Islam -- Facts

--
-- Islam: Religion of Bigots - 8/23/13
-- Are Muslims exempt from obamacare - posted 11/20/13
-- An interesting viewpoint.   Needs serious consideration -
-- Why Islam’s Sharia law is the biggest threat to American safety

Home    Back

 Islam: Religion of Bigots

by Robert Spencer    Frontpagemag.com     August 23, 2013

Barack Obama has said repeatedly that Islam is “a religion of peace.”  His administration has accused those who do not agree with this proposition — or who dare mention Islamic violence against women and homicidal oppression of homosexuals — of “Islamophobia.”These are fictions and the President has done the country a fundamental disservice by promulgating them. 

The truth?  The true religious bigotry is the one that exists in the heart of Islamic orthodoxy.  In Saudi Arabia, the existence of Christian churches is prohibited, along with the Bible itself; no Christian or Jew can enter Mecca or Medina lest their mere footsteps desecrate Islam’s holiest sites.  In Pakistan and Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Muslim world, conversion from Islam to Christianity is punishable by death.  In Iraq, Syria, Nigeria and even the President’s beloved Indonesia, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and other “infidels” often face acts of religious genocide by fundamentalists who invoke core Islamic texts and teachings to justify their actions.

In short, as Robert Spencer shows in his alarming new pamphlet, Islam: Religion of Bigots, the creed of Muhammad, far from being a religion of peace, has revealed itself in the post-9/11 world to be a religion of bigotry.


“Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance,” proclaimed President Barack Obama during his appeal to the Muslim world from Cairo on June 4, 2009.
“We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country.”1

Unfortunately, this is far from the truth. Even during what is generally considered to have been the Golden Age of Islamic “tolerance,” it is more accurate to say that non-Muslims were tolerated as second-class subjects rather than respected as equals under Islamic regimes. They were regarded as dhimmis, whose residence was conditioned on their submission to humiliating regulations that ensured their subjugation to the Muslim population. They had to pay an onerous special tax (jizya) mandated by the Qur’an (9:29), for example, and wear special marks identifying their second-class status.

Moreover, unlike Christendom, whose leaders have issued apologies for past mistreatment of Jews and condemned the scriptural justifications for that mistreatment, authorities in the Muslim world from Muhammad’s day to this have never thought twice about referring to Jews as “apes and pigs” (cf. Qur’an 2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166), or regarding them as destined by God’s will for destruction. These are some of the salient facts that Obama’s charitable view obscures at a time when prominent Muslim leaders including Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the world’s most prominent Muslim cleric, are calling on the faithful to finish the extermination of the Jews that Hitler began.2

In countries where Muslims are a small minority, such as the United States, there is a surface plausibility to Obama’s claim. Muslim groups have so far accommodated themselves to a democracy whose secular faith is one of diversity and tolerance.  But in countries and communities where Muslims constitute a national majority, the face of Islam looks quite different.  In Saudi Arabia, the existence of Christian churches is prohibited, along with the possession of Christian Bibles; no Christian or Jew is allowed to enter the cities of Mecca and Medina lest their footprints defile Islam’s sacred sites.  As the Kingdom of the Two Holy Places, Saudi Arabia has a unique status in the Islamic world.  One aspect of this status is that Mecca and Medina are realizations of Muhammad’s command to remove all but Muslims from the Arabian Peninsula.3 Mecca and Medina represent the aspirations of the Muslim world, the vision of a quintessential Islamic society: one in which there are no non-Muslims.

In Pakistan, Afghanistan and elsewhere, conversion from Islam to Christianity is already punishable by death, in accord with Muhammad’s command. In Thailand, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Nigeria, and even Obama’s beloved Indonesia, religious minorities — Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and non-believers –face harassment and often violent religious persecution. These persecutions are carried out by jihadist Muslims who invoke core Islamic texts and teachings to justify their actions. In short, in the Muslim world itself, which since 9/11 has been increasingly swept up in the tide of Islamic supremacism, the creed of Muhammad reveals itself to be a religion of bigots rather than, as President Obama would have it, a religion of peace.

There is a theological foundation for Islamic bigotry. The Qur’an calls the Jews and Christians who reject Muhammad “the most vile of created beings” (98:6). It says that the “polytheists are unclean” (9:28), and since it claims that Jews consider Ezra the Son of God the way Christians consider Jesus the Son of God (9:30), and that “it is not befitting for Allah to take a son” (19:35), in Islamic theology, Jews and Christians are as much polytheists as are Hindus and hence just as unclean.

Religious Genocide

In March 2013, the Egyptian Islamic scholar Abdullah Badr demonstrated how such a belief can work out in practice when he explained that Christians disgusted him, saying that it was “not a matter of piety, but disgust. I get grossed out. Get that? Disgust, I get grossed out, man, I cannot stand their smell or … I don’t like them, it’s my choice. And they gross me out; their smell, their look, everything. I feel disgusted, disgusted.”4

That disgust has combined with imperatives derived from Qur’anic injunctions to “slay the polytheists wherever you find them” (9:5) and to subjugate the People of the Book (9:29) to play out in Islamic history in the cleansing of entire regions of their non-Muslim populations. Eliminating other religions, as per Qur’an 8:39 (“fight…until religion is all for Allah”) and making sure that any non-Muslims who remain are conquered and submissive, is the overarching goal of jihad. As an Iranian Bahai observed to V. S. Naipaul in the course of his travels through the world of Islam, “These Muslims are a strange people. They have an old mentality. Very old mentality. They are very bad to minorities.”5

The transformation of Constantinople following its conquest in 1453 illustrates the effects of Muslim bigotry. Before the Muslim conquest, Constantinople had been the center of Eastern Christianity and the second city of all Christendom, as well as the chief rival to the splendor and authority of Rome. Its Hagia Sophia cathedral, built by the Emperor Justinian in the sixth century, was the grandest and most celebrated church in the Christian world until the construction of St. Peter’s in the Vatican. As recently as 1914, Constantinople still boasted a population nearly fifty percent Christian. Today, as a result of the religious persecution of Christians, the city is now 99.99% Muslim.6

After the 1453 Muslim conquest, the Hagia Sophia Cathedral, like so many other Christian churches before and after, was transformed into a mosque. After Turkey’s secularization, the mosque was converted into a museum by the secularists, and is now about to be transformed into a mosque again. While secular Turkey did not enforce Islamic law, it saw a depoliticized Islam as essential to the Turkish identity at the expense of the Christian population. In Tur-Abdin in southwest Turkey in 1960, there were 150,000 Christians; today, there are just over two thousand.7 The rest have fled in the face of Muslim hostility and harassment.

Occasionally, Muslim authorities found it politically expedient to draw explicitly on the genocidal passions Muhammad had inspired, and used them to arouse the fury of the populace against the dhimmis, who were bringing Allah’s disfavor upon the larger community. In a harbinger of the Armenian catastrophe that would take place in Turkey twenty years later, the Ottoman sultan Abdul Hamid initiated a series of bloody strikes against the restive Christian Armenians in eastern Anatolia in 1895. The Armenians had made the mistake of embracing Western notions of human rights, and of beginning to question their dhimmi status. According to Lord Kinross, historian of the Ottoman Empire, “at the point of a bayonet,” the Armenians were offered “the choice between death and forcible conversion to Islam.”8 The genocide that the Muslim Turks subsequently conducted during World War I was a manifestation of the same jihadist strain in Islam, and led to the murder of a million and a half Armenians.

In Turkey itself, the Christian population has declined from 15% in 1920 to 1% today. In Syria, the Christian population has declined from 33% to 10% in the same span. Since the Turks occupied northern Cyprus in 1974, churches have been despoiled of their icons, which have flooded the market in Greece. The Turks have taken over many churches for secular uses, and even tried to convert the fourth century Christian monastery of San Makar into a hotel. Christian Cypriots are forbidden to come near the building, much less enter it.9

Likewise in Tunisia, “in the early 1950s, half of the inhabitants of Tunis were Catholics, but with the declaration of independence some 280,000 Tunisian Catholics were expelled. Today there are no more than a tenth of this number and most of the churches are closed or no longer in use.”10

Before the Gulf War, the number of Christians in Iraq approached a million people, according to some estimates.11 But with Shi’ites and Sunnis vying for power in the war-torn country, over half, or roughly 500,000 Christians, have fled the country rather than risk the treatment in store for them from the majority Muslim population. This is not to suggest that the brutal regime of Saddam Hussein was particularly hospitable to Iraqi Christians. Even under his relatively secular regime, in which Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz was a Chaldean Catholic, the small Christian community faced random violence from the Muslim majority. Aside from outbreaks of actual persecution, including murder, Christians were routinely pressured to renounce their religion and to marry Muslims.12 But since Saddam’s removal and the institution of Iraq’s Islamic constitution, the situation has grown exponentially worse.

Since the Muslim Brotherhood’s ascendancy in Egypt, enabled by the Obama administration, Islamic bigotry has been directed with increasing violence toward the nation’s indigenous Coptic Christian population. Recently, Muslim mobs, with the acquiescence of the Islamic supremacist regime, conducted an armed attack on St. Mark’s Cathedral, the seat of the Coptic pope. Now Copts are fleeing the country in droves. NBC News reported in June 2013: “The number of Egyptians receiving asylum in the U.S. has jumped more than five-fold in recent years.”13

In Bethlehem, the birthplace of Christ, the population was 85% Christian in 1948, but as of 2006, only 12% of those who hold to the faith of the town’s most celebrated native son remained, and even that minimal percentage is almost certainly smaller today.14

Islamic bigotry is driving Christians out of their ancient homelands all over the Middle East. “A century ago,” noted Simon Kent in the Toronto Sun, June 2013, “more than 20% of the region’s population was Christian and as recently as the 1980s, places like Lebanon had a Christian majority. Now, with Christian numbers fading, it’s split between brawling Hezbollah Shi’a and Sunni fanatics. Estimates put the Christian population in the Middle East at under 5% and sinking rapidly — and the figure only remains that high because of the Coptic Christians who have not yet left strife- torn Egypt.”15

The purging of Christians in the Middle East has taken place largely since Osama bin Laden launched the Islamic jihad in earnest. It represents the greatest population cleansing of modern times, dwarfing “ethnic” cleansings, and has taken place almost silently — while facile Western observers, including the occupant of the White House, rhapsodize about Muslim “tolerance.”

In a stark plaint that would sound paranoid if it were not so obviously true, Gregory III, the Patriarch of Antioch of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, stated in 2006: “After September 11, there is a plot to eliminate all the Christian minorities from the Arabic world. Our simple existence ruins the equations whereby Arabs can’t be other than Moslems, and Christians but be westerners.”16

Nor is it just the Arab Middle East where the purge is taking place. Hindu activist Bharati Krishna declares: “When Pakistan came into existence in 1947, 24 per cent of the population were Hindus. And now look at the percentage of Hindus in Pakistan, just below 2 per cent. What happened to the rest? Majority of them have been mercilessly killed by the Islamic fanatics and the rest forcibly converted to Islam.” Krishna adds “the same happened in the case of Bangladeshi Hindus. The percentage of Hindu population in Bangladesh in 1947 (then East Pakistan) was numbered at 31. But with course of time it has been declined and stationed at nine per cent now. Massive religious conversion and ruthless murders of the Hindus were the reasons for this decline.”17

Traditional Islamic Submissions

Bigotry towards non-Muslim populations, along with religious cleansing, is as old as Islam itself. Islam originated in Arabia in the late seventh and early eighth centuries.18 Before its advent, Egypt, Libya, and all of North Africa were Christian, and had been so for hundreds of years. So were Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and Asia Minor. The churches addressed in the letters of Paul, collected in the New Testament, are located in Asia Minor and modern Turkey as well as modern Greece. Antioch, Constantinople (“Istanbul” in modern Turkey) and Alexandria in Egypt were three of the most important Christian centers of the first millennium. But then came the Arab armies, and ultimately these lands became Muslim — not because the compelling aspects of Islam induced large numbers of people to convert to the religion of the conquerors, but because the non-Muslims were forced to accept a humiliating second-class status. This was a bigotry enforced by the sword. Conversion to Islam became the only way to live a decent life or, in many cases, to live at all, and in this way the Christian populations of these areas steadily diminished.

There was no tolerance for the “other,” as numerous misleading commentators claim. For the invading Muslim armies, it wasn’t enough to conquer their rivals; the native population had to be subdued, and its religion humiliated. Historian Bat Ye’or recounts that when the Arab invaders conquered Egypt in the seventh century, “Sophronius [Bishop of Jerusalem], in his sermon on the Day of Epiphany 636, bewailed the destruction of churches and monasteries, the sacked towns, the fields laid waste, the villages burned down by the nomads who were overrunning the country. In a letter the same year to Sergius, patriarch of Constantinople, he mentions the ravages wrought by the Muslim Arabs. Thousands of people perished in 639, victims of the famine and plague that resulted from these destructions.”19

Once the Muslims were entrenched in power, they began to levy the jizya, or tax on non-Muslims, which were not small charges. A medieval chronicler writes of one of the towns subjected to Muslim rule: “It is impossible to describe the lamentable position of the inhabitants of this town, who came to the point of offering their children in exchange for the enormous sums that they had to pay each month, finding no one to help them because God had abandoned them and had delivered the Christians into the hands of their enemies.”20 In the fourteenth century, the pioneering sociologist Ibn Khaldun explained the options for Christians: “It is [for them to choose between] conversion to Islam, payment of the poll tax, or death.”21

As far as Islamic law was concerned, the Muslims who displayed such ruthless bigotry toward non-Muslims were not carrying their zeal too far, but were following the example of their Prophet, who expelled the three Jewish tribes of Medina: “It has been narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Jews of Banu Nadir and Banu Quraiza fought against the Messenger of Allah, who expelled Banu Nadir, and allowed Quraiza to stay on, and granted favour to them until they too fought against him. Then he killed their men, and distributed their women, children and properties among the Muslims, except that some of them had joined the Messenger of Allah who granted them security. They embraced Islam. The Messenger of Allah turned out all the Jews of Medina, Banu Qainuqa… and the Jews of Banu Haritha and every other Jew who was in Medina.”22

In light of the violence with which Muhammad spread Islam, there is a distinct menace in his famous invitation to the Byzantine emperor Heraclius: “Embrace Islam and you will be safe.”23 Heraclius didn’t embrace Islam, and ultimately Byzantium fell to the jihadi sword.

These statements and actions of Islam’s prophet laid the foundations of a culture of bigotry and religious purges. The former realms of Christendom, now universally regarded as part of the Islamic world, only became so in the same way as these Arabian Jewish tribes became Muslim: by being bathed in blood and then subjugated by force.

The provisions governing the jizya and the subjection of non-Muslims in Islamic law have not been fully enforced since the mid-nineteenth century, but reinstituting them is a goal of today’s jihadists, who seek to restore the orthodoxy of the faith and are now in control of the two largest countries in the Middle East. In March 2007, Muslim gangs knocked on doors in Christian neighborhoods in Baghdad, demanding payment of the jizya.24 In December 2011, Yassir Al-Burhami, a leader of the Salafists, an Egyptian movement of rigorist Muslims, reiterated some of the classic Islamic laws regarding the dhimmis: “Appointing infidels to positions of authority over Muslims is prohibited. Allah said: ‘Never will Allah grant the infidels a way [to triumph] over the Believers’” (Qur’an 4:141). He also declared that the Muslims of Egypt should begin again to collect the jizya from the Christians.

Al-Burhami also cited Muhammad’s precedents as a guide to Muslims living in countries in which they were still minorities: “The Muslims can implement any form of conduct used by the Prophet Muhammad. When the Prophet Muhammad was still in Mecca, he dealt with the infidels in a certain way, and when the Muslims are weak, they should deal with the infidels this way. ‘Refrain from action, pray, and pay the zakkat.’ In many infidel countries, such as occupied Palestine, we instruct Muslims to do just that. We are not telling the Muslims in Gaza to launch rockets every day, which would lead to the destruction of the entire country. We tell them to adhere to the truce. When the Prophet Muhammad first arrived in Al-Medina, he signed a treaty with the Jews without forcing them to pay the jizya poll tax. This was necessary at the time, but when they breached the treaty, he fought them, and eventually, he imposed the jizya upon the People of the Book…. The Christians [of Egypt] can be dealt with like the Jews of Al-Medina. This is possible.”25

The idea that Christians must “feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29) in Islamic lands is also very much alive. When the first Catholic Church in Qatar opened in March 2008, it included no cross, no bell, no steeple, and no sign. “The idea,” explained the church’s pastor, Father Tom Veneracion, “is to be discreet because we don’t want to inflame any sensitivities.”26 In the Philippines, the church in the nation’s one Islamic city, Marawi, has also done away with the cross. A Catholic priest, Father Teresito Soganub, explains: “To avoid arguments and to avoid further misunderstandings we just plant the cross deep in our hearts.” Soganub, according to Reuters, “doesn’t wear a crucifix or a clerical collar and sports a beard out of respect for his Muslim neighbors.” He celebrates few weddings, since roast pork is a staple of wedding receptions for Filipino Catholics.27

It is easy to see the need for such discretion. Preaching in a mosque in Al-Damam, Saudi Arabia, the popular Saudi Sheikh Muhammad Saleh Al-Munajjid recommended hatred of Christians and Jews as a proper course: “Muslims must,” he declared, “educate their children to jihad. This is the greatest benefit of the situation: educating the children to jihad and to hatred of the Jews, the Christians, and the infidels; educating the children to jihad and to revival of the embers of jihad in their souls. This is what is needed now.”28

The hatred of other religions, particularly of Christianity and Judaism, is manifest in the attitude towards religious conversion in countries with Islamic supremacist regimes. Converts from Islam to Christianity are often hunted in these countries, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia being the most prominent, while virtually all religious authorities in the Muslim world agree that such individuals deserve death. Muhammad himself commanded it: “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.”29 This is still the position of all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence, although there is some disagreement over whether the law applies only to men, or to women also.At Cairo’s Al-Azhar University, the most prestigious and influential institution in the Islamic world, an Islamic manual that the institution certifies as a reliable guide to Sunni Muslim orthodoxy states: “When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.” Although the right to kill an apostate is reserved in Islamic law to the leader of the community and other Muslims can theoretically be punished for taking this duty upon themselves, in practice a Muslim who kills an apostate needs to pay no indemnity and perform no expiatory acts (as he must in other kinds of murder cases under classic Islamic law). This accommodation is made because killing an apostate “is killing someone who deserves to die.”30

Islamic Bigotry and Islamophobia

Given Islam’s long and shameful record of bigotry, it is perverse in the extreme that Islamic spokesmen routinely charge those who point out the foregoing facts about Islam with … bigotry. According to these spokesmen and their gullible sympathizers on the left, any observation about the harsher realities of the Islamic world is evidence of “Islamophobia” — irrational hatred of all Muslims, and not just those who are carrying out terrorism in the name of Allah, or brutalizing women as a religious obligation. Several widely publicized reports, including one by the Democratic Party- aligned Center for American Progress, single out prominent conservative figures who have publicly criticized the misogyny, bigotry and terrorism promoted by many Islamic institutions, and stigmatized them as “Islamophobes.”31

The term Islamophobia is one of the favored weapons of the Muslim Brotherhood and allied jihadist organizations in the West. Muslim Brotherhood groups such as the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) employ it to manufacture a modern-day thought crime out of legitimate concerns about Islamic bigotry, misogyny and support for terrorist entities like Hezbollah and Hamas. Voltaire said, “To learn who rules over you [or in this case intends to rule over you], simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”

The campaign to suppress all links of Islam to Islamic terrorism gained its greatest and most potentially damaging success in 2011, when Muslim Brotherhood groups and their left-wing allies prevailed on the Obama Administration to remove all mention of Islam and jihad from the counter-terror training materials used by the FBI and other agencies. This left agents in a state of woeful unpreparedness, rendering them incapable of evaluating intelligence regarding jihadist threats. This condition of purposeful ignorance bore bitter fruit in April 2013, when Islamic terrorists exploded a bomb at the Boston Marathon. The Russian and Saudi governments had warned the FBI in advance about the bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev. But the FBI discounted the warnings because they were blind to Tsarnaev’s connection to the global Islamic jihad and perceived him only as a Chechen “nationalist,” engaged in a cause that was a Russian problem and had nothing to do with the United States.

The goal of the “Islamophobia” campaign is disarm the West in the face of the Islamic threat, and beyond that to establish in free societies the blasphemy provisions of Islamic law forbidding criticism of Islam. This prohibition would preclude, for example, recognition of the Jew-hatred that permeates Islamic sacred texts, as well as the pronouncements of Islamic leaders.32 It would also render the First Amendment to the U.S. Bill of Rights null and void. Adoption of laws criminalizing “Islamophobia” would also foreclose criticism of Islam’s institutionalized mistreatment of women and gays.

If such a possibility seems farfetched, consider that the student councils at four elite universities in California, including UCLA and UC Berkeley, have passed (by unanimous votes) “anti-Islamophobia” resolutions mandating “zero tolerance” for just those expressions of opinion. One of the chief advocates of these resolutions, and leader of two campus Muslim Brotherhood fronts, Sadia Saifuddin, was recently nominated by the regents of the UC system to sit on their board as the representative of all UC students.33

Blasphemy laws protecting Islam may not yet be adopted in the West, but Muslim mobs are ready to enforce them anyway. In the fall of 2005, violent Muslim riots resulting in over 100 deaths were triggered by the publication of cartoons in Denmark depicting Muhammad. In the wake of these Islam-inspired outrages, a group of writers issued a manifesto called, “Together Facing the New Totalitarianism.”34 This genuine anti-bigotry manifesto declared: “After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new global totalitarian threat: Islamism…. We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all. We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of ‘Islamophobia,’ a wretched concept that confuses criticism of Islam as a religion and stigmatization of those who believe in it. We defend the universality of the freedom of expression, so that a critical spirit can exist in every continent, towards each and every maltreatment and dogma.”35

Canaries in the Mine of the Islamic Jihad

The foremost targets of Muslim bigotry and the canaries in the mine for all non-Muslims in the path of the jihad are, unsurprisingly, Jews and the state of Israel. Islamic leaders have repeatedly affirmed their desire that the Jewish State cease to exist — a genocidal agenda in itself, and one that could only be accomplished by a Holocaust in the Middle East. Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, the former president of Iran, has called for such a Holocaust (without notable dissent from the Muslim world), saying that “the annihilation of the Zionist regime will come,” and that it was predicted by the Ayatollah Khomeini: “The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time” — a declaration widely but not quite accurately translated in the West as “as the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map.”

On other occasions, Ahmadinejad has made the goal crystal clear: “The Islamic umma (community) will not allow its historic enemy [Israel] to live in its heartland,” and “the issue of Palestine is not one which we could compromise on …. This would mean the defeat of the Islamic world.” In Ahmadinejad’s mind, the destruction of Israel is near:

“There is no doubt that the new wave [of attacks] in Palestine will soon wipe this disgraceful blot [Israel] from the face of the Islamic world.” The Palestinians have made this genocidal goal equally clear. In the words of Mahmoud al-Zahar, a founder of Hamas: “There is no place for you Jews among us, and you have no future among the nations of the world. You are headed to annihilation.”36

Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah (Party of Allah), has proclaimed the same goal:“[I]f they [the Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide,” while a 1992 Hezbollah statement declared “open war until the elimination of Israel and until the death of the last Jew on earth.”37

This hatred of the Jews and their existence emanates directly from Muhammad’s call to all Muslims to “fight the Jews and kill them” to the very last one. Thus Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood that the Obama administration has chaperoned to power in Egypt, proclaimed: “Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them — even though they exaggerated this issue — he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers….”38

For the jihadists, the Jews are only the first in line. In 1998, the World Islamic Front, led by Osama bin Laden, formally declared jihad against “the Jews and the Crusaders,” meaning the Christian nations (as the jihadis regarded them) of America and Europe. The fatwa declared: “The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies — civilians and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it.”39 At the “World Without Zionism” conference held in Tehran in October 2005, the assembled delegates chanted “death to Israel, death to America, death to England,” while the host, Ahmadinejad, predicted to the cheers of the assembled that, “with the help of the Almighty, we shall soon experience a world without America and Zionism, notwithstanding those who doubt.”40

Like Ahmadinejad, Hasan Nasrallah also wants to see America destroyed: “Let the entire world hear me. Our hostility to the Great Satan [America] is absolute. … Regardless of how the world has changed after 11 September, ‘Death to America’ will remain our reverberating and powerful slogan: ‘Death to America.’”

This chilling command is the logical extension of Islamic bigotry, and its crowning manifestation.
 


Notes:

1 “Text: Obama’s Speech in Cairo,” New York Times, June 4, 2009.

2 “Sheik Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi: Allah Imposed Hitler upon the Jews to Punish Them ‘Allah Willing, the Next Time Will Be at the Hand of the Believers,’” MEMRITV.org, January 28-30, 2005.

3 “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.” (Sahih Muslim 19.4366)

4 Raymond Ibrahim, “Video: ‘I Hate Christians and Am Disgusted by Them’ — Muslim Cleric,” RaymondIbrahim.com, April 1, 2013.

5 V. S. Naipaul, Among the Believers: An Islamic Journey, Vintage Books, 1982, p. 18.

6 Philip Mansel, Constantinople: City of the World’s Desire 1453- 1924, St. Martin’s Griffin, 1998, p. 437.

7 Aid to the Church in Need, “Religious Freedom in the Majority Islamic Countries 1998 Report: Turkey,” op. cit.

8 Lord Kinross, The Ottoman Centuries: The Rise and Fall of the Turkish Empire, Morrow Quill, 1979, p. 559-560.

9 Aid to the Church in Need, “Religious Freedom in the Majority Islamic Countries 1998 Report: Cyprus,” op. cit.

10 Ibid

11 Luiza Oleszczuk, “Christians could disappear from Iraq and Afghanistan,” Christian Post, December 30, 2011.

12Aid to the Church in Need, “Religious Freedom in the Majority Islamic Countries 1998 Report: Iraq.” http://www.alleanzacat- tolica.org/ acs/acs_english/report_98/iraq.htm

13 Charlene Gubash, “Egypt’s Coptic Christians say they are ‘no longer safe,’” NBC News, June 20, 2013.

14 Stephen Farrell and Rana Sabbagh Gargour, “‘All my staff at the church have been killed – they disappeared,’” The Times, Decem- ber 23, 2006.

15 Simon Kent, “Christians face being driven from the Middle East,” Toronto Sun, June 9, 2013.

16 “We Are the Church of Islam: Interview with the patriarch of Antioch Grégoire III Laham,” 30 Days, Issue No. 10, 2005.

17 Bharati Krishna, “Pakistan Hindus, mercilessly killed, forcibly converted to Islam,” Haindava Keralam, April 29, 2012.

18 Toward the beginning of the seventh century, if one accepts the canonical account of Muhammad’s life.

19 Bat Ye’or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996, p. 44.

20 Quoted in Bat Ye’or, pp. 271-272.

21 Bat Ye’or, p. 296.

22 Sahih Muslim, translated by Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, Kitab Bhavan, revised edition 2000, vol. 3, book 17, no. 4364.

23 This incident is almost certainly apocryphal, but nonetheless considered authentic in Islamic tradition. Muhammed Ibn Ismaiel Al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari: The Translation of the Meanings, translated by Muhammad M. Khan, Darussalam, 1997, vol. 4, book 56, no. 2941.

24 “Muslims Forcing Christian Assyrians in Baghdad Neighborhood to Pay ‘Protection Tax,’” Assyrian International News Agency, March 18, 2007.

25 “Egyptian Salafi Leader Yassir Al-Burhami Compares the Christians of Egypt to the Jews of Al-Medina,” Middle East Media Research Institute, December 3, 2011.

26 Sonia Verma, “First Catholic Church Opens in Qatar, Sparking Fear of Backlash Against Christians,” FoxNews, March 14, 2008.

27 Carmel Crimmins, “Philippines’ Islamic city proud to be different,” Reuters, March 17, 2008.

28 This sermon is undated. Like the others quoted here, it was posted at the Saudi website Al-Minbar (www.alminbar.net).

29 Muhammed Ibn Ismaiel Al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari: The Translation of the Meanings, translated by Muhammad M. Khan, Darussalam, 1997, vol. 9, book 84, number 57.

30 Reliance of the Traveller, o8.1, o8.4. 21

31 Wajahat Ali, Eli Clifton, Matthew Duss, Lee Fang, Scott Keyes, and Faiz Shakir, Fear, Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America, The Center for American Progress, August 2011, listed five leading “Islamophobes”: Frank Gaffney, David Yerushalmi, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer, and Steven Emerson. These names appear in most “Islamophobia” reports, along with David Horowitz, Michael Savage, Pat Robertson, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Mark Steyn, Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck, and Pamela Geller.

32 Epitomized in Muhammad’s notorious statement: “The last
hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them, until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: O Muslim, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him” (Sahih Muslim 6985).

33 The other two are UC Santa Barbara and UC Davis. http:// frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/islamic-supremacist-nom- inated-as-uc-student-regent/. See also David Horowitz and Robert Spencer, Islamophobia: Thought Crime of the Totalitarian Future (pamphlet) September 8, 2011. http://frontpagemag.com/2012/ david-horowitz-and-robert-spencer/islamophobia-thought-crime- of-the-totalitarian-future-4/

34 http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4764730.stm

35 Ibid.

36 “Hamas Leader Mahmoud Al-Zahhar Justifies Persecution of Jews in History and Promises that Jews ‘Are Headed to Annihilation,’” MEMRI, November 12, 2010.

37 “The Islamic Genocide Plan,” FrontPageMagazine.com, December 1, 2006. See also “Statements by Radical Muslims calling for the destruction of Israel (and its ally the United States),” Discover The Networks, January 2007, http://www.discoverthe- networks.org/Articles/genocidequotesjan.html. Quotations from contemporary jihadists are taken from these two sources unless otherwise noted.

38 ‘To conclude my speech, I’d like to say that the only thing I hope for is that as my life approaches its end, Allah will give me an opportunity to go to the land of Jihad and resistance, even if in a wheelchair. I will shoot Allah’s enemies, the Jews, and they will throw a bomb at me, and thus, I will seal my life with martyrdom.” Sheik Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi: Allah Imposed Hitler upon the Jews to Punish Them — ‘Allah Willing, the Next Time Will Be at the Hand of the Believers,’” MEMRITV.org, January 28-30, 2005.

39 World Islamic Front statement, “Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders,” February 23, 1998. http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/ docs/980223-fatwa.htm 40 Safa Haeri, “Iran on course for a showdown,” Asia Times, October 28, 2005.
 


Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://www.frontpagemag.com

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/frontpagemag-com/religion-of-bigotry/
 


 Here is what I have found.  Certain people may request exemption from obamacare if they meet the necessary specifications, and a benevolent bureaucrat approves.  So regardless of what snopes says about the claim that Muslims are exempted being false, this leaves the question very much open for Muslims to be exempted in total.


 Analysis: These forwarded messages contain an astounding array of inaccuracies and exaggerations, beginning with the main proposition:

·  Are Muslims "specifically exempted from the government mandate to purchase insurance, and also from the penalty tax for being uninsured," as claimed in the message?

The answer is no. This is a fictitious claim.  There is no provision specifically exempting Muslims or any other religious group from mandated health insurance in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 [This statement (in red) is true specifically, but practically false when considered in context of what a bureaucrat will do with it, or more specifically what obama’s directive’s tell how it is to be handled.]

Nor do the words "Muslim," "Islam," or "Dhimmitude" appear anywhere in any version of the legislation.

·         Is anybody exempted from the insurance mandate by reason of religious affiliation?

Yes. A paragraph on page 107 of the legislation provides for individual religious exemptions. The language is non-specific with regard to particular faiths, however.

Read carefully: (5) EXEMPTIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.—In the case of an individual who is seeking an exemption certificate under section 1311(d)(4)(H) from any requirement or penalty imposed by section 5000A, the following information [is required]:

(A) In the case of an individual seeking exemption based on the individual's status as a member of an exempt religious sect or division, as a member of a health care sharing ministry, as an Indian, or as an individual eligible for a hardship exemption, such information as the Secretary shall prescribe. Similarly, page 128 of the legislation states: "(A) RELIGIOUS CONSCIENCE EXEMPTION.—Such term [i.e., "applicable individual"] shall not include any individual for any month if such individual has in effect an exemption under section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which certifies that such individual is a member of a recognized religious sect or division thereof described in section 1402(g)(1) and an adherent of established tenets or teachings of such sect or division as described in such section. The above passage amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, of which Section 1402(g)(1) defines "a member of a recognized religious sect or division thereof" as follows: (1) Exemption
Any individual may file an application (in such form and manner, and with such official, as may be prescribed by regulations under this chapter) for an exemption from the tax imposed by this chapter if he is a member of a recognized religious sect or division thereof and is an adherent of established tenets or teachings of such sect or division by reason of which he is conscientiously opposed to acceptance of the benefits of any private or public insurance which makes payments in the event of death, disability, old-age, or retirement or makes payments toward the cost of, or provides services for, medical care (including the benefits of any insurance system established by the Social Security Act). Such exemption may be granted only if the application contains or is accompanied by—

(A) such evidence of such individual’s membership in, and adherence to the tenets or teachings of, the sect or division thereof as the Secretary may require for purposes of determining such individual’s compliance with the preceding sentence, and

(B) his waiver of all benefits and other payments under titles II and XVIII of the Social Security Act on the basis of his wages and self-employment income as well as all such benefits and other payments to him on the basis of the wages and self-employment income of any other person,

and only if the Commissioner of Social Security finds that—

(C) such sect or division thereof has the established tenets or teachings referred to in the preceding sentence,

(D) it is the practice, and has been for a period of time which he deems to be substantial, for members of such sect or division thereof to make provision for their dependent members which in his judgment is reasonable in view of their general level of living, and

(E) such sect or division thereof has been in existence at all times since December 31, 1950.

 

The upshot of all this legalese is that the law sets the eligibility bar for religious exemptions quite high. According to a 2009 report on MSNBC.com, the provision was originally drafted with the Old Order Amish in mind, a sect whose beliefs prohibit them from participating in any public or commercial insurance (and whose members, for that reason, are already exempt from Social Security). Members must participate in a form of self-insurance per the language above requiring exempted sects "to make provision for their dependent members."

·  Is it true that "Islam considers insurance to be 'gambling,' 'risk-taking,' and 'usury,' and is thus banned"?

Strictly speaking, yes. But there are exceptions to the rule, of which health insurance is probably one.

"It is true, under common interpretations of Islamic law, that conventional insurance is forbidden," explains About.com's Guide to Islam Christine Huda Dodge. "As [Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid] explains, many scholars point out that paying money for something, with no guarantee that you will ever benefit from it (i.e. you pay for health insurance coverage, and never get sick), involves a high ambiguity/risk and could theoretically be considered a form of gambling. The criticism is of the system itself, where the insured always seems to lose while the insurance companies get richer and charge higher premiums."

However, some of the same Islamic sources allow for exceptions in cases where insurance is mandated by law. "If you are forced to take out insurance and there is an accident," notes Sheikh Al-Munajjid, "it is permissible for you to take from the insurance company the same amount as the payments you have made, but you should not take any more than that."

As Dodge points out, Muslims living as minorities and governed by secular law in non-Muslim countries typically have to compromise and work within the limits imposed on them. "It seems to me that most American Muslims are resigned to certain insurances that are considered to be obligatory," she writes. "Car insurance, for example, is mandated by law. As far as I know, nobody has complained or petitioned for a religious exemption to car insurance. Health insurance is even more fundamental, as the health/life/death of one's self and family hangs in the balance. I am unaware of any attempts from within the Muslim community to avoid health insurance."

Muslims buy auto insurance where required by law. It stands to reason they can buy health insurance, too.

  


 An interesting viewpoint.   Needs serious consideration

This is very interesting in light of the identification of two young Muslims as the perpetrators of the latest Boston Massacre.

A German's View on Islam - it's well worth reading.

This is by far the best explanation of the Muslim terrorist situation I have ever read.   The author's references to past history are accurate and clear. It's not a lengthy read, it's easy to understand, and it's well worth the read.   The author of this email is Dr. Emanuel Tanya, a well-known and well-respected psychiatrist.

A man, whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II, owned a number of large industries and estates.

When he was asked how many German  people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism.

'Very few people were true Nazis,' he said, 'but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care.   I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.'

We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace.

Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectre of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.

                 It is the fanatics who march.

It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide.

It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave.

It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque.

It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals.

It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.

The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent majority,' is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful  majority were irrelevant.

China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.

And who can forget Rwanda, which  collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace loving'?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:

Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own  them, and the end of their world will have begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.

Now Islamic prayers have been introduced into Toronto and other public schools in Ontario, and, yes, in Ottawa too while the Lord's Prayer was removed (due to being so offensive?) The Islamic way may be peaceful for the time being in our country until the fanatics move in.

In Australia, and indeed in many countries around the world, many of the most commonly consumed food items have the Halal emblem on them.   Just look at the back of some of the most popular chocolate bars, and at other food items in your local supermarket.    Food on aircraft has  the Halal emblem, just to appease the privileged minority who are now rapidly expanding within the nation’s shores.

In the U.K, the Muslim communities refuse to integrate and there are now dozens of “no-go” zones within major cities across the country that the police force dare not intrude upon.   Sharia law prevails there, because the Muslim community in those areas refuses to acknowledge British law.

As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts - the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

Lastly, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on is contributing to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand.    So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on! Let us hope that thousands, world-wide, read this and think about it, and they also continue to send it on - before it's too  late.

And we are silent......
 



 Why Islam’s Sharia law is the biggest threat to American safety

May 10, 2013 WASHINGTON Times

— Former US Attorney General Mike Mukasey spoke recently at Temple Emanuel in Greensboro, North Carolina. “Isms all want to rid the world of something. Nazism wanted to rid the world of Jews. Communism wanted to rid the world of God. Islamism wants to rid the world of infidels - that is you,” said Mukasey.

Sharia (the “path) is Islamic law. According to most sources, including the Council on Foreign Relations, shariah is made up of rules that regulate every nook and cranny of life - worship, marriage and inheritance, criminal offenses, commerce and personal conduct. “It is derived primarily from the Quran and the Sunna—the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed.”

The bombings and shootings in the name of Islam, such as the Boston Marathon, Fort Hood, the “Underwear Bomber” and 911 are just one element of how sharia law calls Muslims to fight against those who do not accept their law.

Andrew McCarthy, former federal prosecutor and co-author of Shariah: The Threat To America: An Exercise In Competitive Analysis, wrote, “American elites still deal with sharia as just a religious system, when in fact it is as totalitarian a political program as ever were those of communism, fascism, national socialism, or Japanese imperialism.”

The Muslim holy book, the Quran, says that non-Muslims are “the most vile of created beings” (Q 98:6)

Omar Ahmad, co-founder/Board Chairman of Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), in 1998 said publicly, “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”

Islam’s sharia law is insinuating itself into our courtrooms, schools, prisons and every other aspect of society. The lever often used is one of discrimination against the precepts of shariah, while Christian and Jewish customs and laws remain.

America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. From those foundational principles, Jews and Christians predominantly built this nation’s entire infrastructure from hospitals, universities and charities to the industries that made life better for much of the world.

Islamic principles, defined by sharia law, are in absolute direct opposition to everything Americans believe regarding the law and civil society.

How is sharia showing up in America?

In a 2011 report, Center for Security Policy found 50 “significant” published appellate court cases where sharia law entered the court’s decision making. “Some judges are making decisions deferring to Shariah law even when those decisions conflict with Constitutional protections.”

While later overturned, a New Jersey judge exonerated a Muslim man of raping his wife because sharia allowed him to do so. (The ruling was later overturned.)
The Muslim Students’ Association - Muslim Accommodations Task Force has convinced at least 17 universities to have foot baths built or under construction, including Boston University, George Washington University and Temple University, and at least nine universities have prayer rooms for “Muslim students only,” including Stanford, Emory and the University of Virginia, according to USA Today.
Illinois’ Skokie School Districts replaced Veteran’s Day with Eid ul Adha, a major Muslim holiday, in 2013.
In Ohio, a Muslim death row inmate, Abdul Awkal, has filed a federal lawsuit arguing the prison system’s failure to provide halal meals is a restraint on his religious freedoms. His on-going case already succeeded in having pork removed from the prison system’s menu.
This matters because the punishments and discrimination, especially against women, defy American principles of human rights, religious freedom, and equality of all before the law. Women must remain mostly covered, and under some interpretations completely covered. Female genital mutilation is practiced in some Muslim nations to protect chastity. Men can have four wives while women only one husband. Women receive half the inheritance of a brother and so on.

Islamic Sharia law cannot co-exist with the American system of government.

Andrew McCarthy wrote, “Shariah is not compatible with the U.S. Constitution. In fact, the forces of shariah have been at war with non-Muslims for 1400 years and with the United States of America for 200 years. While the most recent campaign to impose this totalitarian code began in the late 20th Century, it is but the latest in a historical record of offensive warfare that stretches back to the origins of Islam itself.”

The unique American system of government as expressed philosophically in the Declaration of Independence and codified in the U.S. Constitution is based “on the laws of nature and of nature’s God.” This is the God who handed down a set of laws to the Israelites (Jews) and later through Jesus Christ (Christians) brought about a higher law that resides in the human heart.

Inherent in God’s law – the law of Jews, Christians and the American system – is freedom, individual responsibility, peace, charity, goodwill toward all people.

The Bill of Rights is but a restatement of the rights Americans knew they had as human beings given by God. They knew that all forms of government tended toward infringing upon those rights and wanted to ensure people remained free.

The National Center for Constitutional Studies posts writings by John Quincy Adams, sixth president as well as Thomas Jefferson, as ambassador to France, and John Adams, as ambassador to England regarding their understanding of Islam. The latter wrote a four-page report to the Congress describing a meeting with the emissary of the Islamic potentates of Tripoli to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, regarding the Barbary Pirates’ demands for tribute.

Jefferson and Adams wrote:

“We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the grounds of their pretentions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation.

“The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the laws of their prophet, that it was written in their Qur’an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Muslim who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

John Quincy contrasted what he learned from Muslims with Christianity and America. “The fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion is the extirpation of hatred from the human heart. It forbids the exercise of it, even towards enemies. There is no denomination of Christians, which denies or misunderstands this doctrine.

“[Christianity] has mitigated the horrors of war - it has softened the features of slavery - it has humanized the intercourse of social life. The unqualified acknowledgement of a duty does not, indeed, suffice to insure its performance. Hatred is yet a passion, but too powerful upon the hearts of Christians. Yet they cannot indulge it, except by the sacrifice of their principles, and the conscious violation of their duties. No state paper from a Christian hand, could, without trampling the precepts of its Lord and Master, have commenced by an open proclamation of hatred to any portion of the human race.

“The Ottoman (Muslim) lays it down as the foundation of his discourse.”

Mukasey stressed that we should show respect to those Muslim voices that reject the imposition of shariah law, but remain vigilant against those who do not.

When asked, “How can disparate communities come together for a greater good, in spite of our differences?

Mukasey responded, “Together, study the Constitution, Declaration of Independence and Federalist Papers.”

Knowledge of facts is the beginning of understanding, power and tolerance. Americans do not inherently dislike Muslims. They dislike repression, violence and inequality.

Carla Garrison follows current events with one eye on history and the other on the future. Her goal is to encourage people to know the truth and use it as a call to personal action.

Read more: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/truth-be-told/2013/may/10/why-islams-shariah-law-biggest-threat-american-saf/#ixzz2VAKKgQ00

 


Home    Back    Top