A witness said that stones “smaller than a baseball” were specifically chosen to make the death more agonizing.
The Clarion Project
“Religion” of “Peace”
…He indicated that the stoning “was a result of them being caught them acting intimately in one of the houses in the city.”
The source said, “This case is the first of its kind carried out by people of the Daash organization in this area.” The source added that “this organization usually kills its victims by shooting them or by slitting their throats with a knife.”
A civil servant, speaking to NBC News, also reported witnessing the stoning by the Islamic State. “It is a terrible scene I wish I did not remember,” he said, adding that eight fighters from the Islamic State carried out the stoning in front of a crowd of 200 residents of the town.
“They brought the man and the woman, they tied their hands and covered their faces, and started to stone them,” he reported, adding that that stones “smaller than a baseball” were specifically chosen to make the death more agonizing.
The witness said that the couple screamed in pain as they were slowly killed over a period of 15 minutes.
by Roger Kimball
…In fact, free speech is like other freedoms: its victory is never permanent. Every generation must work anew to win or at least maintain it. As André Gide once put it, “Toutes choses sont dites déjà, mais comme personne n’écoute, il faut toujours recommencer.” The hard truth is that, with the exception of certain modalities of sexually explicit material, speech is much less free today than it was fifty or a hundred years ago.
What are the major threats to free speech today? Perhaps the overarching condition that threatens free speech is the spread of political correctness. This has sharply curtailed candor about all manner of contentious subjects. It is no longer possible, in polite society, to speak frankly about race, about differences between the sexes, or a hundred other topics — so-called “climate change,” for example, or the relationship between Islam and free speech.
It is extraordinary, is it not, that various Islamic groups, often with the collusion of Western politicians, including Hillary Clinton, are proposing to resurrect blasphemy laws , making it illegal — illegal — to “insult” Mohammed or criticize Islam? The end of their efforts is a “global censorship regime.” We’re not there yet, not quite, but we’re well on the road. One sign of the success of this campaign is the systematic reluctance of Western leaders to describe Islamic terrorism as, well, Islamic terrorism. The activities of the Islamic State, for example, are roundly, and fearfully, condemned, but in the next breath their homicidal savagery is delicately distinguished from Islam. They’re “not Muslims but monsters,” said Prime Minister David Cameron after “jihad John” beheaded a Brit, but a more candid man would have noted that the members of ISIS are monsters as well as Muslims.
It’s the same or worse in America, alas. After 9/11, President Bush assured the world that Islam was a religion of “peace,” ignoring the inconvenient fact that Islamic peace can be vouchsafed only when the entire world has been converted to that barbaric faith. At the end of the day, the options for non-Muslims are three: conversion, slavery (“dhimmitude”), or death. Which makes perfect sense in a religion whose very name means “submission.”
George Orwell was right when he observed that the first indispensable step towards freedom is the willingness to call things by their real names. The cause of freedom is not aided when a Director of National Intelligence says (and says with a straight face) that the Muslim Brotherhood is “a largely secular organization.” Nor is it aided when the U.S. President, his Secretary of State and other underlings lie about what caused the Benghazi massacre.
The triumph of political correctness has encouraged an epidemic allergy to candor. The hope is that the embrace of euphemism will alter not only our language but the reality our language names. And to a large extent, it is working. Unfreedom does not become freedom by calling it free, but the misprision can help spread and reinforce the fog of self-deceit. Terrorism committed by Muslims is not Islamic terrorism but “anti-Islamic activity,” A Muslim army officer who goes on a shooting rampage at Ft. Hood while shouting “Allahu Akbar” is guilty of “workplace violence” not slaughter undertaken to advance the cause of Islam, etc., etc…..
by Roger L Simon
We don’t know details yet of the murder of a woman at Vaughan Foods — an Oklahoma distribution center — by a co-worker, but we do know that it was a beheading and we do know the alleged suspect — Alton Nolen, 30 — was a new convert to Islam.
We also know that other workers at Vaughan say the suspect had tried to convert them to that religion….
….It’s not as if the Islamic extremist playbooks are a secret. They are the basic texts of the religion itself, studied by all adherents in or outside prison, in large groups or by themselves. These same texts call for the extermination or, at best, dhimmitude of the infidel who does not convert. So the behavior of the ummah is regulated across borders. You don’t have to be a card-carrying member of ISIL to know how to behead. Anyone can do it.
This makes our prisons veritable training grounds — petri dishes, if you will — for fanatic killers of the type of the Oklahoma suspect, not to mention recruitment centers for whatever murderous Islamic sect happens to be in vogue that week or month. The only difference between New York and Oklahoma prisons would be one of scale.
A Justice Department report criticized the prison system for “failing to protect against ‘infiltration by religious extremists’”. But that report was way back in 2004. The situation is unquestionably much worse now.
Furthermore, the report exonerated “radical chaplains,” placing the blame on “extremist inmates running worship services.” I’m skeptical. The entire system must be examined, including every chaplain. The New York State system had a chaplain (Imam Warith Deen Umara) who praised the September 11 attacks. The Oklahoma beheading makes a complete public investigation mandatory.
The more difficult question, however, is what to do after the investigation, if the results are as they seem. Banning Islam from our prisons for inciting violence might backfire in a way that would engender even more conversions. Still, jihadism in it essence advocates the violent overthrow of the U.S. government, with which it is incompatible. Should we allow such a thing inside prison? The conventional answer is to seek out “moderate” Islamic chaplains to counter the extremists. But where are such people and, more specifically, where have they been? Other than the extraordinary Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, the outspoken moderates are an extremely scarce commodity.
Nevertheless something must be done now to prevent our prisons form becoming Jihad Factories. They’re already more than halfway there.
Bare Naked Islam
Last year, we saw a sea of black flags of jihad at the Muslim Day Parade not far from Ground Zero in NYC. This year, it was all about the yellow 4-finger salute celebrating deposed president Mohamed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist group, both of which are now outlawed and banned in Egypt.
Thanks to Urban Infidel
Shockingly, marching band from the NYPD and a contingent of New Jersey Girl Scouts in Muslim attire kicked off the event. The streets were filled with flag-waving marchers, pro-Islam floats and a demonstration of a hanging. The mannequin seen dangling from a noose on this float was wrapped in the flag of Egypt, apparently representing the demise of sharia and radical Islamist ideology in Egypt with the ouster of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Who in the heck parades with a mannequin in a noose?
Muslim Brotherhood supporters.
By John Guandolo
….Specifically, the U.S. Constitution, in its Preamble, identifies the People as sovereign under our system. Sharia specifically states all of mankind must submit to Islam: “Sovereignty in Islam is the prerogative of Allah Almighty alone.” (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence, Mohammed Hashim Kalamali)
Article VI of the U.S. Constitution states “This Constitution…shall be the supreme law of the land.” As was noted in an earlier UTT Blog this week, the most popular Junior High School text in American Islamic schools – What Islam is All About – states, “The law of the land is the Shari’ah of Allah.”
Finally, the U.S. Constitution guarantees all Americans the freedom to practice their faith and religion without government interference. The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…” Sharia, which comes from the Quran and the example/teachings of the prophet Mohammed, states “Fight and slay the unbeliever wherever you find them and lie and wait for them in every stratagem of war” (Quran 9:5); and “But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah. But if they turn away from Islam, seize them and slay them wherever you find them, and take no friends or helpers from among their ranks.” (Quran 4:89) In Sharia, there is no disagreement among the scholars and 100% of authoritative Islamic Law legally puts Muslims at a higher status in the community with greater rights than those of non-Muslims, and 100% of all Islamic Law mandates that all apostates from Islam be killed.
What the Global Islamic Movement intends to do, and says it intends to do, and is killing tens of thousands of people across the globe and overthrowing countries in furtherance of, is the imposition of Sharia on the world. This is not about religious freedom for Muslims in any way. It is about a violent and organized effort to impose foreign law (Sharia) on American citizens in direct conflict of the U.S Constitution and U.S. Federal Code.
Those who have sworn an Oath to protect and defend America and our Constitution must do so against any incursion into our system by Sharia. Sharia should be viewed as a cancer inside our system – a viewpoint which was crystal clear to our Founders.
by John Guandolo
As Americans come to better understand that Sharia is real law and jihadis intend to impose it on all Muslims and non-Muslims alike, it becomes important to know when Sharia adherence is increasing in a particular area because it indicates violence from the jihadis will soon follow.
As law enforcement and military units have discovered, adherence to Sharia is directly proportional to the level of violence advocated in the Islamic community against those who do not want to be adherent to Sharia – Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
A 2004 study entitled Understanding Terror Networks by a former CIA case officer revealed that 97% of jihadis were highly adherent to Sharia. This adherence was measured in observable behavior including the wearing of traditional Islamic garb and growing a Sharia adherent beard.
A study published in 2011 randomly surveyed 100 mosques across America and measured the correlation between Sharia adherence and the promotion of violence through published literature at the mosque, comments and teachings of the Imam, and other factors. This “Mapping Sharia” study revealed a one to one correlation between Sharia compliance and violence taught at Islamic Centers, Mosques, and Masjids.
In the New York Police Department’s landmark 2007 report on the homegrown threat entitled, “Radicalization in the West” the NYPD identified the implementation of Sharia and the establishment of a global Islamic state (Caliphate) as the driving “Jihadi-Salafi ideology” behind jihadists in the U.S and beyond (page 17). The report notes the “progression or gravitation towards Salafi Islam” and regular attendance at a Salafi mosque are two key indicators of “radicalization” of Muslims towards jihad. The term “Salafi” comes from the Islamic phrase “al salaf al-salih” or the “righteous predecessors”—the first three generations of Muslims. These are individuals who strictly follow Sharia, and while there are debates among Salafis on a variety of issues, there is no legal disagreement in the Sharia on the definition and obligation of jihad, nor of how Muslims must relate to non-Muslims.
The NYPD report identifies “signatures” of “Salafism” – or what I call here “Sharia Adherence”—which include: being part of a group which will strengthen your Salafis/Sharia Adherence, and “wearing traditional Islamic clothing, growing a beard (page 31).”
If you see an increase in Sharia adherence in your community, you will see an increase in violence and jihad.
Here are a few of those signatures of Sharia adherence:
Sharia adherent men will have short/trimmed mustaches but their beards are often unkempt.
“Cut the mustaches short and leave the beard as it is.” Bukhari 7:781
In Islam, Mohammad is the most perfect example of a Muslim. Islamic men who dye their beards red with henna are identifying themselves with the Prophet Mohammad who wore his beard this way.
Black Islamic Headdress
Islamic men who wear the black headdress are identifying themselves as jihadis. Overseas, American military soldiers and Marines understand this. While only a few sightings have been reported in the United States, if this is seen in your community, it should be taken seriously….