Hasan for shooting to death 13 people while shouting “Allahu Akbar!”, although even the village idiot knows that he did it because he was an Islamist. But, this is the simple truth.

Those Who Say Temps and CO2 Have Never Been Higher Have Some ‘Splainin To Do

Oct 17th, 2010
by EdTroy.
1 comment


OK, I don’t want this to be a long and detailed post. And, I am not going to waste the time and energy to make the graphs easy to understand, since I realize that most people are totally illiterate when it comes to math and science anyway. Thus, they believe the total bullshit handed out in “schools” and by the government. (If they would only think, and realize that the only real purpose of any government, whether that of the United States or the UN, is the total control of people and money, they would realize that global warming was a creation of the globalists so as to be able to control your lives and your fortunes.)

But, here are some data points to look at. Now, you must understand that “today” is on the right side of the graph. In other words, the left side of the graph was 525 million years ago. (OK, I realize I just lost at least 40% of stupid Americans, including Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin, who believe the earth has only been here for 6500 years and that man used to walk among the dinosaurs just like Fred Flintstone; I could only dream that scientific literacy was a prerequisite for voting. But, as George Bush has shown with his total lack of scientific literacy, believing that a few cells in a petrie dish is human being, it is sadly allowable for the leader of the free world to be scientifically illiterate.)
Anyway, getting back to the graph. A long time ago is on the left. The present is on the right. Even more confusing is the scale for temperature. I don’t know why the authors did their graph this way, but they did. In the middle graph, high temperatures (greenhouse) are toward the bottom of the graph, while low temperatures (icehouse) are towards the top of the graph. Knowing that, it is obvious that it is becoming warmer, because you see the temperature graph going down on the right-hand end. But, what is more important is the fact that it is usually much warmer than it is today. (Around 22C vs about 15C today.) It is also clear that the cooler periods (icehouse), like we are now leaving, are shorter-lived than the greenhouse periods that have dominated climate over the last 525 million years. So, you can instantly see that not only has it been warmer before, but it has been warmer most of the time before.
Now, lets look at another fallacy of the global warmingistas. They claim that CO2 has never been higher. Well, if you look at CO2 concentrations, in parts per million (ppm) on the top graph, you see that CO2 is almost 0 today. The last time it was that low was about 250 million years ago! In the last 150 million years, CO2 concentration has decreased, almost steadily, from about 2000 ppm to about 300 ppm today. The slight rise from 300 to 330 ppm is meaningless in terms of the total range of CO2 over the last 525 million years. If you look at the graph, there is NO correlation between temperature and CO2. However, if you look at the graph, there does appear to be a very good correlation between GCR (galactic cosmic rays) and temperature. You will see that about 20 million years after GCR levels peak, temperature dips to minimums (icehouse). Similarly, a few dozen million years after GCR levels decrease, temperatures peak out at the “greenhouse” levels.
I believe that the global warmingistas do not understand climate change. They have admitted as much in the climate gate e-mails, since they said that they can’t explain a number of lacks of correlation between temperature and CO2 levels. What we have been “seeing” over the last 30 to even 200 years is nothing more than “decimal dust” as a friend of mine used to say. If nothing else, this single set of graphs clearly shows that there is NO significant long term correlation between CO2 and temperature, that temperatures have not only been much higher than they are today, but that higher temperatures have been the norm, and CO2 levels have also been much higher in the past.
Is it possible that we are in for an extended period of global warming? The graphs would seem to indicate that. The fact that the earth has usually been warmer than it is today would seem to indicate that. But, the critical thing to remember is that these are NATURAL changes. Spending trillions of dollars on the reduction of carbon dioxide will do nothing to change things, because it is not the root cause of climate change. That money and those regulations are only a way for governments and the UN to cripple and enslave the people of the world. 10 or 20 years from now, the climate will be what the climate will be, no matter what regulations and taxes are imposed on the population of the world. The only difference will be that some people will be poorer for the taxation and some will be richer. The temperature will be what the temperature will be.

Islam Is A Religion Of Peace. Ayaan Hirsi Ali Spanks Muslim Apologists In Debate

Oct 17th, 2010
by EdTroy.
2 comments

This was a great debate sponsored by Intelligence Squared. In this debate, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Douglas Murray debated Zeba Khan and Maajid Nawaz. The topic was, “Islam Is A Religion Of Peace”. The audience, which contained some Muslims, was asked to vote on that statement both before and after the debate. Before the debate, the results to the question “Islam is a religion of peace” were the following:

Yes 41%

No 25%

Undecided 34%

After the debate, the results were rather startling.

Yes 36%

No 55%

Undecided 9%

Clearly, many who were undecided were convinced that Islam is not a religion of peace, while even some who thought that it was had their minds changed.

I have to admit that the debaters who were “for” Islam being a religion of peace were not what I would claim are “mainstream” Muslims. Zeba Khan heads up an organization called “Muslim Americans for Obama”. The fact that she was “for” Obama makes her politics somewhat suspect, to me. But, besides that, the fact that her parents sent her to a Hebrew school, and that she learned Hebrew, makes her, in my opinion, not a typical, mainstream Muslim. And, of course, she was not displaying many of the “habits” displayed by Muslim women, like wearing a headscarf. While she may profess to being a “Muslim”, I would say that she is probably pretty far from the mainstream Muslim women, even in the United States, although I am sure there are hundreds of thousands of women like her in the United States, and several million in the rest of the world. But, since there are 1.57 billion Muslims in the world, if you assume that 1/2 are women, that leaves a few hundred million Muslim women who are probably not accurately portrayed by Zeba Khan. Maajid Hawaz was a former terrorist from the United Kingdom, by his own admission. He said he was saved by Amnesty International while doing time in an Egyptian jail for an arrest on terrorism charges. Again, not your typical “Muslim”, although certainly closer to the jihad than Zeba.

Those stating that Islam is not a religion of peace were Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Douglas Murray. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the famous Muslim apostate that fled her native Somalia and ended up in the Netherlands as a Parliamentarian after a long journey though various countries. Her life’s adventures and her escape from Islam are documented in her excellent books Infidel, Nomad: From Islam to America: A Personal Journey Through the Clash of Civilizations, and The Caged Virgin: An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam She and Theo van Gogh made the short film “Submission“, for which Theo van Gogh was brutally murdered by a Muslim. The note explaining his butchering was attached to his chest with the knife that killed him. Since that time, Ayaan Hirsi Ali has been constantly under the protection of police and body guards. She now lives in the United States, again, under 24 hour protection. (It was brought up during the debate that all attendees had to go through metal detectors to attend the debate; certainly not something speaking to the peace and tranquility of Islam.)

The case against Islam being a religion of peace was very strong and it obviously swayed the opinions of many of the people in the audience. It is an excellent debate. In it you will see the honesty of the people who know that Islam is not, and never was, a religion of peace and the typical deceptions of the apologists, ranging from “you don’t understand Arabic, and thus mis-translate the Koran”, to arguments that what Mohammad did (like marrying a 6 year old girl) are taken “out of context” since this is the 21st century and that was the 7th century. (Like, it was ever appropriate for a 50 something male to marry a 6 year old girl. And, unfortunately, although the Ayatollah Khomeini of modern Iran was discussed, Ali and Murray missed a great opportunity by not pointing out that he married a 10 year old girl when he was 28, in the 20th century, and said that it was a “divine blessing” to have a prepubescent bride. He further said “Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house.” Even today, the legal age for marriage for girls in Iran is 9.) (1)

I’ve written previously about the marriage, in Gaza, of prepubescent girls to men.

Anyway, it was a great and important debate. Watch it.

ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE from Intelligence Squared US on Vimeo.

1. “Religion of peace?: why Christianity is and Islam isn’t” by Robert Spencer, p 187.

American Physical Society Fellow Resigns Over APS Refusal To Look Into The Science Of Global Warming

Oct 12th, 2010
by EdTroy.
3 comments

I knew about this resignation letter a few days ago, because I, along with Professor Lewis and a couple of hundred other scientists, were signatories to several petitions to the American Physical Society to get them to actually look into the science of man-made global warming with an open mind. The APS has an official position on global warming that basically says that it is real and there is no doubt about it. Any scientist who tells you that we know everything and that there is no chance for doubt is not really a scientist. Science, by definition, is the search for answers. As soon as we put on the blinders and refuse to examine the evidence with an open mind, especially when the existing theories do not fit reality, science becomes nothing more than religion based on faith, not science based on reason and reality. This attitude of the APS did not change even after the totally damning revelations of the “Climate-gate” e-mails that clearly showed that science was taking a back seat to politics and money. (And, don’t forget, one of those very e-mails admitted that the data did not fit the theory, and that was “embarrassing”.

I did not make the letter of resignation public at the time, because I did not know if Professor Lewis meant it to be made public. But, no less than the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), itself, has published the letter of resignation. I will still not publish it in it’s entirety, but you can, and should, read it at the IPCC site link.

I have to admit that I thought it was one of the best letters of resignation that I have ever seen. And, I think he stated the position of myself and tens of thousands of other scientists, when he stated his reason for resigning from the APS after being a member for 67 years.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.

That is a strong condemnation coming from a Fellow of the APS. I especially liked the way that he pointed out that Professor Curtis Callan of Princeton University, who is president of the APS, is dependent upon global warming for several millions of dollars a year in grants from the government to study it. And, of course, he is just one of thousands of scientists who depend upon the bogey man of global warming for all, or a good portion, of their government funding. It makes me laugh when scientists such as myself, who have looked at the evidence both for and against global warming and come away with a very strong conviction that global warming is all about a vast transfer of wealth and not about the scientific method, are accused of being in the “back pocket” of big oil. I wish I was, but I am not, and never have been. If nothing else, anyone who reads the Climate-gate e-mails in even a cursory manor and who has even a passing knowledge of the scientific method can see that what was happening had nothing to do with the scientific method and everything to do with “cooking the books”. (And, I think “cooking” is a good word to use in the case of global warming.)

When one looks at even the most simplistic frauds involved in the “science of global warming”, such as Al Gore’s vaunted Vostok ice core data, it becomes obvious that CO2 does not cause global warming. I have even shown that if you take Al Gore’s own data, and present it in a scientific and coherent manner, not in the fraudulent 3rd grade science class method used by Gore, that CO2 does not drive temperature. If anything, temperature might drive CO2, but it is clear that CO2 does not drive temperature.

And, after you read Professor Hal Lewis’ resignation letter, be sure you look at his brief biography. He is one of the most distinguished physicists in the world, not some fringe kook.

Muslim Brotherhood Officially Declares War On The West

Oct 11th, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

Personally, I thought they had declared war on us a long time ago, but I guess I was thinking of the war on the infidels declared by Osama bin Laden in 1996. But, as I have pointed out several times, it is time we recognized that we are at war with Islam and state as much. Also, as I’ve said, anyone is free in the United States to practice whatever religion they want to practice, and that goes for Muslims as well. BUT, and here is where the problem lies, Islam is not just a religion. It is an ideology; a totalitarian, brutal, supremacist, waring, misogynistic, and barbarian ideology. And, it is this ideology and the barbaric system of laws and government called Sharia that must be stopped if the West is to survive. The Gloria Center just announced that the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, the most dangerous Muslim organization in the world, with hundreds of times more members than al Qaeda, especially when you realize that supposedly “mainstream” organizations like CAIR are nothing but fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood, officially declared war on the West a few days ago. And, as I have pointed our here and here, the Muslim Brotherhood is very much alive and well in the United States.

The article from the Gloria Center, by Barry Rubin starts out:

This is one of those obscure  Middle East events of the utmost significance that is ignored by the Western mass media, especially because they happen in Arabic, not English; by Western governments, because they don’t fit their policies; and by experts, because they don’t mesh with their preconceptions.

This explicit formulation of a revolutionary program makes it a game-changer. It should be read by every Western decision maker and have a direct effect on policy because this development may affect people’s lives in every Western country.

OK, enough of a build-up? Well, it isn’t exaggerated. So don’t think the next sentence is an anticlimax. Here we go: The leader of the Muslim Brotherhood has endorsed (Arabic) (English translation by MEMRI) anti-American Jihad and pretty much every element in the al-Qaida ideology book. Since the Brotherhood is the main opposition force in Egypt and Jordan as well as the most powerful group, both politically and religiously, in the Muslim communities of Europe and North America this is pretty serious stuff.

By the way, no one can argue that he merely represents old, tired policies of the distant past because the supreme guide who said these things was elected just a few months ago. His position reflects current thinking.

Does that mean the Egyptian, Jordanian, and all the camouflaged Muslim Brotherhood fronts in Europe and North America are going to launch terrorism as one of their affiliates, Hamas, has long done? No.

But it does mean that something awaited for decades has happened: the Muslim Brotherhood is ready to move from the era of propaganda and base-building to one of revolutionary action. At least, its hundreds of thousands of followers are being given that signal. Some of them will engage in terrorist violence as individuals or forming splinter groups; others will redouble their efforts to seize control of their countries and turn them into safe areas for terrorists and instruments for war on the West.

When the extreme and arguably marginal British Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary says that Islam will conquer the West and raise its flag over the White House, that can be treated as wild rhetoric. His remark is getting lots of attention because he said it in English in an interview with CNN. Who cares what he says?

That recent CNN video is below.

But when the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood says the same thing in Arabic, that’s a program for action, a call to arms for hundreds of thousands of people, and a national security threat to every Western country.

If you go to the actual declaration of war by Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Muhammad Badi as translated from Arabic to English by MEMRI, you find several interesting quotes, including the ones below.

“Many Arab and Muslim regimes have not managed to build up their peoples, due to their weakness and their dependence [on the West], and in many cases they have begun to work against the interests of the [Muslim] nation… The lands of the Arabs and of Islam are now plagued with problems because [the Arabs] have lost their [strength of] will, leaving it to the Zionist enemies and their supporters. [The Arab and Muslim regimes] have forgotten, or are pretending to have forgotten, that the real enemy lying in wait for them is the Zionist entity. They are aiming their weapons against their own peoples, while avoiding any confrontation with these Zionists and achieving neither unity nor revival for their nations. Moreover, they are disregarding Allah’s commandment to wage jihad for His sake with [their] money and [their] lives, so that Allah’s word will reign supreme and the infidels’ word will be inferior…

“Today the Muslims desperately need a mentality of honor and means of power [that will enable them] to confront global Zionism. [This movement] knows nothing but the language of force, so [the Muslims] must meet iron with iron, and winds with [even more powerful] storms. They crucially need to understand that the improvement and change that the [Muslim] nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death just as the enemies pursue life.”

I guess that sort of puts to bed as a lie the  favorite pronouncements of the politicos of the West and the main stream media that Islam is a “religion of peace” and that “jihad” just refers to an inner spiritual struggle. Later in his declaration of war, Badi states:

Islam Is Capable of Confronting Oppression and Tyranny… The Outcome of the Confrontation Has Been Predetermined by Allah”

“The Muslim nation has the means [to bring about] improvement and change… It knows the way, the methods, and the road signs, and it has a practical role model in Allah’s Messenger, [the Prophet Muhammad]… who clarified how to implement the values of the [Koran] and the Sunna at every time and in every place. In addition, we have the histories of the ancient prophets, and of the rise and fall of [previous] nations…

“Allah said: ‘The hosts will all be routed and will turn and flee [Koran 54:45].’ This verse is a promise to the believers that they shall defeat their enemies, and [that the enemies] shall withdraw. The Companions of the Prophet received this Koranic promise in Mecca, when they were weak… and a little more than nine years after the Hijra, Allah fulfilled his promise in the Battle of Badr… Can we compare that to what happened in Gaza?

“Today we see how much the [Muslim] nation needs unity… O Muslim nation, unite! O sons of Palestine, unite, all of you, in the face of the enemies who scheme against you, and know that Allah is the best of schemers, and that though Him you shall triumph. [Know that] Islam is capable of confronting oppression and tyranny, and that the outcome of the confrontation has been predetermined by Allah.”

It is interesting to note that the article on the MEMRI site also stated that the Palestinian Authority condemned the speech, while the speech stated that a 3rd Intifada was about to be launched by Hamas in Palestine. Recent articles posted by both DebkaFile and Stratfor report that al-Qaeda has threatened attacks in Lebanon if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visits Lebanon on October 13 and 14, as planned. Hezbollah’s chief Hassan Nasrallah has stated that it would stand up to al Qaeda if they attacked in Lebanon. At the same time, Debkafile is stating that Hezbollah plans to topple the Lebanese government of Saad Hariri immediately after Ahmadnejad’s visit. This, obviously, could be the start of the Middle East war that I have been anticipating for several years. We should have taken out Iran’s nuclear facilities years ago. Now, the war that will almost certainly occur in the next month or two will be far worse than it would have been years ago before Iran and it’s proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, had been allowed so much time to build up their supplies of offensive weapons.

It’s Time To Stop America’s Losers Playing Us For Fools

Oct 8th, 2010
by EdTroy.
1 comment

This has been growing for decades; the losers playing the winners for fools in America. It started in the 1960’s with Johnson’s “Great Society”. He wanted to take the social backstops, like social security, that were stupidly and fraudulently put in place by the most significant destroyer of the American dream, Franklin Roosevelt, and bring them to an impossible crescendo that would totally destroy the greatest nation that ever existed. Social security was a Ponzi scheme of unimaginable proportions. But, in addition to it, many other programs were initiated which would allow the losers in America to suck off the teat of the producers in America for decades, leading to the final collapse of this country, which we are now witnessing. Yes, the collapse is happening even faster in other parts of the world, that adopted socialist ideals and ideologies even earlier than the United States, but the final downfall of the United States (and the global economy) is rapidly approaching.

Social security was the first break in the wall of capitalism and a free society. While it might have seemed like a good idea when started, it was only started as a safety net for people who were too stupid or unfortunate to provide for their own retirement. And, since people were only expected to live a few years beyond the “retirement” age, it was not thought to be dangerous to the national (and world) economy. But, medical science advanced and people ended up living far longer than anticipated. And, to make it worse, people began to expect that social security was meant to provide them with a total and prosperous retirement. That was never the intent. But, by the 1980’s, most stupid Americans expected that they could retire on social security and live happily and prosperously for many decades after they retired.

This belief was even more prevalent in Europe, which adopted socialism even quicker than the United States. Today, we see riots in France because their retirement age has been increased from 60 to 62. Imagine that! People expecting to be able to live off the toil of others from the time they reach the relatively young age of 62! And, this is on top of a culture that expects at least 5 to 8 weeks of vacation per year; again, paid for “by the other guy”.

And now we get into my personal experiences with “poor people” gaming the system. And, if I know a few, then the actual number is huge. The most glaring example was a woman I used to know. After her first divorce, she remarried. When the time came to send her son to a great university to receive an engineering degree, she was dismayed to find out that she could not send her son to the school that he wanted to attend. It seemed that he could not go there without tuition aid, but, the school informed her that she could not get tuition aid because her income, when combined with that of her new husband, was too high. Her new husband said “He’s not my son; I won’t contribute to his college education.” So, like most “poor” or even just underclass people, she gamed the system. Within 3 months and a few days (a no-fault divorce takes a minimum of 3 month), she was divorced from her second husband. Of course, they still lived together as husband and wife; nothing had changed between them; they still “loved” each other. But, they had to be divorced so that her son could qualify for tuition aid. And, now that she was divorced, her son did qualify for, and did receive, tuition aid. And, these were not “poor” people. As a school bus driver, 10 years ago, she made almost $40,000 per year. I don’t know how much her husband made, but I suspect their combined income was close to $100,000 per year, almost 10 years ago. Thus, they were not “poor” by any normal stretch of the imagination. Of course, they were not rich, either. To do that, according to Obamba, you and your spouse need to make at least $250,000 per year, today. But, this was 10 years ago. And, even today, a family income of $250,000 is far from being rich. That income, under the current mortgage loan rules, won’t even qualify you for a nice home in some markets, and would not have qualified you for much of anything a few years ago in places like San Francisco and New York City.

But, she got her “divorce” and her son got a quality engineering education. She later dumped husband 2, and the fact that they were already “divorced” made it that much easier. All she had to do was say “get out!” But, at the time they got divorced, they had no intention to get divorced; it was just a way of gaming the system, much like people get a divorce to avoid the marriage penalty in the income tax system.

In the same way, millions of other Americans are gaming the system. How many food stamp recipients are fat and thus overfed and “over-qualified” for food stamps? How many food stamp recipients have cell phones and cable or satellite tv? If they can afford cable or satellite tv, or even worse, a cell phone, they obviously have no reason to expect food stamps. (If you can’t afford food, how can you afford a cell phone, cable tv, or satellite tv?) We are constantly told that we need illegal Mexican immigrants because Americans will not do the jobs that they do. Well, if Americans were not paid with welfare and food stamps to sit on the couch eating bon-bons, bought with food stamps, while watching Oprah or the Home Shopping Network on the cable or satellite  tv, paid for with welfare or extended unemployment, they would be fighting for their RIGHT to pick lettuce, cotton, brussel sprouts, beans, or whatever. But, they are paid, and very well, to do nothing. And, of course, on top of that pay, many make money “under the table” as housekeepers, gardeners, drug mules, drug dealers, maids, nannies, or gang enforcers.  Is it any wonder that our country is so totally screwed up?  We need to wake up and realize that the socialist nirvana that has been forced down our throats is a false ideal. We need to realize that if we do not wake up and restrict social welfare to those who genuinely need it (which is probably less than 10% of those now receiving it) we are doomed to abject failure. Everyone needs to read Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged”. It is one of the best books ever written, and it’s prescience is astounding.

And, we need to go beyond the simple course of blocking those who do not deserve public money from receiving it. We need to block the organizations whose goal is the destruction of the United States. This would be any organization affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, such as CAIR, MSA, ISNA, and others. We need to stand up against such atrocities as the Islamist Supremacist Mosque at Ground Zero. We need to stand with Israel in it’s fight to survive. And, we need to vote out those politicians who are actively supporting things like NAFTA, CAFTA, and the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. The only purpose of these plans is to enrich multinational corporations by taking American jobs and shipping them overseas, thereby destroying the middle class in America.

“Muslim Brotherhood In America, Part 2” – Stakelbeck On Terror

Oct 7th, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

This is the second of a two part series on the Muslim Brotherhood in America. The first part of the series is here.

In this episode, Erick Stakelbeck finishes his discussion on the Muslim Brotherhood’s activities to subvert the government of the United States and replace the Constitution of the United States with Sharia law. While completely illegal, the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood, and it’s many front groups such as CAIR, MSA, ISNA, and others are not only ignored by the government of the United States, but individuals with known ties to the Muslim Brotherhood have been invited and admitted into top secret facilities such as the National Counter-Terrorism Center and the FBI training center. It seems that our government is totally bent on self-destruction.

This video also points out how Muslims are illegally taking over the streets of Paris, well along in their intended path of Islamizing Europe and creating what Bat Ye’Or presciently described as “Eurabia”. It is both disturbing and disgusting that Western civilization has stooped so low as to allow such barbarity to exist without any real opposition. Yes, France has wisely banned the burqa, but I suspect it will have a hard time enforcing that ban, when it is totally incapable of controlling the other illegal actions of Muslims.

The video also includes a discussion with the former president of Spain, Jose Maria Aznar. He has started a group known as “Friends Of Israel”. While he is somewhat a lone voice in the wilderness, he, and a few other leaders, realize that the current demonizing  of Israel for defending it’s right to exist in a very hostile Islamic land is a very dangerous trend. As goes Israel, so goes the rest of civilization. Islam, and the Muslim Brotherhood, fully intend to take over the world, create a new Caliphate, and bring the world back to the seventh century. We must stand to prevent that.

The video also includes footage of Muslims illegally raising funds in Mosques in the United States for the known terrorist organization, Hamas.

Disturbing Dhimmitude And Incompetence On The Part Of The US Government

Oct 5th, 2010
by EdTroy.
Comments are off for this post

As most of you probably do not know, the cartoonist, Molly Norris, who started the Facebook page and event “Everybody Draw Mohammad Day” is no longer with us. (I wrote about it here.) Oh, she is still alive, but she has been forced by Muslims to change her identity, quit her job, and move to an undisclosed location under a new identity. And, to make matters worse, she had to pay for this! As pointed out by Robert Spencer in “The Jihad Against A Seattle Cartoonist“:

“On the insistence of top security specialists at the FBI,” the Seattle Weekly explained, “she is, as they put it, ‘going ghost’: moving, changing her name, and essentially wiping away her identity. She will no longer be publishing cartoons in our paper or in City Arts magazine, where she has been a regular contributor. She is, in effect, being put into a witness-protection program–except, as she notes, without the government picking up the tab.”

This is an absolute travesty of justice, and a complete failure of the government of the United States. After all, what is the purpose of a government? Contrary to the increasingly popular opinion that government exists to take from the producers and give to the poor, lazy slobs who refuse to take responsibility for their own lives and finances, the primary purpose of a government is to protect it’s people. What makes the case of Molly Norris even more appalling is the fact that the Imam Rauf, the Islamic scoundrel who is trying to rub 911 in the face of every non-Muslim American by building a triumphalist Mosque on the site of the 911 atrocity, is getting police protection by the New York City police department according to the above referenced article by Robert Spencer. And, an even more atrocious miscarriage of justice is that

Gainsville, Florida authorities have announced that they plan to bill the abortive Koran-burner Terry Jones $180,000 for security costs for the Koran-burning event that he ultimately called off after a blizzard of international publicity, all negative – despite the fact that they never bothered to warn Jones beforehand that he would be footing the bill.

We are loosing the battle against Islam and Sharia Law. While burning a Koran is a silly thing, it should also be a harmless act. It is a symbolic act. By both burning Korans and publishing cartoons, freedom loving people are saying that they do not feel any special reverence for the Koran, Mohammad, or Islam. And, that is as it should be. The Koran is just a book. Would people riot if someone decided to burn a copy of “Mein Kampf”? I think not. And yet each is just the ravings of a of monomaniacal lunatic.

If Muslims, anywhere in the world, choose to act as infantile barbarians every time they feel that someone has insulted them or their pedophile founder, they need to “get over it.” To the extent that they behave badly, they need to be punished, just like any other criminals who burn, riot, rape, or murder. The West, if it is to survive, needs to realize that Islam is NOT just a religion, but, more importantly, it is an ideology and a system of government. The Dutch Parliamentarian, Geert Wilders, who is under constant police protection after making the film “Fitna” (see it in my sidebar), made a great speech in Germany over the weekend. He explained this difference between Islam and other religions.

Today I am here, however, to warn you for looming disunity. Germany’s national identity, its democracy and economic prosperity, is being threatened by the political ideology of Islam. In 1848, Karl Marx began his Communist Manifesto with the famous words: “A specter is haunting Europe – the specter of communism.” Today, another specter is haunting Europe. It is the specter of Islam. This danger, too, is political. Islam is not merely a religion, as many people seem to think: Islam is mainly a political ideology.

This insight is not new.

I quote from the bestselling book and BBC television series The Triumph of the West which the renowned Oxford historian J.M. Roberts wrote in 1985: “Although we carelessly speak of Islam as a ‘religion’; that word carries many overtones of the special history of western Europe. The Muslim is primarily a member of a community, the follower of a certain way, an adherent to a system of law, rather than someone holding particular theological views.” The Flemish Professor Urbain Vermeulen, the former president of the European Union of Arabists and Islamicists, too, points out that “Islam is primarily a legal system, a law,” rather than a religion.

The American political scientist Mark Alexander writes that “One of our greatest mistakes is to think of Islam as just another one of the world’s great religions. We shouldn’t. Islam is politics or it is nothing at all, but, of course, it is politics with a spiritual dimension, … which will stop at nothing until the West is no more, until the West has … been well and truly Islamized.”

These are not just statements by opponents of Islam. Islamic scholars say the same thing. There cannot be any doubt about the nature of Islam to those who have read the Koran, the Sira and the Hadith. Abul Ala Maududi, the influential 20th century Pakistani Islamic thinker, wrote – I quote, emphasizing that these are not my words but those of a leading Islamic scholar – “Islam is not merely a religious creed [but] a revolutionary ideology and jihad refers to that revolutionary struggle … to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth, which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam.”

Ali Sina, an Iranian Islamic apostate who lives in Canada, points out that there is one golden rule that lies at the heart of every religion – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. In Islam, this rule only applies to fellow believers, but not to Infidels. Ali Sina says “The reason I am against Islam is not because it is a religion, but because it is a political ideology of imperialism and domination in the guise of religion. Because Islam does not follow the Golden Rule, it attracts violent people.”

A dispassionate study of the beginnings of Islamic history reveals clearly that Muhammad’s objective was first to conquer his own people, the Arabs, and to unify them under his rule, and then to conquer and rule the world. That was the original cause; it was obviously political and was backed by military force. “I was ordered to fight all men until they say ‘There is no god but Allah,’” Muhammad said in his final address. He did so in accordance with the Koranic command in sura 8:39: “Fight them until there is no more dissension and the religion is entirely Allah’s.”

According to the mythology, Muhammad founded Islam in Mecca after the Angel Gabriel visited him for the first time in the year 610. The first twelve years of Islam, when Islam was religious rather than political, were not a success. In 622, Muhammad emigrated to Yathrib, a predominantly Jewish oasis, with his small band of 150 followers. There he established the first mosque in history, took over political power, gave Yathrib the name of Medina, which means the “City of the Prophet,” and began his career as a military and a political leader who conquered all of Arabia. Tellingly, the Islamic calendar starts with the hijra, the migration to Medina – the moment when Islam became a political movement.

It is vital that we make this distinction between a normal religion, like Christianity, and a totalitarian political ideology like Islam. Islam must be stopped in its tracks and destroyed as a political ideology, way of life, and system of laws if civilization is to survive.