• Religion Of Peace

  • Archives

  • Elisabeth was found guilty of hate speech crimes for speaking the truth about Islam. Click to donate to her legal defense fund

  • Categories

  • Meta

  • This blogsite / website is not the official website of ACT! for America, Inc. This blogsite / website is independently owned and operated by that ACT! for America chapter named on this site. The statements, positions, opinions and views expressed in this website, whether written, audible, or video, are those of the individuals and organizations making them and and do not necessarily represent the positions, views, and opinions of ACT! for America, Inc., its directors, officers, or agents. The sole official website of ACT! for America, Inc. is www.actforamerica.org
  • Statements, views, positions and opinions expressed in articles, columns, commentaries and blog posts, whether written, audible, or video, which are not the original work of the ACT! for America chapter that owns and operates this website / blogsite, and is named on this website / blogsite are not necessarily the views, positions, and opinions of the ACT! for America chapter that owns and operates this website / blogsite

Canada: Two Terror Attacks in Three Days; More to Come?

By: Rachel Molschky

Martin Rouleau

…Islam is the perfect excuse to commit murder. Hiding behind so-called “religious” doctrine, terrorists find a way to justify crimes which no religion should condone. In the surreal world of multiculturalism, political correctness and liberalism of the modern West, where up is down and black is white, terrorists are victimized and their religion is a protected species like the California condor. As we protect the species, separating the religion from the violence it inspires, and we welcome more to become our neighbors and coworkers through immigration, allowing them to build houses of “worship” where terror is bred, with our helping hand, the process of our own demise begins.

The new friendly immigrants charm their way into converting our people to their “religion,” second and third generation immigrants (and sometimes first) are radicalized, and homegrown terrorists are scattered about, living among us, plotting whatever acts of terror they can against their hosts. And the result is two terror attacks in three days…

…We can categorize the terrorists however we want, but while we perpetuate our own ignorance by putting the blinders on, pretending only a few Muslims are “radical” while “moderate” and “mainstream” Imams continue to preach violence in their mosques, and Western Muslims wanting to be obedient and dutiful to Allah listen intently, idolizing the savagery of ISIS and others like them, we are only fooling ourselves. More attacks will come.

In fact this is exactly what ISIS is calling for, and we already saw it in Oklahoma with the beheading by yet another Muslim convert. Just as Al Qaeda had called on devout Muslims to perpetrate “lone wolf” terror attacks in the West, so too is ISIS, and with its popularity on social media, it is finding success.

To make matters worse the US has “inadvertently” armed ISIS, when a cache of arms meant for Kurds wound up in the hands of ISIS, adding to millions of dollars of American weaponry the terrorists have already commandeered from Iraqi soldiers. It’s left ISIS jihadists thumbing their noses at the US and the allies, no doubt providing even greater motivation for Western fans of the terror group to strike on unsuspecting people in surprising places.

The days of safety are ending in Canada. PM Harper said that Canada is not immune to terror attacks. He was right. More Muslim immigrants, more mosques, more Islam- more terror.

More

A Warning To The West: A Voice From The Heart Of The Islamic World

by Magda Borham

Niqabis-of-UK.0

…Followers of Islam believe they are the only righteous people on earth and the only nation who hold the truth. Muslims believe Islam  is the only true religion.

Due to this Muslims believe everyone else who has a different religion, or has no faith and does not follow Islam are“Kaffirs” (a derogatory term means unbelievers). Muslims are influenced by many frivolous koranic verses and hadiths (words and deeds of their prophet) teaching them they are the best nation that has ever emerged on earth. For example, according to surat (verse) 3:110 from the Quran, Allah said to Muslims: “Thus We have made you the best nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger (Muhammad) be a witness over you”.

10441003_10202541408276486_6373692814228356281_nMuslims are in your country, but they live not to integrate or to be part of your society or at least to be equal with others, but to dominate and to be the only privileged group. Muslims achieve this  by turning you into a second class citizen in your own country.

They immigrate to your countries holding the same belief system that turned their lives into hell on earth. This same belief, same religion made their lives unsupportable in their original societies. It is the same religion that transformed their countries into war zones of endless conflicts. Muslims now homeless want to apply this system and live and apply the same destruction in your own country.

Muslims are not in your country to help build it or to make it prosper.  Many believe this, including politicians. Muslims are in your country to drain its resources and to suck the blood out of society. For example Muslims represent almost 90% of all your country’s welfare recipients.

A real Muslim’s loyalty is not and will never be to your countries but to the global Islamic “Umma” (nation) only.

At this point please don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that ALL Muslims are bad; But we have no choice but to take care of them all because they ALL believe totally in this evil ideology,  but they do ALL believe in an evil man, a warlord, The Prophet of Islam.

In the world of snakes and vipers, the average person can’t distinguish between the poisonous snake and the non-poisonous snake; the average person has no choice but to avoid all kind of snakes.. Since the world did not invent a tool able to detect who is the “devout” Muslim and who is the “nominal” Muslim or a device to detect who is telling the truth and who practising “taqqiyah تقية” (telling lies to the unbelievers in order to advance the cause of Islam), so it is wise to take your precautions against ALLMuslims and not accept them as immigrants or asylum seekers, they left us no choice but to avoid them all.

It’s no ones fault that Muslims put themselves in this situation, since not one single Muslim has the will, the courage or indeed the ability to stop his fellow believers from harming others in the name of his religion. Not one single Muslim group has the guts or the will to organize manifestations to condemn Islamic terrorism, like those organized to condemn cartoons and youtube videos criticizing their “Prophet”, not one single mosque or Imam or Islamic organisation can teach against those violent texts in the Quran and the Hadith (words, deeds and biography of the prophet of Islam) which incite thousands of Muslims to commit acts of terrorism, because they can’t go against their own islamic books ….

Until Muslims can accept responsibility and act to change, then they have no right to demand respect. Until then they have no right to endlessly act like robots and repeat that Islam is a “religion of peace”. This claim has absolutely no value or credibility now. Muslims can’t ask the rest of the world to respect them as they don’t respect others and continue to impose their laws and way of life on others.

Golden Rule’s don’t exist in Islam. With Muslims their thoughts are based as if they are travelling long a one way road. One direction ONLY, one direction. This has been the same since the time of their prophet in the 7th century and continues to this day… Muslims demand tolerance, but they don’t have to tolerate anybody else in other societies or faiths…They demand accommodation, but they don’t have to accommodate anybody else…They demand respect but they don’t have to respect anybody else….Remember, they immigrate to your western countries and think that’s your duty to integrate to them, not the reverse.

Muslims don’t understand that respect is earned not given

More

The Savage Lands of Islam

by DANIEL GREENFIELD

….Even few apologists for Islam will defend Saudi Arabia for the simple reason that it is indefensible. The media will run the occasional story about the House of Saud’s commitment to reform, much as Charles Manson keeps committing to becoming a better person, but even they don’t really believe it. Yet even though Saudi Arabia is the heartland of Sunni Islam, and its fortunes shape and control mosques and teachings around the world, they insist on treating Islam and Saudi Arabia as two separate things.

It is brutally telling that the two centers of Islam, Saudi Arabia for the Sunnis and Iran for the Shiites, are genuinely horrifying places. Neither can remotely be associated with tolerance or human rights. It is simple common sense that the spread of Islam will make Western countries more like Saudi Arabia and Iran, rather than less like them.

If Saudi Arabia is not an example that we wish to emulate, then why must we bodily incorporate the religion of Mecca and Medina into London and Los Angeles? What other possible outcome do we imagine that there will be but fewer rights and more violence, dead women, abused children, bomb plots and polygamy?

There are two Islams. The real Islam of the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia and an imaginary Islam that exists only in the mosques of air and card table Korans of academics apologists and political pundits who have decided that Islam cannot be bad, because no religion can be bad, not even one which kills and kills, it must just be misunderstood.

But then why not tell the Grand Mufti that he has misunderstood his own religion, the religion that he and his ancestors have dedicated themselves to purifying and reforming back to its roots? Telling him that would be a dangerous thing on his own turf, but it would also be foolish. The Grand Mufti’s controversial statements contain nothing that Mohammed had not said.

Can the founder of a religion misunderstand his own teachings?

Islam is savage, intolerant, cruel and expansionistic, not due to a misunderstanding, but an understanding of the worst aspects of human nature. It is what it is and no amount of wishing will make it otherwise.

We have opened the door to the desert and a hot wind blows through into the northern climes. Either we shut the door or get used to living in the Saudi desert.

More

Sweden – Ship of fools

A BEHEADING IN OKLAHOMA

The Diversity of Islam?

by Robert Spencer

…One irony (among many) of all this is that Islam is, in point of fact, one of the least diverse entities on the planet. A few years I came across a group photo of a summit meeting of Southeast Asian government officials. The Vietnamese, Thai, Laotian, Cambodian, Thai, Burmese and Chinese officials all had names indigenous to their nations; the Malaysian and Indonesian ministers had names like Muhammad and Abdullah – names indigenous to Arabia. Converts to Islam the world over give up a bit of their cultural diversity to take on Arabic names, and in many cases feel compelled to adopt the dress of a seventh-century Arab. This is not diversity, it’s homogeneity.

Nor is there, despite numerous claims to the contrary, significant diversity in the understanding of Islamic law, Sharia. Wherever Sharia is fully implemented around the world today, from Sudan to Saudi Arabia to Iran, it looks largely the same: freedom of speech is restricted, women and non-Muslims are denied basic rights, apostates from Islam are ostracized or even killed, “heretics” and “blasphemers” are hounded by legal authorities and/or lynch mobs. The four major Sunni schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree on 75% of all rulings, and those matters upon which they differ are not central to Islamic faith or practice.

Nonetheless, the diversity of Islam is a key number in the liberal hymnbook, and Kristof gives it a game rendition in last Wednesday’s Times. The goal, of course, is to buttress Affleck’s claim that it is “gross” and “racist” to suggest that there is anything particularly violent about Islam – well, there are those jihad terrorists, yes, but the whole thing is so diverse, you see.

Kristof attempts to illustrate this by asserting that “historically, Islam was not particularly intolerant, and it initially elevated the status of women.” This is a common myth; that Kristof would retail it indicates he is unaware of, or unwilling to confront, the unpleasant facts of the institutionalized oppression of dhimmitude that made for the violent oppression of religious minorities in the Islamic world until they were abolished in the mid-nineteenth century.

But what about tolerant, pluralistic al-Andalus? The philosopher Maimonides, a Jew who lived for a time in Muslim Spain and then fled that supposedly tolerant and pluralistic land, remarked,

You know, my brethren, that on account of our sins God has cast us into the midst of this people, the nation of Ishmael, who persecute us severely, and who devise ways to harm us and to debase us….No nation has ever done more harm to Israel. None has matched it in debasing and humiliating us. None has been able to reduce us as they have….We have borne their imposed degradation, their lies, and absurdities, which are beyond human power to bear.

Kristof follows up this wishful thinking with a frankly bizarre sentence: “Anybody looking at the history even of the 20th century would not single out Islam as the bloodthirsty religion; it was Christian/Nazi/Communist Europe and Buddhist/Taoist/Hindu/atheist Asia that set records for mass slaughter.” “Christian/Nazi/Communist”? “Buddhist/Taoist/Hindu/atheist”? These conflations render Kristof’s argument utterly incoherent. Islam is not “the bloodthirsty religion,” but “Christian/Nazi/Communist Europe” is? Is “Christian/Nazi/Communist Europe” a religion? Is it any single thing at all?…

More

Remembering the Battle of Tours

by Mark Tapson

bot

…Some contemporary historians downplay the magnitude of the Muslim threat, claiming that Abd-ar-Rahman’s force was only a raiding party. They minimize the significance of the battle’s outcome, too; at least one historian even claims that Europe would have been better off if Islam had conquered it. But Hanson notes that “most of the renowned historians of the 18th and 19th centuries… saw Poitiers as a landmark battle that signaled the high-water mark of Islamic advance into Europe.” Edward Creasey included it among his The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World. Many believe that if Charles – whom the Pope afterward dubbed Martel, or “the Hammer” – had not stopped Abd-ar-Rahman at Tours, there would have been nothing to prevent Europe from ultimately becoming Islamic. Edward Gibbon called Charles “the savior of Christendom” and wrote in The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire in 1776 that if not for Charles’ victory, “perhaps the interpretation of the Koran would now be taught in the schools of Oxford.”

If only Gibbon could see Oxford now. Not only is the interpretation of the Koran taught there, but Islam thrives in Oxford, thanks partly to the patronage of dhimmi Prince Charles. In his essay “Islam in Oxford,” faux moderate Muslim scholar Muqtadar Khan writes smugly that “Gibbon would have been surprised to learn the lesson that military defeats do not stop the advance of civilizations and the globalization of Islam is unimpeded by the material and military weaknesses of the Muslim world.”

Apart from his dubious suggestion that Islam has anything to do with the advance of civilization, Khan is right. Today the Islamic invasion of Europe and the rest of the West is of the demographic, not military, sort. The continent faces an immigration crisis from at least one generation of young Muslims, many of whom not only are willfully unassimilated, but who are waging cultural and physical aggression against their hosts, establishing parallel communities ruled by sharia and “no-go” zones of violence toward infidels. “Nothing can stop the spread of Islam,” insists Islamic apologist Reza Aslan. “There are those who would try, but it simply will not happen. Absolutely nothing can stop the spread of Islam.”

But Charles Martel begged to differ in 732. The tide was turned back then, and if necessary it can be turned back again, by new Martels. The conflict is different now – it’s far from being as straightforward and elemental as two armies facing off – and so those new Martels won’t necessarily be soldiers. They will also be culture warriors and activists and ordinary citizens willing to put themselves on the front lines against this new incursion. We need “free citizens willing to fight for their own freedom and the values of their civilization” – as Charles Martel and his warriors once were.

More

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,727 other followers

%d bloggers like this: