Islam  --  Facts and Fiction

-- Islam’s Nazi Connections - 12/05/02
-- Die nazistischen Verbindungen des Islams - December 5, 2002
-- Sheik: 'It's OK to kill non-Muslims' - 11/19/02
-- Terrorism Has Everything To Do With Islam - 11/13/02
-- Death to America - 9/08/02
-- Pictures of peaceful Islam  - Bilder des friedlichen Islams - posted year 2002
-- Mainstream Muslim - 6/18/2002
-- Multiculturalists are the real racists - 8/21/2002
-- Pakistan Stupid - 8/21/2002

 Pakistan Stupid

by K. Lloyd Billingsley July 17, 2002

SACRAMENTO – Earlier this year, in the village of Meerwala in rural Pakistan, an 11-year-old boy of the Gujjar tribe, a group considered low class, was spotted walking, unchaperoned, with a 30-year-old woman from the upscale Mastoi tribe. Locals were not about to tolerate some lower-class punk getting uppity with a lady of the gentry.

They have in those parts something called a Panchayat, or tribal jury. This august body, which included Mohammad Ramzan, uncle of the Mastoi woman, decreed that as punishment for the “insult,” and “illicit affair,” the boy’s 18-year old sister should be gang raped. The girl, as it happened, was a pious type who used to teach the Quran to children. This character reference, like the fact that she had committed no crime, did not impress the jurors, who ruled that if she did not consent to this punishment every woman in the boy’s family should be raped.

On June 22, four members of a tribal council dragged the girl into a mud hut, where they took turns raping her. But the punishment did not end there. The appointed rapists then forced the girl to walk home naked, in front of 1,000 onlookers, who watched without protest. These events rightfully drew condemnation from around the world, but the protest packed a secondary meaning.

One of the orthodoxies of political correctness is multiculturalism, the notion that all cultures have the same value. Therefore, by politically correct reasoning, affluent westerners in democratic countries with Judeo-Christian roots have no right to criticize what goes on in other countries. It’s all relative, as they used to say in the sixties. This politically correct ethos is so pervasive that, as George Orwell said, it makes the stating of the obvious a duty.

A culture that sentences an innocent 18-year-old girl to be gang raped for a perceived slight committed by her 11-year-old brother is not the same as a culture where such savagery is unknown, not to mention forbidden by the rule of law. Those decrying the mandated gang rape signaled by their protest that all cultures are not equal. Otherwise there would have been no protest, only explanations that, however outrageous it might seem to us, such rape is part of their culture and to criticize it is racist, and so on. The substitutionary punishment also deserves attention.

It would not be right to punish an 11-year-old busted for shoplifting by jailing his innocent18-year-old sister. The perpetrator of a crime must pay, not someone else. Group membership should not incur guilt for crimes committed by others, but it does under political correctness.

Government race and gender preferences, for example, punish people who have never oppressed anybody, in the belief that this will compensate for acts committed by others, hundreds of years ago. The push for slavery reparations would do the same, on a massive scale.

Those who believe in punishing people for infractions committed by others, or who maintain that all cultures are morally equivalent, should pause to think before protesting the incidents in Pakistan. And those who think that political correctness is a myth should read The Shadow University: The Betrayal of Liberty On America’s Campuses, by Alan Kors and Harvey Silverglate, a new book from the Free Press.

K. Lloyd Billingsleyis editorial director of the Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco.

 The AMC; 'Mainstream' Muslims?
by Daniel Pipes June 18, 2002 FBI directors don't make a habit of breaking bread with organizations their agents may soon be investigating, perhaps even closing. Robert S. Mueller III, however, is about to make precisely this blunder: On June 28, he is scheduled to deliver a lunch talk to the American Muslim Council.

Mueller accepted this invitation, his spokesman Bill Carter explains, because the FBI regards the AMC as "the most mainstream Muslim group in the United States."

The AMC does indeed seek to convey a message of moderation. Its event this month, for example, is reassuringly titled "American Muslims: Part of America." AMC also boasts of having initiated "many of the historic events marking the entrance of Muslims into mainstream American culture and life."

Public relations, however, is not reality. The FBI may have missed the AMC's true nature because until just days ago its guidelines prohibited it from collecting general information on an organization of this sort. To help it catch up, then, here are five compelling reasons why Director Mueller should break his lunch date:

Apologetics for terrorism: The U.S. government years ago formally certified Hamas and Hezbollah to be terrorist groups; AMC sings their praises.

In 2000, Abdurahman Alamoudi, the group's longtime executive director, exhorted a rally outside the White House with "We are ALL supporters of Hamas. Allahu Akhbar! . . . I am also a supporter of Hezbollah." In January, Alamoudi participated - alongside leaders of Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and al Qaeda - in a Beirut conference whose communique called for a boycott of American products.

The American Muslim Council also has ties to other terrorists. For example, Jamal Barzinji, whose Virginia house and business were raided by federal authorities in an anti-terrorism investigation three months ago, is on the AMC board and will be on the podium at the forthcoming AMC conference.

In December 2000, AMC's Dallas chapter gave an award to Ghassan Dahduli. Eleven months later, he was deported from the United States on account of his connections to al Qaeda and Hamas.

In addition, Alamoudi has vehemently defended Omar Abdul Rahman, the blind sheikh now imprisoned for his role in New York-area terrorism. And AMC has both held press conferences supporting Sudan's National Islamic Front (a Department of State-designated terrorist group) and, in 1992, hosted the NIS's leader on a visit to the United States.

Helping fund-raise for terrorism: The Holy Land Foundation is one of the main American conduits of money to Hamas; not surprisingly, AMC has lavished praise on it, bestowing an award on it for a "strong global vision." When President Bush closed Holy Land after 9/11 for collecting money "used to support the Hamas terror organization," AMC responded by condemning the president's act as "particularly disturbing . . . unjust and counterproductive."

Run-ins with the law: AMC leaders have a long and colorful history of legal problems. Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin (the former H. Rap Brown), a one-time president of AMC's executive board, has the nearly unique distinction of having been listed not just once but twice as one of the FBI's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives. Oh, and today he is sitting out a life sentence without parole for murdering a policeman.

Other employees have less horrible but still troubled resumes. For example, AMC's current director, Eric Vickers, has been admonished, sanctioned or suspended by courts over a 10-year period due to his faulty practice of law.

Hostility to law enforcement: Even after 9/11, AMC's Web site linked to a document, "Know Your Rights" that advises "Don't Talk to the FBI." Indeed, AMC has fervently opposes successive administrations' efforts to stave off terrorism.

And Vickers personally has, to put it delicately, a strained relationship with law enforcement. In his youth, he admits, he was "against the cops." He remains hostile but expresses himself more elegantly today, for example, accusing Attorney General John Ashcroft of "using national security as a pretext" to engage in a pattern of ethnic and religious discrimination.

Hostility to the United States: Its apparent patriotism aside, AMC harbors an intense anti-Americanism. "Let us damn America," Sami Al-Arian, a featured speaker at recent AMC events, has declaimed.

Alamoudi, the longtime executive director, has dilated on the agony of living in a country he loathes: "I think if we are outside this country, we can say oh, Allah, destroy America, but once we are here, our mission in this country is to change it. There is no way for Muslims to be violent in America, no way. We have other means to do it. You can be violent anywhere else but in America."

Far from being "the most mainstream Muslim group in the United States," the AMC is among their most extreme. That explains why George W. Bush in 2000 returned a $1,000 donation from Alamoudi to his campaign.

Rather than endorse AMC by his presence, Robert Mueller should find other lunch companions next Friday. Then he should put the organization under surveillance, ascertain its funding sources, look over its books, and check its staff's visa status.

 Multiculturalists are the real racists
Mark Steyn  National Post 8/21/2002

Last Thursday, in Sydney, the pack leader of a group of Lebanese Muslim gang-rapists was sentenced to 55 years in jail. I suppose I ought to say "Lebanese-Australian" Muslim gang-rapists, since the accused were Australian citizens. But, identity-wise, the rambunctious young lads considered themselves heavy on the Lebanese, light on the Australian. During their gang rapes, the lucky lady would be told she was about to be "f---ed Leb style" and that she deserved it because she was an "Australian pig."

But, inevitably, it's the heavy sentence that's "controversial." After September 11th, Americans were advised to ask themselves, "Why do they hate us?" Now Australians need to ask themselves, "Why do they rape us?" As Monroe Reimers put it on the letters page of The Sydney Morning Herald:

"As terrible as the crime was, we must not confuse justice with revenge. We need answers. Where has this hatred come from? How have we contributed to it? Perhaps it's time to take a good hard look at the racism by exclusion practised with such a vengeance by our community and cultural institutions."

Indeed. Many's the time, labouring under the burden of some or other ghastly Ottawa policy, I've thought of pinning some gal down and sodomizing her while 14 of my pals look on and await their turn. But I fear in my case the Monroe Reimers of the world would be rather less eager to search for "root causes." Gang rape as a legitimate expression of the campaign for social justice is a privilege reserved only unto a few.

Mr. Reimers, though, will be happy to know his view is echoed across the hemispheres. Five days before 9/11, the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet reported that 65% of the country's rapes were committed by "non-Western" immigrants -- a category which, in Norway, is almost wholly Muslim. A professor at the University of Oslo explained that one reason for the disproportionate Muslim share of the rape market was that in their native lands "rape is scarcely punished" because it is generally believed that "it is women who are responsible for rape."

So Muslim immigrants to Norway should be made aware that things are a little different in Scandinavia? Not at all! Rather, the professor insisted, "Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes" because their manner of dress would be regarded by Muslim men as inappropriate. "Norwegian women must realize that we live in a multicultural society and adapt themselves to it." Or to modify Queen Victoria's wedding-night advice to her daughter: Lie back and think of Yemen.

France? Well, I can't bring you any ethnic rape statistics from the Fifth Republic because the authorities go to great lengths not to keep any. But, even though the phenomenon of immigrant gang rape does not exist, there's already a word for it: the "tournante" -- or "take your turn." Last year, 11 Muslim men were arrested for enjoying a grand old tournante with a 14-year old girl in a cellar.

Denmark? "Three quarters of rapes are carried out by non-Danes," says Peter Skaarup, chairman of the People's Party, a member of the governing coalition.

Well, you get the idea. Whether or not Muslim cultures are more prone to rape is a question we shall explore another day. What's interesting is how easily even this most extreme manifestation of multiculturalism is subsumed within the usual pieties. Norwegian women must learn to be, in a very real sense, less "exclusionary." Lebanese male immigrants, fleeing a war-torn wasteland and finding refuge in a land of peace, freedom and opportunity, are inevitably transformed into gang rapists by Australian racism.

After September 11th, a friend in London said to me she couldn't stand all the America-needs-to-ask-itself stuff because she used to work at a rape crisis centre and she'd heard this blame-the-victim routine a thousand times before. America was asking for it: like those Norwegian women, it was being "provocative." My friend thought the multiculti apologists were treating America as a metaphorical rape victim. But, even so, it comes as a surprise to realize they do exactly the same to actual rape victims. After the O.J. verdict, it was noted by some feminists that "race trumped gender." What we've seen since September 11th is that multiculturalism trumps everything. Its grip on the imagination of the Western elites is unshakeable. Even President Bush, in the month after September 11th, felt obliged to line up a series of photo-ops so he could declare that "Islam is peace" while surrounded by representatives of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, an organization which objected, on the grounds of "ethnic and religious stereotyping," to the prosecution of two men in Chicago for the "honour killing" of their female cousin.

On this "Islam is peace" business, Bassam Tibi, a Muslim professor at Goettingen University in Germany, gave a helpful speech a few months back: "Both sides should acknowledge candidly that although they might use identical terms these mean different things to each of them," he said. "The word 'peace,' for example, implies to a Muslim the extension of the Dar al-Islam -- or 'House of Islam' -- to the entire world. This is completely different from the Enlightenment concept of eternal peace that dominates Western thought." Only when the entire world is a Dar al-Islam will it be a Dar a-Salam, or "House of Peace."

On the face of it, that sounds ridiculous. The "Muslim world" -- the arc stretching from North Africa through South Asia -- is economically, militarily, scientifically and artistically irrelevant. But, looked at through the prism of Norwegian rape or French crime, the idea of a Dar al-Islam doesn't sound so ridiculous. The "code of silence" that surrounds rape in tightly knit Muslim families is, so to speak, amplified by the broader "code of silence" surrounding multicultural issues in the West. If all cultures are of equal value, how do you point out any defects?

As I understand it, the benefits of multiculturalism are that the sterile white-bread cultures of Australia, Canada and Britain get some great ethnic restaurants and a Commonwealth Games opening ceremony that lasts until two in the morning. But, in the case of those Muslim ghettoes in Sydney, in Oslo, in Paris, in Copenhagen and in Manchester, multiculturalism means that the worst attributes of Muslim culture -- the subjugation of women -- combine with the worst attributes of Western culture -- licence and self-gratification. Tattoed, pierced Pakistani skinhead gangs swaggering down the streets of Northern England are as much a product of multiculturalism as the turban-wearing Sikh Mountie in the vice-regal escort at Rideau Hall. Yet even in the face of the crudest assaults on its most cherished causes -- women's rights, gay rights -- the political class turns squeamishly away.

Once upon a time we knew what to do. A British district officer, coming upon a scene of suttee, was told by the locals that in Hindu culture it was the custom to cremate a widow on her husband's funeral pyre. He replied that in British culture it was the custom to hang chaps who did that sort of thing. There are many great things about India -- curry, pyjamas, sitars, software engineers -- but suttee was not one of them. What a pity we're no longer capable of being "judgmental" and "discriminating." We're told the old-school imperialists were racists, that they thought of the wogs as inferior. But, if so, they at least considered them capable of improvement. The multiculturalists are just as racist. The only difference is that they think the wogs can never reform: Good heavens, you can't expect a Muslim in Norway not to go about raping the womenfolk! Much better just to get used to it.

As one is always obliged to explain when tiptoeing around this territory, I'm not a racist, only a culturist. I believe Western culture -- rule of law, universal suffrage, etc. -- is preferable to Arab culture: that's why there are millions of Muslims in Scandinavia, and four Scandinavians in Syria. Follow the traffic. I support immigration, but with assimilation. Without it, like a Hindu widow, we're slowly climbing on the funeral pyre of our lost empires. You see it in European foreign policy already: they're scared of their mysterious, swelling, unstoppable Muslim populations.

Islam For All reported the other day that, at present demographic rates, in 20 years' time the majority of Holland's children (the population under 18) will be Muslim. It will be the first Islamic country in western Europe since the loss of Spain. Europe is the colony now.

Or as Charles Johnson, whose excellent "Little Green Footballs" Web site turns up dozens of fascinating Islamic tidbits every day, suggested: "Maybe we should start a betting pool: Which European country will be the first to institute shari'a?"


 Death to America

September 8, 2002     by Daniel Pipes     New York Post

America's war on terrorism did not begin in September 2001. It began in November 1979.

That was shortly after Ayatollah Khomeini had seized power in Iran, riding the slogan "Death to America" - and sure enough, the attacks on Americans soon began. In November 1979, a militant Islamic mob took over the U.S. embassy in Tehran, the Iranian capital, and held 52 Americans hostage for the next 444 days.

The rescue team sent to free those hostages in April 1980 suffered eight fatalities, making them the first of militant Islam's many American casualties. Others included:

April 1983: 17 dead at the U.S. embassy in Beirut.

October 1983: 241 dead at the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut.

December 1983: five dead at the U.S. embassy in Kuwait.

January 1984: the president of the American University of Beirut killed.

April 1984: 18 dead near a U.S. airbase in Spain.

September 1984: 16 dead at the U.S. embassy in Beirut (again).

December 1984: Two dead on a plane hijacked to Tehran.

June 1985: One dead on a plane hijacked to Beirut.

After a let-up, the attacks then restarted: Five and 19 dead in Saudi Arabia in 1995 and 1996, 224 dead at the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998 and 17 dead on the USS Cole in Yemen in October 2000.

Simultaneously, the murderous assault of militant Islam also took place on U.S. soil:

July 1980: an Iranian dissident killed in the Washington, D.C. area.

August 1983: a leader of the Ahmadiyya sect of Islam killed in Canton, Mich.

August 1984: three Indians killed in a suburb of Tacoma, Wash.

September 1986: a doctor killed in Augusta, Ga.

January 1990: an Egyptian freethinker killed in Tucson, Ariz.

November 1990: a Jewish leader killed in New York.

February 1991: an Egyptian Islamist killed in New York.

January 1993: two CIA staff killed outside agency headquarters in Langley, Va.

February 1993: Six people killed at the World Trade Center.

March 1994: an Orthodox Jewish boy killed on the Brooklyn Bridge.

February 1997: a Danish tourist killed on the Empire State building.

October 1999: 217 passengers killed on an EgyptAir flight near New York City.

In all, 800 persons lost their lives in the course of attacks by militant Islam on Americans before September 2001 - more than killed by any other enemy since the Vietnam War. (Further, this listing does not include the dozens more Americans in Israel killed by militant Islamic terrorists.)

And yet, these murders hardly registered. Only with the events of a year ago did Americans finally realize that "Death to America" truly is the battle cry of this era's most dangerous foe, militant Islam.

In retrospect, the mistake began when Iranians assaulted the U.S. embassy in Tehran and met with no resistance.

Interestingly, a Marine sergeant present at the embassy that fateful day in November 1979 agrees with this assessment. As the militant Islamic mob invaded the embassy, Rodney V. Sickmann followed orders and protected neither himself nor the embassy. As a result, he was taken hostage and lived to tell the tale. (He now works for Anheuser-Busch.)

In retrospect, he believes that passivity was a mistake. The Marines should have done their assigned duty, even if it cost their lives. "Had we opened fire on them, maybe we would only have lasted an hour." But had they done that, they "could have changed history."

Standing their ground would have sent a powerful signal that the United States of America cannot be attacked with impunity. In contrast, the embassy's surrender sent the opposite signal - that it's open season on Americans. "If you look back, it started in 1979; it's just escalated," Sickmann correctly concludes.

To which one of the century's great geostrategist thinkers, Robert Strausz-Hupé, adds his assent. Just before passing away earlier this year at the age of 98, Strausz-Hupé wrote his final words, and they were about the war on terrorism: "I have lived long enough to see good repeatedly win over evil, although at a much higher cost than need have been paid. This time we have already paid the price of victory. It remains for us to win it."
Original article available at:

 Terrorism Has 'Everything To Do With Islam,' Author Charges
By Marc Morano Senior Staff Writer
November 13, 2002

( - President Bush wasted no time, following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, in exonerating Islam and reminding Americans that the violence had been committed by freedom haters. Islam, the religion the terrorists claimed to represent while carrying out their attacks, actually stood for peace, the president insisted.

Fourteen months after the attacks, the 19 hijacker/terrorists are still considered heroes by certain elements of the Islamic community around the world.

A would-be shoe bomber, Richard Reid, and an alleged would-be dirty bomber, Jose Padilla, have seen their attack plans foiled in the U.S. since Sept. 11, 2001. But the accused Beltway Sniper, John Muhammad, and his alleged teenaged accomplice John Malvo, are believed responsible for a multi-state shooting spree that culminated in the killings of ten people in the Washington, D.C., region, before they were captured.

Reid, Padilla, Muhammad and Malvo all had one thing in common - a devotion to Islam.

Robert Spencer, author of Islam Unveiled and an adjunct fellow at the conservative think tank Free Congress Foundation, believes Islam's theological foundation is creating many of today's terrorists and would-be terrorists.

Spencer's book takes a critical look at the religion of Islam, its holy book, The Koran, its prophet Muhammad and concludes that the religion is producing violent behavior in a significant numbers of its adherents.

"The religious motivation [for terrorism] is paramount for millions of these people and if we don't recognize that, we are going to be ill equipped in the face of what we are up against," Spencer told

Spencer believes the U.S. is not prepared to fight a war on terrorism because the nation fails to understand the true nature of Islam.  "[Our leaders] are intent on insisting that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, when it has everything to do with Islam," Spencer said.

"When you are in a conflict and you don't know the true nature of your opponent, you are at a tremendous disadvantage," he added.  According to Spencer the "mainstream interpretation" of the religion of Islam is responsible for violent behavior because the text of the Koran has many passages inciting followers to violence.

"When the Koran says, 'Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them,' the extremists can point to that and many other verses of that kind and say: 'Look, this is what the religion teaches,'" Spencer said.  Moderate Muslims are "in the unfortunate position of saying: 'No that is not actually what it means,'" and can be "easily portrayed by extremists as being the disloyal party, the ones that don't take the Koran seriously," he added.

Moderates have a difficult time explaining away verses that incite violence because Islam teaches that the Koran was dictated word for word by Allah (God), according to Spencer.  "Muslims teach the Koran is the literal words of God in a stronger sense than Christianity believes the Bible is the word of God ... the Koran is more than inspired, it is dictated, it is actually God speaking. There is no human element," Spencer said.

"The moderates who might be fighting against Islam's dark side, have the disadvantage of having to go against the plain words of the text of the Koran," he said.  "There is no theological or geographical or denominational or any other kind of firewall between extremist Islam and moderate Islam," he added.

'Religion of Peace'

Islamic scholars and Muslim advocates dispute Spencer's research and the premise of his book.  Michael Young, editor of Islam For Today, rejects the notion that the religion of Islam is to blame for terrorist activities.  "Islam promotes itself first and foremost as a religion of peace ... Islam spread throughout Southeast Asia and Africa entirely by peaceful means," Young told

Young believes many people mistakenly believe Islam is a violent religion because of the "local culture" of some Muslim nations.  "Very often when Islam is in society for so long, people fail to distinguish between what is Islam and what is their own local culture," Young explained.  Young did concede however, "There are vocal people within in Muslim community who do harbor Taliban sympathies."

'Defamatory attacks on Islam'

Ibrahim Hooper, communications director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), was more blunt in defending Islam from charges that it encourages terrorism.  "When people of other faiths commit crimes or violent acts, people don't generalize to the whole faith, but when a Muslim commits a violent act, somehow it is an indictment to their entire faith," Hooper told

"Muslims occasionally do bad things, so do Jews, so do Christians, so do Hindus, so do Martians," he added.  Hooper believes that since the Sept. 11 terror attacks, there has been "a new cottage industry of defamatory attacks on Islam."  "If you want to make a buck now, attack Islam," Hooper said. "When it is done to Christianity or Judaism, people in authority object. When it is done to Islam, it gets a pass," he added. 

Young believes Islam's tarnished image among some Westerners is the result of some Muslim followers misinterpreting passages of the Koran, something that could happen in any religion, he said.  "If you are intent on committing a violent act, you can always find some religious text that smashes the heads of babies against rocks. If you choose to interpret in a certain way, you will find what you are looking for," Young said.

But Spencer, agreeing that many religions of the world have inspired violence among its adherents, believes Islam is by far the most culpable.  "There is no doubt that Christians and Jews and everybody else bearing every other name of every other religion have done terrible things, but that doesn't mean that every religious text is equal in capacity to inspire that kind of thing," Spencer said.  According to Spencer, the Koran takes the "Seventh Century warrior," Muhammad, and "canonize[s] him as the supreme example of human behavior."  "So that instead of being a Seventh Century warfare pattern that we ought not to follow, [Muhammad] becomes the model for how we should always behave. So this is the defect, this is the difficulty," Spencer said.

'Political Correctness'

Larry Johnson, a former CIA and State Department officer and counter terrorism expert, believes media and government officials are not dealing forthright with the threat of Islamic terrorists, because there is a "bit of political correctness still running afoot."  "We like to portray as a nation, Islam as a religion of peace, and it really isn't," Johnson said.  "As it is widely practiced, [Islam] doesn't encourage peace and it encourages violence, Part of that is that it has not had its own version of The Reformation.  It is stuck in Middle Ages as Christianity or Judaism once was," he added.

"[Moderates] do not represent the majority thought in the Muslim world. They are very much on the defensive," Johnson said.  Johnson believes the radical Islam movement is the greatest national security threat facing the U.S.  "There is no other significant threat confronting us ... it gives people a reason to do what they do and to take risks and make sacrifices," Johnson said.  Johnson thinks a modern "crusade" may be necessary to battle Islam.  "I think George Bush was right when he called for a crusade, but it's not a crusade of Christians against Islam, as was a hallmark of the first Crusades. This is a crusade of [modern societies] versus a medieval thought process," Johnson said.

'50,000 Muslim Men'

In order to fight what he sees as a growing Islamic threat, Spencer proposes that the U.S. impose strict immigration limits on Muslims entering the U.S.  "Why were 50,000 Muslim men admitted to the country from Muslim countries since September 11?" he asked. When are we going to start being sane about immigration law?"

Spencer would also like to see mosques monitored by law enforcement for anti-American sentiment and any inciting of violence, ideas Hooper finds offensive.  "I live here too. I don't want to be attacked, but battling terrorists and defaming Islam are two different things," Hooper countered.  Spencer is not optimistic the U.S. will take the security threat of Islam seriously.

"Everyone is so afraid of being called a racist that they are afraid to take measures that are necessary to defend oneself," Spencer said.

 London Islamic cleric caught on tape calling for death of Americans

Posted: November 19, 2002     2002

A London-based Muslim cleric has been caught on film urging his followers to kill non-Muslims – particularly Americans – and to commit other acts of terrorism.  Sheik Abu Hamza, affiliated with London's Finsbury Park mosque, tells an audience that non-believers should be killed or sold into slavery in a tape converted to digital files and smuggled onto the Internet.  The tapes were reportedly given by Hamza to a researcher who posed as a supporter and infiltrated his inner circle.

If a kafir person (non-believer) goes in a Muslim country, he is like a cow," explains Hamza. "Anybody can take him.  That is the Islamic law."  "If a kafir is walking by and you catch him, he's booty," he says on one tape. "You can sell him in the market. Most of them are spies.  And even if they don't do anything, if Muslims cannot take them and sell them in the market, you just kill them. It's OK."

Hamza praises the al-Qaida bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed 224 people.  "If Muslims are having a war against these people, than yes, it is legitimate," he says.  He praised attacks against ships from non-Muslim countries: "If a ship which loses its way and comes to a Muslim land, they'll take it as booty."  A terrorist attack in 2000 on the USS Cole killed 17 American sailors. The attack has been linked to Muslim militants in Britain, but Hamza has never been charged.

Despite accusations he recruits for al-Qaida, Hamza's only punishment in Britain has been a High Court order banning him from preaching at the Finsbury Park mosque.  However, when the Ottawa Citizen visited the mosque several weeks ago, worshippers had his phone number handy, the newspaper reported.  "It's all fabrication. He's just taking clips and taking it out of context, as usual," Hamza said last night when asked about the videos.

He scoffed at suggestions the tapes may lead to his arrest.  He said he can't be accused of inciting people to commit violent acts because he's a cleric who only preaches Muslim law.  "I say the reality that's in the Muslim books anyway.  Whether I say it or not, it's in the books."  The sheik, who was born in Egypt and grew up in England, then alluded to more violence – using language similar to that used by Osama bin Laden.  "Just as non-Muslim blood is hot, Muslim blood is hot, too," he said. "It's for them to worry about. When they kill, they will be killed."

 Islam’s Nazi Connections
By Serge Trifkovic Front   December 5, 2002

An essay adapted by Robert Locke from Dr. Serge Trifkovic’s new book "The Sword of the Prophet": A Politically-Incorrect Guide to Islam.  One of the good things one can truthfully say about Islam is that there has never been any love lost between Moslems and Marxists. Sadly, the opposite end of the totalitarian political spectrum is quite another matter. SS chief Heinrich Himmler was known to remark that he regretted that Germany had adopted Christianity, rather than "warlike" Islam, as its religion, and there is a disturbing amount of twisted but very real logic in his remark.

Beyond the obvious dislike of a certain other religion, we have the plain fact that both Nazism and Islam both openly aim at world conquest. Both demand the total subordination of the free will of the individual – the very word "Islam" means submission in Arabic.  Both are explicitly anti-nationalist and believe in the liquidation of the nation-state in favor of a "higher" community: in Islam the umma or community of all believers; in Nazism the herrenvolk or master race.

Both believe in undemocratic leadership by a privileged knower of an absolute, eternal, and ultimately mystical truth: the caliph or führer respectively.  To be fair, in strict Nazism Arabs are racial Semites and thus subhumans, but as Robert Locke has written, the Nazis did not really believe in their racial mythology when they found it inconvenient, and they exploited their commonalities with Islam for all they were worth. If the British army had not stopped Rommel in the sands of El Alamein in 1942, preventing him from conquering the Middle East, the consequences for world history might have been dramatic. What did happen was quite ugly enough.

The Nazis began by attempting to exploit Arab resentment of the British and French colonial rule that they were under during the 1930’s, colonial rule which, in light of the subsequent bloody and tyrannical history of the region, it is hard to condemn today as worse than the likely alternative.  They promised the Arabs "liberation" from the French and British, a promise which the naïve Arabs, not grasping the character of a Nazi regime that would likely have reduced them to slaves in its own empire, took at face value.

This gave rise to a curious Arab ditty rendered in English thus: No more monsieur, No more mister.  In heaven Allah, On earth Hitler.  Hitler himself was even given an Arabic name: Abu Ali.  But Hitler’s Germany went further and sensed the demonic potentialities inherent in the mythology, reliably emotionally satisfying to persons crazed with resentment, of radical anti-Semitism.  It made a concerted, and remarkably successful effort to plant modern anti-Semitism in the Arab world.

The founding of Israel helped further this project.  As Bernard Lewis has written" The struggle for Palestine greatly facilitated the acceptance of the anti-Semitic interpretation of history, and led some to attribute all evil in the Middle East - and, indeed, in the world - to secret Jewish plots." Thus even before Israel was created the struggle to create it was turned into an existential battle of identity, with the complete denial of the legitimacy of Jewish existence as a central component of Moslem aspiration.

The Nazis managed to recruit some Moslems directly. Several Moslem SS divisions were raised: the Skanderbeg Division from Albania, the Handschar Division from Bosnia, and smaller units from throughout the Moslem world from Chechnya to Uzbekistan were incorporated into the German armed forces in one capacity or another.  This was only taking the first step in Heinrich Himmler’s planned grand alliance between Nazi Germany and the Islamic world.

One of his closest aides, Obergruppenführer Gottlob Berger, boasted that "a link is created between Islam and National-Socialism on an open, honest basis.  It will be directed in terms of blood and race from the North, and in the ideological-spiritual sphere from the East." 

What an image: a Nazi-Moslem alliance to conquer the world!  Naturally, totalitarian ideology (as shown by the Sino-Soviet and Iran-Taliban splits, for example) is a notoriously weak glue, so it is questionable how far this could have prospered.

But the thought is chilling enough.  Major Nazi sympathizers of this era include Ahmed Shukairi, the first chairman of the PLO; Gamal Abdel Nasser and Anwar Sadat, future presidents of Egypt; and the founders of the Pan-Arab socialist Ba' ath party, currently ruling Syria and Iraq.

One Ba'ath leader has since recalled of this time: "We were racists, admiring Nazism, reading their books and sources of their thought.  We were the first who thought of translating Mein Kampf."  Many of the Nazi sympathizers of this era have never repudiated their beliefs; some still openly parade them.

In 1945, one name was missing from the Allies’ list of war criminals, that of Haj Mohammed Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti or supreme religious leader of Jerusalem and the former President of the Supreme Moslem Council of Palestine.  In May 1941, the Mufti declared jihad against Britain and made his way to Berlin after the British put down his attempt to establish a pro-Nazi government in Iraq by a coup d’etat.

When he met Hitler, on November 21, 1941, he declared that the Arabs are Germany’s natural friends, ready to cooperate with the Reich with all their hearts by the formation of an Arab Legion.  Hitler promised that as soon as the German armies pushed into the Southern Caucasus the Arabs would be liberated from the British yoke.

The Mufti’s part of the deal was to raise support for Germany among the Moslems in the Soviet Union, the Balkans and the Middle East. He conducted radio propaganda through the network of six stations, set up anti-British espionage and fifth column networks in the Middle East.

In the annual protest against the Balfour Declaration held in 1943 at the Luftwaffe hall in Berlin, the Mufti praised the Germans because they "know how to get rid of the Jews, and that brings us close to the Germans and sets us in their camp."

Echoing Muhammad after the battle of Badr, on March 1, 1944 the Mufti called in a broadcast from Berlin: "Arabs! Rise as one and fight for your sacred rights.  Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion. This saves your honor."  In 1941, he had pledged "to solve the question of the Jewish elements in Palestine and in other Arab countries as required by national interests, and in the same way as the Jewish question in the Axis lands is being solved." 

Bernard Lewis writes that in addition to the old goal of a Jew-free Arabia "he aimed at much vaster purposes, conceived not so much in pan-Arab as in pan-Islamic terms, for a Holy War of Islam in alliance with Germany against World Jewry, to accomplish the Final Solution of the Jewish problem everywhere." 

According to German officials who knew him, The Mufti had repeatedly suggested to the various authorities with whom he was maintaining contact, above all to Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, the extermination of European Jewry.  He considered this as a comfortable solution of the Palestinian problem.

Perhaps "the Nazis needed no persuasion or instigation," as he was later to claim, but the foremost Arab spiritual leader of his time did all he could to ensure that the Germans did not waver in their resolve. 

He went out of his way to prevent any Jews being allowed to leave Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria, which were initially willing to let them go:  "The Mufti was making protests everywhere — in the Office of the (Foreign) Minister, in the antechamber of the Secretary of State, and in other departments, such as Home Office, Press, Radio, and in the SS headquarters." 

In the end, Eichmann said, "We have promised him that no European Jew would enter Palestine any more." The contemporary heirs to the Nazi view of Judentum are not the handfull of powerless skinheads and Aryan Nation survivalists. They are schools, religious leaders, and mainstream intellectuals in the Moslem, meaning primarily Arab, world.

Quite apart from the ups and downs of the misnamed "peace process" in the Middle East, quite apart from the more or less bellicose posture towards the government of Israel, the crude way they actively demonize all Jews as such is startling. The most prominent and influential daily newspaper in the Arab world is Al-Ahram, a semi-official organ of the Egyptian government. 

In June 2001 it carried an op-ed article, "What exactly do the Jews want?" -- and the answer was worthy of the Nazi newspaper the Völkische Beobachter six decades earlier: "The Jews share boundless hatred of the gentiles, they kill women and children and sow destruction… Israel is today populated by people who are not descendants of the Children of Israel, but rather a mixture of slaves, Aryans and the remnants of the Khazars, and they are not Semites.

In other words, people without an identity, whose only purpose is blackmails, theft and control over property and land, with the assistance of the Western countries."  The second most influential Egyptian daily is Al-Akhbar, which went a step further on April 18, 2001:  "Our thanks go the late Hitler who wrought, in advance, the vengeance of the Palestinians upon the most despicable villains on the face of the earth.  However, we rebuke Hitler for the fact that the vengeance was insufficient." 

It is hard to imagine hatred more vitriolic than that which reproaches the Nazis for not completing the Final Solution more thoroughly.  What is remarkable is not that such sentiments exist, but that they are freely circulated in the mainstream media and internalized by the opinion-making elite throughout the Moslem world.  In the same league, we find the claim that the Holocaust in fact never happened and that the Jews and Israelis are the real Nazis is regularly made. 

The Jewish-Nazi theme is a favorite of Arab caricaturists, some of whom use the swastika interchangeably with the Star of David, or juxtapose them. Graphic depiction of the Jews appear to have been lifted directly from the pages of the notorious old Nazi newspaper Der Stürmer (The Stormtroooper).  A final tidbit: it is no accident that a number of Nazi war criminals found refuge in Moslem nations.

Take the notorious Otto Skorzeny, an SS officer who led the rescue of Mussolini from captivity, was described by the OSS, predecessor to the CIA, as "the most dangerous man in Europe," and later found service under General Nasser in Egypt.

 There were others.  Thankfully, the Nazis of course lost WWII and the abortive alliance between Islam and Nazism never panned out.  Sadly, there exist Moslems today, not on the fringes but in the mainstream of their nations, who still view this as a great lost opportunity based on profound natural affinities.

 Die nazistischen Verbindungen des Islams
By Serge Trifkovic   Front   December 5, 2002

Ein Aufsatz angepaßt von Robert Locke vom neuen Buch von Dr Serge Trifkovic "The Sword of the Prophet" (Das Schwert des Hellsehers): Ein Politisch-falscher Führer zum Islam.  Eines der guten Dinge, die man über den Islam ehrlich sagen kann, ist, dass es keine Liebe verloren zwischen Moslems und Marxisten nie gegeben hat.  Unglücklicherweise ist das entgegengesetzte Ende des totalitären politischen Spektrums eine ganz andere Sache.  SS-Chef Heinrich Himmler war bekannt, um zu bemerken, dass er bedauerte, dass Deutschland Christentum, aber nicht "Kriegs"-Islam als sein Religion angenommen hatte

Außer offensichtlicher Abneigung einer bestimmten anderen Religion haben wir die einfache Tatsache, dass sowohl Nazismus als auch Islam beide offen auf die Welteroberung zielen. Beider fordern die Totalunterordnung der Willensfreiheit der Person - das wirkliche Wort "Islam" bedeutet Vorlage im Arabisch. Sowohl sind ausführlich Antinationalist als auch glauben an die Beseitigung des Nationalstaats für eine "höhere" Gemeinschaft: im Islam der umma oder Gemeinschaft aller Gläubiger; im Nazismus der herrenvolk oder Master-Rasse.

Beide glauben an die undemokratische Führung durch einen privilegierten knower einer absoluten, ewigen und schließlich mystischen Wahrheit: der Kalif oder führer beziehungsweise. In strengen Nazismus-Arabern schön zu sein, sind Rassensemiten und so Submenschen, aber wie Robert Locke geschrieben hat, glaubten die Nazis an ihre Rassenmythologie nicht wirklich, als sie es ungünstig fanden, und sie ihre Allgemeinheiten mit dem Islam für alles ausnutzten, dass sie wert waren. Wenn die britische Armee Rommel in den Sanden von El Alamein darin nicht aufgehört hatte

Die Nazis begannen, indem sie versuchten, arabisches Ressentiment der britischen und französischen Kolonialregel auszunutzen, dass sie unter während der 1930er Jahre, Kolonialregel waren, die, im Licht der nachfolgenden blutigen und tyrannischen Geschichte des Gebiets, es hart ist, heute als schlechter zu verurteilen, als die wahrscheinliche Alternative. Sie versprachen den Arabern "Befreiung" von den Französen und Briten, eine Versprechung, welch die naiven Araber, den Charakter eines Nazistischen Regimes nicht ergreifend, das sie wahrscheinlich auf Sklaven in seinem eigenen empi reduziert hätte

Das verursachte ein neugieriges arabisches Liedchen gemacht auf Englisch so: Nicht mehr monsieur, Nicht mehr Herr. Im Himmel Allah, Auf der Erde Hitler. Hitler
selbst wurde sogar ein arabischer Name: Abu Ali gegeben. Aber das Deutschland von Hitler ging weiter und fühlte die dämonischen Potentiale innewohnend der
Mythologie, zuverlässig emotional Personen verrückt gemacht mit dem Ressentiment des radikalen Antisemitismus befriedigend. Es machte eine gemeinsame und
bemerkenswert erfolgreiche Anstrengung, modernen Antisemitismus in der arabischen Welt zu pflanzen.

Die Gründung Israels half weiter diesem Projekt. Wie Bernard Lewis geschrieben hat, dass " Der Kampf um Palästina außerordentlich die Annahme der
antisemitischen Interpretation der Geschichte erleichterte, und einige dazu brachte, das ganze Übel im Nahen Osten - und, tatsächlich, in der Welt - zu heimlichen
jüdischen Anschlägen zuzuschreiben." So sogar, bevor Israel geschaffen wurde, wurde der Kampf, um es zu schaffen, in einen existenziellen Kampf der Identität,
mit der ganzen Leugnung der Gesetzmäßigkeit der jüdischen Existenz als ein Hauptbestandteil o verwandelt

Die Nazis schafften, einige Moslems direkt zu rekrutieren. Mehrere Moslemische SS Abteilungen wurden erhoben: die Skanderbeg Abteilung von Albanien, die
Handschar Abteilung von Bosnien, und kleinere Einheiten von überall in der Moslemischen Welt von Tschetschenien zu Uzbekistan wurde in die deutschen
Streitkräfte in einer Kapazität oder einem anderen vereinigt. Das machte nur den ersten Schritt in der geplanten großartigen Verbindung von Heinrich Himmler
zwischen dem Nazi Deutschland und die Islamische Welt.

Einer seiner nächsten Helfer, Obergruppenführer Gottlob Berger, rühmte sich, dass "eine Verbindung zwischen dem Islam und Nationalsozialismus auf einer
offenen, ehrlichen Basis geschaffen wird. Es wird in Bezug auf das Blut und Rasse vom Norden, und im ideologisch-geistigen Bereich vom Osten geleitet."

Aber der Gedanke kühlt genug ab. Nazistische Hauptsympathisanten dieses Zeitalters schließen Ahmed Shukairi, der erste Vorsitzende des PLO ein; Gamal Abdel
Nasser und Anwar Sadat, zukünftige Präsidenten Ägyptens; und die Gründer des panarabischen Sozialisten Ba' ath Partei, zurzeit über Syrien und den Irak

Ein Ba'ath Führer hat von dieser Zeit seitdem zurückgerufen: "Wir waren Rassisten, Nazismus bewundernd, ihre Bücher und Quellen ihres Gedankens lesend. Wir
waren erst, wer dachte, Mein Kampf zu übersetzen." Viele der Nazistischen Sympathisanten dieses Zeitalters haben ihren Glauben nie verstoßen; einige stellen sie
noch offen zur Schau.

1945 wurde ein Name von der Liste der Verbündeten von Kriegsverbrechern, dieser von Haj Mohammed Amin al-Husseini, dem Mufti oder höchstem religiösem
Führer Jerusalems und dem ehemaligen Präsidenten des Höchsten Moslemischen Rats Palästinas vermisst. Im Mai 1941 erklärte der Mufti jihad gegen
Großbritannien und machte seinen Weg nach Berlin, nachdem die Briten seinen Versuch hinstellen, eine pro-nazistische Regierung im Irak durch einen Coup zu

Als er Hitler am 21. November 1941 traf, erklärte er, dass die Araber Deutschlands natürliche Freunde, bereit sind, mit dem Reich mit allen ihren Herzen durch die
Bildung einer arabischen Legion zusammenzuarbeiten. Hitler versprach, dass, sobald die deutschen Armeen in den Südlichen Kaukasus stießen, die Araber vom
britischen Joch befreit würden.

Der Teil von Mufti des Geschäfts sollte Unterstützung für Deutschland unter den Moslems in der Sowjetunion, dem Balkan und dem Nahen Osten erheben. Er
führte Radiopropaganda durch das Netz von sechs Stationen, stellte antibritische Spionage und die fünften Säulennetze im Nahen Osten auf.

Im jährlichen Protest gegen die Balfour Behauptung gehalten 1943 am Luftwaffe-Saal in Berlin lobte der Mufti die Deutschen, weil sie "wissen, wie man die Juden
loswird, und das uns in der Nähe von den Deutschen bringt und uns in ihrem Lager setzt."

Muhammad nach dem Kampf von Badr am 1. März 1944 zurückwerfend, rief der Mufti eine Sendung von Berlin herbei: "Araber! Anstieg als ein und Kampf für Ihre
heiligen Rechte. Töten Sie die Juden, wo auch immer Sie sie finden. Das erfreut Gott, Geschichte, und Religion. Das spart Ihre Ehre." 1941 hatte er "verpflichtet,
die Frage der jüdischen Elemente in Palästina und in anderen arabischen Ländern ebenso verlangt durch nationale Interessen, und auf die gleiche Weise zu lösen,
wie die jüdische Frage in den Achse-Ländern gelöst wird."

Bernard Lewis schreibt, dass zusätzlich zur alten Absicht eines Arabiens Ohne Juden "er auf mehr viel riesengroße Zwecke, vorgestellt nicht soviel im Panaraber
zielte wie in Panislamischen Fristen für einen Heiligen Krieg des Islams in der Verbindung mit Deutschland gegen das Weltjudentum, die Endlösung des jüdischen
Problems überall zu vollbringen."

Gemäß deutschen Beamten, die ihn kannten, hatte Der Mufti zu den verschiedenen Behörden wiederholt vorgeschlagen, mit denen er Kontakt, vor allem Hitler,
Ribbentrop und Himmler, die Ausrottung des europäischen Judentums aufrechterhielt. Er dachte darüber als eine bequeme Lösung des palästinensischen Problems

Vielleicht "brauchten die Nazis keine Überzeugung oder Anregung," wie er später war, um zu fordern, aber der erste arabische geistige Führer seiner Zeit alles tat,
dass er konnte, um sicherzustellen, dass die Deutschen in ihrer Entschlossenheit nicht schwankten.

Er ging aus seiner Weise, irgendwelche Juden zu verhindern, die erlaubt werden, Ungarn, Rumänien, und Bulgarien zu verlassen, die am Anfang bereit waren, sie
gehen zu lassen: "Der Mufti machte Proteste überall - im Büro des (Ausländischen) Ministers, im Vorzimmer des Außenministers, und in anderen Abteilungen wie
Innenministerium, Radio, und im SS Hauptquartier Drücken."

Am Ende sagte Eichmann, "Wir haben ihm versprochen, dass kein europäischer Jude in Palästina nicht mehr eingehen würde." Die zeitgenössischen Erben die
Nazistische Ansicht von Judentum sind nicht der handfull von kraftlosen Skinheads und arischer Nation survivalists. Sie sind Schulen, religiöse Führer, und
Hauptströmungsintellektuelle im Moslem, in erster Linie Araber, Welt bedeutend.

Ganz abgesondert vom Auf und Ab des misnamed "geht Frieden" im Nahen Osten ganz abgesondert von der mehr oder weniger kriegslustigen Haltung zur
Regierung Israels in einer Prozession, die grobe Art, wie sie aktiv alle Juden als solcher dämonisieren, erschrickt. Die prominenteste und einflussreiche tägliche
Zeitung in der arabischen Welt ist Al-Ahram, ein halbamtliches Organ der ägyptischen Regierung.

Im Juni 2001 trug es einen op-ed Artikel, "Was genau wollen die Juden?" - und die Antwort war der Nazistischen Zeitung der Völkische Beobachter sechs
Jahrzehnte früher würdig: "Die Juden teilen grenzenlosen Hass der Nichtjuden, sie töten Frauen und Kinder, und Sau-Vernichtung ? Israel wird heute von Leuten
bevölkert, die nicht Nachkommen der Kinder Israels, aber eher eine Mischung von Sklaven, Ariern und den Resten des Khazars sind, und sie nicht Semiten sind.

Mit anderen Worten, sind Leute ohne eine Identität, deren nur beabsichtigen, Erpressungen, Diebstahl und Kontrolle über das Eigentum und Land mit dem
Beistand von den Westländern. "Der zweite einflussreichste Ägypter ist täglich Al-Akhbar, der ein Schritt weiter am 18. April 2001 ging: "Unser Dank geht der
verstorbene Hitler, der, im Voraus, die Rache der Palästinenser auf die schändlichsten Bengel auf dem Gesicht der Erde hervorbrachte. Jedoch rügen wir Hitler für
die Tatsache, dass die Rache ungenügend war."

Es ist hart, sich Hass mehr vitriolisch vorzustellen, als das, der die Nazis tadelt, wegen die Endlösung mehr gründlich nicht zu vollenden. Was bemerkenswert ist, ist
nicht, dass solche Gefühle bestehen, aber dass sie in den Hauptströmungsmedien frei in Umlauf gesetzt und von der Meinung machenden Elite überall in der
Moslemischen Welt verinnerlicht werden. In derselben Liga finden wir den Anspruch, dass der Holocaust tatsächlich nie geschah, und dass die Juden und Israelis
die echten Nazis sind, wird regelmäßig gemacht.

Das Jüdisch-nazistische Thema ist ein Liebling von arabischen Karikaturisten, von denen einige die Swastika interchangeably mit dem Davidsstern verwenden,
oder sie nebeneinander stellen. Das graphische Bild der Juden scheint, direkt von den Seiten der notorischen alten Nazistischen Zeitung Der Stürmer (Der
Stormtroooper) gehoben worden zu sein. Ein Endleckerbissen: es ist kein Unfall, dass mehrere Nazistische Kriegsverbrecher Unterschlupf in Moslemischen
Nationen fanden.

Nehmen Sie den notorischen Otto Skorzeny, ein SS Offizier, der die Rettung von Mussolini von der Gefangenschaft führte, wurde durch den OSS, Vorgänger zum
CIA, als "der gefährlichste Mann in Europa," und später gefundener Dienst unter dem General Nasser in Ägypten beschrieben.

Es gab andere. Dankbar verloren die Nazis natürlich WWII und die vorzeitige Verbindung zwischen dem Islam und Nazismus nie ausgewaschen. Bestehen Sie
unglücklicherweise dort Moslems heute, nicht auf den Fransen aber in der Hauptströmung ihrer Nationen, die noch das als eine große verlorene auf tiefe natürliche
Sympathien beruhende Gelegenheit ansehen.

 Below are actual photos of Muslims who marched in the streets of London during their recent Religion of Peace Demonstration.  (Peace?  That's a joke -- but not funny.)  These photos have never been shown in any American newspapers or television news programs because we want to be careful not to  offend the Muslims.

Unten sind wirkliche Fotos von Moslems, die in den Straßen Londons während ihrer neuen Religion der Friedens demonstration marschierten. (Frieden? Es ist ein Witz - aber nicht komisch.) sind Diese Fotos in irgendwelchen amerikanischen Zeitungen oder Fernsehnachrichten programmen nie gezeigt worden, weil wir uns davor hüten wollen, die Moslems zu verletzen.

Islam wird die Welt beherrschen Ermorden Sie diejenigen das Beleidigungs Islam  -- Europa, das Sie Abbruch bezahlen werden, ist darauf Weg -- Enthaupten Sie diejenigen, die Islam beleidigen -- Schlachten Sie diejenigen, die Islam verspotten -- ?? -- Europa, das Sie Ihrer Ausrottung bezahlen werden, ist auf seinem Weg Enthaupten Sie diejenigen, die Islam beleidigen

Europa ist der Krebs-Islam ist die Antwort -- Schlachten Sie diejenigen, die Islam verspotten   Freiheit geht zum Teufel

Europa nimmt eine Lehre von 9/11 Europa, das Sie Ihrem 9/11 bezahlen werden, ist auf seinem Weg Bereiten Sie sich auf den echten halocaust vor

Home   TOC   Top