WORLD NEWS VERIFIES WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ABOUT MUSLIM INDOCTRINATION IN THE HOME AND MOSQUE – DEFINITELY MUSLIM FAITH BASED SCHOOLS MUST NOT BE PERMITTED IN THE UNITED KINGDOM (U.K.) - REVISED
Read reality for yourself:
Time for Canada to Take on the Jihadist Agenda
by Tarek Fatah
The Toronto Sun
October 28, 2014
http://www.meforum.org/4873/time-to-take-on-jihadist-agenda

Damian Clairmont, a Calgary-based convert to Islam, was radicalized for two years before departing Canada to fight and die for ISIS in Syria. His mother has denounced the government's "cavalier attitude" toward Islamist indoctrination of Canadian youth.

At times, my fellow Canadians alarm me.
When three anonymous women allegedly have kinky sex with radio celebrity Jian Ghomeshi and are allegedly physically and/or verbally assaulted by him, the country goes into a tizzy.
However, when three anonymous Toronto girls are recruited by Islamic State to marry ISIS fighters overseas who are warring against Canada, and are subsequently rescued by our security agencies and released back into the community, Canada yawns.

While Canadians were distracted by the Ghomeshi affair, the Senate Security Committee heard from RCMP and CSIS officials about the threats we face at the hands of homegrown jihadists.
One exchange between Sen. Daniel Lang and CSIS Assistant Director Michael Peirce ended with the security official making a startling admission — CSIS does not investigate mosques!
SEN. LANG: "Is there teachings going on in this country, in Canada, that are espousing that particular viewpoint [of Islam], which is then transferring itself into radicalization?"
MICHAEL PEIRCE: "The short answer to the question is yes. There are individuals who are espousing a radical extremist view of Islam, and they are doing so specifically to radicalize individuals … I'm not talking about specific institutions. I'm talking about individuals. And I should be very clear about that. When we investigate, we investigate individuals and their activities … So for instance, we don't investigate mosques." (My italics)

How could CSIS give a pass to some of the very institutions where Muslim youth are introduced to the doctrine of Islam's supremacy over other religions?
To sample this type of rhetoric let me share the words of a Canadian imam who is regularly consulted by Canada's security agencies.

In one sermon, he had this to say about non-Muslims:
"O Allah, protect us from the 'fitna' (mischief) of these people. O Allah, protect us from the evil of these people. O Allah, destroy them from within themselves, Ya Allah, and do not allow them to raise their heads against Islam."

In another mosque sermon:
"We have to establish Islam (in Canada). I want to see Islam in every single corner of the city. I would like to see Hijabis, Niqabis (face-masked women) everywhere in the city. I want to see brothers (Muslim men) in beards and kufis (skull caps) everywhere."

Another Islamic organization in Toronto runs a school as well as a mosque.
On an Urdu-language TV channel, its cleric and its administrator defended the establishment of a worldwide Islamic caliphate, saying, "Having a Caliphate is an integral part of the Islamic faith. Every believing Muslim prays for a true Caliph."

The dissension being planted in the minds of young Muslim children is widespread and not new.
It's time for CSIS and the RCMP to recognize that outreach and appeasement programs have failed.
A Toronto high school teacher, Brian Sambourne, recently wrote a letter to the editor of The Globe and Mail, revealing that on the day the New York twin towers fell on 9/11, some of his Muslim students celebrated the event.

Sambourne, who noted these students had "deep grievances" about constant wars in the Mideast, told me that over the last decade, these anti-West feelings have gotten worse.
On the day Osama Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan, he said, Muslim students disrupted his class and were visibly angry with the U.S. mission.

It's time for CSIS and the RCMP to recognize that outreach and appeasement programs have failed.
It's time to take off our kid gloves and land a knockout punch on the jihadist agenda in Canada. 
Tarek S. Fatah is a founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress, a columnist at the Toronto Sun, host of a Sunday afternoon talk show on Toronto's NewsTalk1010 AM Radio, and a Robert J. and Abby B. Levine Fellow at the Middle East Forum. He is the author of two award-winning books: Chasing a Mirage: The Tragic Illusion of an Islamic State and The Jew is Not My Enemy: Unveiling the Myths that Fuel Muslim Anti-Semitism.
 
Now let’s look at reality and islam’s goal of world domination.
 
Arab Imperialism Masked as Religion Threatens World Tranquility/Peace:
 
INTRODUCTION:
 
Since its inception Islam claims to be a peaceful religion, but in practice it has been anything but peaceful.   In fact, it was responsible for among other things, bringing on or being the cause of the Crusades, but trying to throw the blame for them on others.   Let's look at the facts, <<<" Throughout history Islam which claims to be a religion of peace has attacked apostate (counterfeit) Christians and has attempted to steal land and people from them, and then cried fowl when they struck back.  How ridicules and hypocritical that is for any group; to wit, to initiate blood guilt and then yell when the other group defends itself and strikes back.
 
For example, Islam yells about the wrongs of the apostate (counterfeit) Christian Crusades that started in 1095 with the First Crusade under the directions of Pope Urban II, and ended with the Ninth Crusade in 1289.   Of course, the apostate (counterfeit) Christians committed many atrocities such as their wrong doing against the Jews in Jerusalem by the Franks, one of the groups making up the Crusader forces.  However, in reality, Islam was responsible for all that occurred as they lit-the-fuse that caused the crusades to take place with their blood guilty war like ways as we shall see in this article with facts that can be checked by all."[source - Religion of Peace That Loves War:, by Iris the Preacher, 2006]>>>.   And, <<<" When members of Islam move to Australia, Canada, England, France, Spain, US, Denmark, etc. they want religious freedom, they demand it, but do they want to grant the same basic human right of conscience to others?  NO, they definitely do not.   This denial is shown to be the case from ancient times.  In fact, this denial was actually the 'trigger' for the Crusades that Islam so blames the so called Christians for, but fail to state that they brought the Crusades on themselves by their actions.  How so?  Let's look at the facts from history." [source - Islam Is Against Freedom of Conscience Yet Wants It For Themselves: by Iris the Preacher, 2006]>>>.   And an encyclopedia says, <<<" <<" A turning point in western attitudes towards the east came in the year 1009, when the Fatimid caliph of Cairo, al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, had the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem destroyed. His successor permitted the Byzantine Empire to rebuild it under stringent circumstances, and pilgrimage was again permitted, but many stories began to be circulated in the West about the cruelty of Muslims toward Christian pilgrims; these stories then played an important role in the development of the crusades later in the century."[source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]>>>.
 
Today, many in Islam decry the temporary occupation of Iraq by a coalition that wants nothing better than to leave, but does not see how it can until members of Islam stop killing each other because they belong to different flavors of Islam - until the country is stabilized.   Yet, these same members of Islam, many of which have been occupying other's lands for centuries see no wrong in so doing - what a corrupt double standard.   For example, they wrongly occupy much of Palestine, but the entire Palestine was given not to the descendants of Abraham's son, Ishmael, from whom the Arabs descended, but to the descendants of Abraham's son, Isaac, by none other than the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, and Jacob, creator of all there is, himself, as clearly recorded in Numbers 34:1-28, "And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,  2  Command the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land of Canaan; (this is the land that shall fall unto you for an inheritance, even the land of Canaan with the coasts thereof  3  Then your south quarter shall be from the wilderness of Zin along by the coast of Edom, and your south border shall be the outmost coast of the salt sea eastward:  4  And your border shall turn from the south to the ascent of Akrabbim, and pass on to Zin: and the going forth thereof shall be from the south to Kadeshbarnea, and shall go on to Hazaraddar, and pass on to Azmon:  5  And the border shall fetch a compass from Azmon unto the river of Egypt, and the goings out of it shall be at the sea.  6  And as for the western border, ye shall even have the great sea for a border: this shall be your west border.  7  And this shall be your north border: from the great sea ye shall point out for you mount Hor:  8  From mount Hor ye shall point out your border unto the entrance of Hamath; and the goings forth of the border shall be to Zedad:  9  And the border shall go on to Ziphron, and the goings out of it shall be at Hazarenan: this shall be your north border.  10  And ye shall point out your east border from Hazarenan to Shepham:  11  And the coast shall go down from Shepham to Riblah, on the east side of Ain; and the border shall descend, and shall reach unto the side of the sea of Chinnereth eastward:  12  And the border shall go down to Jordan, and the goings out of it shall be at the salt sea: this shall be your land with the coasts thereof round about.  13  And Moses commanded the children of Israel, saying, This is the land which ye shall inherit by lot, which the LORD commanded to give unto the nine tribes, and to the half tribe:  14  For the tribe of the children of Reuben according to the house of their fathers, and the tribe of the children of Gad according to the house of their fathers, have received their inheritance; and half the tribe of Manasseh have received their inheritance:  15  The two tribes and the half tribe have received their inheritance on this side Jordan near Jericho eastward, toward the sunrising.  16 ¶  And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,  17  These are the names of the men which shall divide the land unto you: Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun.  18  And ye shall take one prince of every tribe, to divide the land by inheritance.  19  And the names of the men are these: Of the tribe of Judah, Caleb the son of Jephunneh.  20  And of the tribe of the children of Simeon, Shemuel the son of Ammihud.
21  Of the tribe of Benjamin, Elidad the son of Chislon.  22  And the prince of the tribe of the children of Dan, Bukki the son of Jogli.  23  The prince of the children of Joseph, for the tribe of the children of Manasseh, Hanniel the son of Ephod.  24  And the prince of the tribe of the children of Ephraim, Kemuel the son of Shiphtan.  25  And the prince of the tribe of the children of Zebulun, Elizaphan the son of Parnach.  26  And the prince of the tribe of the children of Issachar, Paltiel the son of Azzan.  27  And the prince of the tribe of the children of Asher, Ahihud the son of Shelomi.  28  And the prince of the tribe of the children of Naphtali, Pedahel the son of Ammihud.
29 These are they whom the LORD commanded to divide the inheritance unto the children of Israel in the land of Canaan." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).
 
This shows extreme greed and a lust for violence on the part of many of the descendants of Abraham's son Ishmael as they already control over 98% of the middle east, but do not even want the descendants of Abraham's son Isaac to have the less than 2% that was given to them.
 
Now we shall deal with how Islam was violent from the beginning and really represented Arab imperialism with a religious façade.
 
EARLY ARAB IMPERIALISM AND LUST FOR VIOLENCE:
 
First an overview of Arab Imperialism:
 
As one writer put it, <<<" Muslims from all over the world are feared as terrorists in the Western world. Is it a propaganda or misunderstanding? It is neither. Frankly stated, it is the truth.
Islam has divided humankind into two perpetually hostile groups, i.e. the Muslims and the non-Muslims. The former have the duty to hate their own fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters and countrymen if they practise a different faith. The Muslims must force the infidels to embrace Islam, using any means including murder, rape, loot, arson, deception and treason.
Until a country has embraced Islam, it is legally considered a battlefield (Dar-ul-Harb) and the Muslims are obliged to betray their own motherland through civil and military action. Once it is converted to the Muslim ideology, it ranks as a Land of Peacxe (Dar-us-Salaam) but at a very high cost to one's national pride because then it exists as a spiritual and cultural satellite of Arabia. This is what makes Islam the subtle tool of Arab Imperialism.
Islamic ideology, which is based on intense hatred of the non-Muslims, is beginning to loom as Islamophobia in the West. The recent Osostlander Report on fundamentalism by the European Parliament has recognised this peril. Though it has been suppressed by the majority vote for the time being, its spectre shall rise again and again until the Muslims start respecting the human rights of free speech and action."[source - ISLAM: The Arab Imperialism, by Anwar Shaikh]>>>.
 
And another historian said, <<<" In the year 620 AD, the prophet sent Khaled-ebn-valid to the Bani Hares tribe to make them become moselms, and emphasized that should they refuse to become moslems, he should make war with them. Khaled (who was famous for his massacres of the tribes of Arabia) reminded the leaders of the Bani Hares tribe to "convert to islam in order to remain alive". The leaders of Bani Hares, fearing the lives of their people, converted to islam, and went with Khaled to see mohammad. Mohammad emphasized to the representatives of the Bani Hares tribe that "if khaled had not written that you have converted to islam, I would have rolled your heads beneath your feet"
 
source: History of Tabbari [arab historian]
volume 4, pages 1256-1258
 
The slogans [I dont know the meaning of the first phrase] and "there is no obligation in religion" did not stop the prophet mohammad to summarily behead followers of other religions ("people of the book" [ie, jews]) for not converting to islam, such that in the case of the Bani Quraizeh tribe, after they surrendred following a war [with mohammad's army], it was ordered [by mohammad] that 900 of their men and youth be beheaded, and their property was taken as war booty, their women and children as slaves, and devided among the moslems. (1) Tabbari [arab historian] reminds us that "the prophet ordered that holes [mass graves] be dug in the ground, and "imam" ali and zobeir cut off their heads in mohammad's presense." [see picture below] (2)
In such wars, the moslem arabs did not even refrain from sleaping with [having sex] the married wives of the captured men, but ofcourse this was also permitted in the qoran.(3)
 
references:
1) Nafaes-ol Fonoon by Shamseddin Mohammad Ameli, page 312; Montakheb-ol Tavarikh by Haj Mohammad Hashem Khorasani, page 54; Parto Eslam by Ahmad Amin, volume 1 page 117; Tarikh Tabbari, by Tabbari, volume 3 pages 1088-1091
2) Tarikhk Tabbari, volume 3 page 1093
3) qoran 4:24 [source - http://www.geocities.com/hammihanirani/articles/islamterror.html on 5/12/2007 and http://hammihan.20fr.com/ on 5/12/2007 under auspices of Free Iran Press].
 
And in a book review by Daniel Pipes of  "The Arab Imperialism" By Anwar Shaikh,  Sheikh noted that according to the Qur'an", <<<" Building on an earlier study with a similar title, Shaikh portrays Islam as a political movement which has conquered peoples around the world. Born a Muslim in India in 1928 and so fervent in his early faith that he killed three non-Muslim men in the riots of 1947, Shaikh has renounced Islam and become a leading spokesman against it. Shaikh sees Islam as a form of Arab imperialism, one he finds far more enduring than the British variant: if the latter required armies to be maintained, the former does not. Instead, it has become self-perpetuating by virtue of having conquered peoples' minds.
 
Like many anti-Islamic polemicists, Shaikh dwells on the career of the Prophet Muhammad, searching it out for inconsistencies (his attitude toward freedom of religion before and after reaching power) and unsavoriness (the Islamic portrayal of paradise shows that, in Islam, "sexual gratification is the ultimate goal of life"). Shaikh goes beyond other critiques in finding that the Qur'an portrays Muhammad to be God's superior and even "the only God"; from this he concludes that "Islam is Muhammadanism." The purpose of this religion, he finds, is "invented Islam to glorify Arabia." And the scheme worked, bringing "imperial dignity to the Arabs," subordinating huge numbers of non-Arab converts and their offspring to "Arab cultural hegemony," and making them permanent allies for the Arab cause. In his pungent words, every non-Arab Muslim has "turned into a moth, restless to cremate itself on the flame of Arab imperialism."
 
Shaikh has lived in Great Britain since 1956; he sees his writings, which have prompted some twenty edicts against his life, as his way to atone for the three murders a half century ago. Unlike Salman Rushdie, he lives openly ("Everyone is aware of my address") and, when asked if he expects to die violently, replies, "I want to die honourably."[source - Daniel Pipes & Middle East Quarterly June 1999; and references, Islam ­ The Arab Imperialism By Anwar Shaikh] >>>.   And in another book review of the same boo, Ibn al Rawandi, says, <<<" Shaikh attacks head on the muslim claim that Islam is a universal religion addressed by God to the whole of mankind, constituting the final revelation delivered by the final prophet. Far from this being the case, Shaikh sees Islam as the product of the genius of Muhammad, who masterfully exploited the ancient Middle Eastern notion of prophethood in pursuit of his own and his people's "dominance urge", which sounds very like Nietzsche's Will to Power.
Shaikh begins by pointing out the inherent absurdities in the concept of prophethood. How it in effect puts belief in prophets above belief in God, since the prophet is supposedly God's messenger and mouthpiece, implying that He is incapable of communicating with humans in any other way. The muslim idea that Muhammad is the final prophet, confirming and fulfilling all previous prophets, is seen as Muhammad's masterstroke, putting the kibosh on any change or innovation.
 
On the basis of the text of the Quran, underwritten by the traditional biography of the Prophet, Shaikh discerns a progress in Muhammad's expression of his prophetic role. In the beginning, when he was politically weak, he claimed to be a mortal and humble servant of Allah, but when he became strong, after his supposed move from Mecca to Medina: "he began changing his tone, until he was able to claim himself to be Allah's Superior". (75) The proof of this is Q.33:56 "Lo! Allah and his angels shower praises on the Prophet (Muhammad). O ye who believe also shower praises on him and salute him with a worthy salutation". Shaikh claims that the word translated "shower praises on him", really means worship and is usually applied to God.
 
According to Shaikh the arrogance of Muhammad is fully expressed in the arrogance of the religion he invented toward all non­Arabs, especially the Jews. The notorious episode of the Jewish tribe of the Banu Quraiza, in which Muhammad is supposed to have overseen the slaughter of 800 Jewish men, is seen by Shaikh as: "a pathetic model of ethnic cleansing. The Jews suffered this fate when they refused to become Arabs. We cannot find an example of such extreme nationalism so early in history. Yet the muslims believe that Islam does not recognize nationalism. They insist that it is a message of international brotherhood". (103­4) As regards history this is not quite true of course. It was routine in the ancient world that when a city was conquered the men were killed and the women and children sold into slavery. However that may be, Shaikh is undoubtedly right to emphasize the essentially Arab nature of Islam, and how that ethnic identity was imposed on those they conquered." [source - Review of Anwar Shaikh book, "The Arab Imperialism" published by The Principality Publishers, P.O. Box 918, Cardiff CF5 2NL (UK) by Ibn al Rawandi]>>>.
 
The MEMRI - The Middle East Media Research Institute, Special Dispatch Series - No. 1569 said,  in quoting France's Berber Leader Belkacem Lounes, said, <<<"'There Is No Worse Colonialism Than That of the Pan-Arabist Clan that Wants to Dominate Our People' [Belkacem Lounes, president of the World Amazigh Congress, wrote an open letter to Libyan leader Mu'ammar Qaddafi in response to the latter's March 1 speech in which he denied the existence of a Berber or Amazigh  people in North Africa. In his letter, dated April 10, Lounes protested Qaddafi's statements, saying that the 30 million Amazigh living today in North Africa cannot be ignored. He added that the Amazigh had played a central role in the fight against European colonialism, but that since independence they had been oppressed by the "internal colonialism" of pan-Arabism, which he labels an imperialist ideology. Lounes stated that it was archaic to consider diversity a danger, and calls on the North African governments to commit to democracy and human rights.]
"What Worse Offense to Elementary Rights is There Than Denying The Existence Of a People?"
"... I waited until April to respond to your speech, since it is during this month that the Amazigh people celebrates every year... a great moment in its history, known as the 'Tafsut Imazighen' ('Amazigh Spring').   For us, this is a celebration of our memory, of our spirit of resistance to all forms of imperialism, and of our love of liberty...
"The people of whom you spoke [in your speech] are women, men, and children who speak their Amazigh language daily. They are women, men, and children who live every day their Amazigh identity, which your words injured. What worse offense to elementary rights is there than denying the existence of a people?..."
"It is Difficult to Imagine That You Are Unaware of... 30 Million Amazigh Speakers" In North Africa
"You claim that Amazigh civilization disappeared due to 'a century of drought in North Africa'... It is difficult to imagine that you are unaware of the existence of 30 million Amazigh-speakers living today in all of the countries of Tamazgha [i.e. North Africa]...
"You let it be understood that the Amazigh are supposedly an invention of colonialism! What colonialism is capable of creating a people ex nihilo, with its language and traditions that go back several thousand years? How could colonialism have done this - given that when the first foreigner arrived on North African soil, he found that the Amazigh had already been there for a long time?...
"How to explain these contradictions and the brutal return to this desire to negate a tangible history and reality? You even denied the evidence, when you assured us that the Amazigh problem did not exist in Libya. But... the Libyan Amazigh, like Amazigh elsewhere, face ostracism, exclusion, and discrimination of all kinds..."
"Thinking That Diversity Is a Danger is an Archaic and Totalitarian Idea"
"You say that 'Libya is for the Libyans' and that you will not accept anyone's saying that they have this identity or that identity.
"So be it - but then [you] must immediately suppress any reference to Arab identity in all of the country's legislative texts, as well as in the names of political, economic, and cultural institutions, starting with the Arab Libyan Republic, Libyan Arab Airlines, the Union of the Arab Maghreb, etc. Then we will be entirely [favorably] disposed to speak of a 'Libyan Libya,' with its history, languages, and cultures. But if your conception of Libya is one of an exclusively Arab country, then for us, the fight for our identity continues...
"You menace the Amazigh, warning that whosoever asserts their identity will be considered a traitor in the service of colonialism... Thinking that diversity is a danger is an archaic and totalitarian idea that is contrary to all of the principles of universal rights.
"We Are a People... Determined To Live Free"
"In addition, I see it as my obligation to repeat here what I told you [face to face]: We are a people and we are determined to live free, whatever it costs us. We are generally peaceful and hospitable. Whoever offers us his hand, we take him into our arms. But whoever tries to keep us from living in dignity, we will fight him with all legitimate means." [source - The MEMRI - The Middle East Media Research Institute, Special Dispatch Series - No. 1569]>>>.
Imperialistic from the beginning:
The start of imperialism was with the plundering of a camel caravan as described, <<<" A general mistake that leads to a fallacious view of facts is the presumption that Badr was the first battle fought against the infidels. As a matter of fact several engagements had actually preceded it. 'Urwa Ibn Zubair wrote a letter to 'Abd al-Malik, the opening sentence of which was : "'Abu Sufyan Ibn Harb was coming from Syria with seventy riders all of whom were Quraish." This was reported to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and his Copmpanions. Hostitlities had laready broken out between the two partiies, and a few persons from the other party including Ibn Hadrami had been slain and some taken prisoners ..... And this had been the event that had led to war between the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and the Quraish. This had also been the first occasion when losses were mutually inflicted ; and this encounter had taken place before Abu Sufyan departed for Syria."
The best way to arrive at the truth is to see what the other side had to say. Such evidence is rarely found, but fortunately, it is available in this case. Hakim Ibn Hizam (a nephew of Khadija the wife of the propeht), who was still an unbeliever had come with the Quraish army. He was five years older than the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and had been friendly to him in the pre-ministry days and continued to be so even when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had entered upon his mission. However he did not embrace Islam till the conquest of Mecca. Ibn Hakim was a Quraish dignitary, held the office of Rifada, and owned and manged Dar al-Nadwa. He lived till the days of the caliph Marwan Ibn Hakam. Once he went to see Marwan, who received him with great honour. Marwan left his royal seat, sat by his side and asked him to relate the events of Badr. Having described te preliminary datails, he said, " When the Quraish had encamped, I went to 'Utba, and said to him, 'O' father of Walid, won't you like to win a life-long fame ?' 'How is it possible ?' asked 'Utba, and I answered, 'You see, the Quraish demand from Muhammad nothing more than blood for the blood of Hadrami, and he was your ally. Why don't you pay his blood-money yourself and let all your people march back home-ward. 'Utba like this proposal, but Abu Jahl did not consent to it. Abu Jahl called 'Amir Hadrami, the brother of the deceased Hadrami, and said that he should stand out and invoke the aid of the nation, for he had his chance of vengenace close at hand. According to Arab custom, 'Amir Hadrami cast off his clothes and cried, 'Oh 'Amr Hadrami, 'Amr Hadrami, Oh 'Amir Hadrami !"
The first man who came into the battle-field was this Amir Hadrami.
Hakim Ibn Hizam and 'Amir Hadrami wee both non-believers, when Badr was fought. 'Utba and Abu Jahl, the leading chiefs died infidels. When persons of consequence, such as these, regarded the battle of Badr as a revenge for Hadrami's blood, we need not care if others, born hundreds of years after the battle, believed that it had been the outcome of an intended plunder of the caravan." [source - This is a quote from an extract of the Second Volume of English Translation of Sirat-un-Nabi originally written in Urdu by the late 'Allama Shibli Nu'mani, a well-known Muslim historian who requires no commendation.]>>>.
Next, Islam stole Syria from its owner, the Roman Empire of the East/Byzantine Empire, and here is a partial account of this wrongful action, <<<" In the face of the Muslim expansion, the Byzantine emperor Heraclius gathered a large army which met the Muslim army at the Battle of the Yarmuk in Syria on 20 August 636. It was a crushing victory which gave Syria to the Muslims...  A description of the battle. Heraclius gathered large bodies of Greeks, Syrians, Mesopotamians and Armenians numbering about 200,000. This army he put under the command of one of his choice men and sent as a vanguard Jabalah ibn-al-Aiham al-Ghassani at the bead of the "naturalized" Arabs [musta'ribah] of Syria of the tribes of Lakhm, Judham and others, resolving to fight the Moslems so that be might either win or withdraw to the land of the Greeks and live in Constantinople. The Muslims gathered together and the Greek army marched against them. The battle they fought at al-Yarmuk ,was of the fiercest and bloodiest kind. Al-Yarmuk [Hieromax] is a river. In this battle 24,000 Moslems took part. The Greeks and their followers in this battle tied themselves to each other by chains, so that no one might set his hope on flight. By Allah's help, some 70,000 of them were put to death, and their remnants took to flight, reaching as far as Palestine, Antioch, Aleppo, Mesopotamia and Armenia. In the battle of al-Yarmuk certain Moslem women took part and fought violently. Among them was Hind, daughter of 'Utbah and mother of Mu'awivah ibn-abi-Sufyan, who repeatedly exclaimed, "Cut the arms of these 'uncircumcised' , with your swords!" Her husband abu-Sufvan had come to Syria as a volunteer desiring to see his sons, and so he brought his wife with him. He then returned to al-Madinah where he died, year 31, at the age of 88. Others say he died in Syria. When the news of his death was carried to his daughter, umm-Habibah, she waited until the third day on which she ordered some yellow paint and covered with it her arms and face saving, "I would not have done that, had I not heard the Prophet say, 'A woman should not be in mourning for more than three days over anyone except her husband."' It is stated that she did likewise when she received the news of her brother Yazid's death. But Allah knows best." [source - Medieval Sourcebook: Al-Baladhuri: The Battle Of The Yarmuk (636) and After by Paul Halsall Jan 1996]>>>.    As we can see, right from the beginning, Islam was greedy for the lands of others and sought to occupy them.
In fact, <<<" Futuh is an Arabic word with the literal meaning of "openings". When appearing in classical Islamic literature it signifies the early Arab-Muslim conquests which facilitated the spread of Islam and Islamic civilization.
As is clear from the literal meaning of the word, futuh is a term with a strong ideological bias in favor of the conquests it signifies, implying their general beneficence and legitimacy. Here is Lewis on the ideology of futuh within classic Islamic thought:
These were not seen as conquests in the vulgar sense of territorial acquisitions, but as the overthrow of impious regimes and illegitimate hierarchies, and the "opening" of their peoples to the new revelation and dispensation... The use of the root fth is thus not unlike the twentieth century use of the verb "liberate", and is indeed sometimes replaced by the latter verb (harrara) in modern Arabic writing on early Islamic history. The Arabic verb ghalaba, "conquer", with its connotation of overwhelming by means of superior force, is sometimes used in early accounts of the Muslim conquests, but only in the context of actual military operations...
Underlying this usage, clearly, is a concept of the essential rightfulness or legitimacy of the Muslim advance and the subsequent illegitimacy of Muslim retreat before infidel conquest... The advance of Muslim power is thus an opening or a liberation, to give free scope to this divinely implanted propensity.
The Political Language of Islam, pp. 93-94
Many histories from the classical period of Islamic civilization dealing with the early conquests have futuh in their title and are considered to form their own genre of literature, called futuh reports. Like many other histories from the early period, the futuh reports contain a mixture of genres and material, with some clearly of an administrative, religio-legal, philosophical, or edificatory nature. For example, a common feature of the genre is an account of the opposing ambassador's first impression of the Arab army in which he remarks favorably upon the primitive virtues of these early Muslim warriors, thus implicitly criticizing the luxury and over-refinement of the author's own time.
The following is a partial list of these histories:
* Futuh Misr (Conquests of Egypt) by Ibn 'Abd al-Hakam
* Futuh al-Sham (Conquests of Syria) by al-Azdi
* Futuh al-Iraq (Conquests of Iraq) by al-Waqidi
* Futuh al-Habasa (Conquests of Abyssinia) by Sihab ad-Din Admad ibn Abd-al-Qadir
* Futuh al-Buldan (Conquests of the Lands) by Abu Al-Abbas Ahmad Bin Jab Al-Baladhuri
The impact of the futuh conquests was immense, not least of all on the conquerors themselves, who incorporated many features of the advanced cultures they absorbed into what eventually became classic Islamic civilization.
Among the conquered peoples, the futuh invasions resulted in two related, though not identical, social upheavals: Islamization and Arabization. The former occurred as Islam became a society's regnant religio-political framework. The latter occurred as Arab customs and the Arab language became widely adopted by a population. Though the two developments often occurred in tandem, the expression of one did not necessarily mean the expression of the other. Many Middle Eastern Christians, for example were Arabized but never Islamicized, while the Persians were Islamicized but did not Arabize.
Of the two upheavals, Islamization had the greater impact on social and cultural identity. In all cases Islamization led to a people's near total rejection of their pagan, pre-Islamic past, such that their ancestral achievements and heritage were either forgotten or actively denigrated. When in the 19th Century European Orientalists began recovering this past, their findings were at first ignored by the Muslim residents of the Near East:
The discovery... of the ancient past was a non-Middle Eastern enterprise and achievement, and for a long time it had no impact on the peoples of the Islamic Middle East, who remained uninterested in their own pagan past. For them, significant history began with the advent of Islam. That was their own, their true history, the history that mattered. What came before was an age of ignorance, of no value with no lesson to teach.
The Multiple Identities of the Middle East, p. 68
Though this alienation may be partially explained by the Arab cultural imperialism implicit in Islamization (as exemplified in the adoption of the Arabic script, for example), there is a more direct theological rationale for this, which is the Islamic concept of jahiliyyah, or state of ignorance and barbarity which supposedly prevailed in pre-Islamic Arabia. Readily applied by the first Islamicized peoples to their own pagan pasts, it led them to view these epochs as times of rampant impiety, ignorance, and injustice from which little of value could be gleaned.
Thus one trope of converted Muslims' perception of their own history is the depiction of the pre-Islamic political order as one of rampant exploitation and tyranny, with rulers ordering society according to malign whim rather than in humble subordinance to God's beneficent law for mankind:
Until the findings of Egyptology became known to them, all that most Egyptians knew about Pharaoh was what they learned from the Qur'an, and the image of Pharaoh in the Qur'an is much the same as in the Old Testament. For Muslims as for Christians and Jews, Pharaoh was the archetypal pagan tyrant and oppressor in which the heroes are the Banuh Isra'il, the children of Israel.
The Multiple Identities of the Middle East, p. 77
And in Islamic Persia, "Chosroes" became as strong a by-word for tyrannical pagan kingship as "Pharaoh" (though ironically the pagan destroyer of the Achaemenid Empire, Alexander the Great, was lionized thanks to an accident of Qur'anic textual sources).
Such hostile depictions of the pre-Islamic political order are a necessary complement to the ideology of futuh: in order for the Muslim conquests to be seen as liberatory, the social orders which they replaced had to be depicted as negatively as possible.
With the rejection of the pre-Islamic political order came the rejection of its cultural legacy as well, often expressed by the iconoclastic destruction of its monumental remains as in the recent demolition of the Buddhas of Bamyan. In Egypt, for example, the missing nose of the Great Sphinx of Giza was broken off by a fanatic Sufi when he saw the local farmers making offerings to the Sphinx. And in Iran:
...the ancient past had been forgotten and to a greater extent obliterated. In Persepolis, the ancient Persian capital, the Muslim conquerors had hacked away the faces of the Medes and Persians depicted in the friezes, seeing in them an expression of pagan idolatry. Only the most recent pre-Islamic history... was known at all, and that in a sketchy form, and from Arabic sources. The more ancient history of Iran was forgotten, and even the name of Cyrus, the founder of the Persian state, was unknown.
The Multiple Identities of the Middle East, p. 71
The popular dissemination of Orientalist discoveries lead to a revision of these attitudes, however, and at least a partial reassertion of pre-Islamic identities. In Egypt, the works of native scholars such as Rifa'a Rafi' al-Tahtawi led to renewed interest in the Pharaonic past and helped give rise to Egyptian national identity movements such as Pharaonism. Though initially derided by other Arabs as tafar'un (meaning lapsing into pharaonism), the Egyptian movements were in time emulated elsewhere:
This movement in Egypt was first opposed, condemned, even derided in other Arabic speaking countries. It was seen as something artificial, as a parochial attempt to create a little Egypt within the greater Arab or Islamic brotherhood. It was denounced by pan-Arabists as separatist, by religious people as neo-pagan, and by both as divisive. Nevertheless the example of Egypt had an impact in other Middle Eastern lands.
The Multiple Identities of the Middle East, pp. 69-70
The acceptance of classical Islam's interpretation of the futuh conquests by the Islamicized/Arabized peoples of the Near East and beyond varies.
It has been least contentious among the Arab countries of Asia, where identity with the original Arab conquerors is strongest. In modern Arab historiography there has been a trend (in part due to the influence of Western-style nationalism), to portray the earliest conquests as liberations of Arabs (or proto-Arabs) from Sassanid/Byzantine imperial domination:
Most Arabs today are Arabized descendants of the inhabitants of pre-conquest Syria, Iraq, and Egypt, but any suggestion that Islamic culture is an Arabized development of what prevailed in those pre-conquest lands deeply offends them.
Lapidus, The Cambridge Illustrated History of the Islamic World (ISBN 0-521-66993-6), p. 24
In North Africa, a reassertion of ethnic and linguistic identity among Berbers called Berberism has recently developed.
Despite a rich pre-Islamic political and cultural heritage, attempts at a reassertion of national identity in Iran have often met with strong resistance:
In 1971, when the Shah of Iran held a great celebration in Persepolis to commemorate the 2,500th anniversary of the foundation of the Persian monarchy by Cyrus the Great, he was vehemently attacked on Islamic religious grounds. Exalting the monarchy was bad enough, but far worse was the proclamation of a common identity with the Zoroastrian past, and a consequent redefinition of the basis of allegiance. For the shah's religious critics, the identity of the Iranians was defined by Islam, and their brothers were Muslims in other countries, not their own unbelieving and misguided ancestors.
The Multiple Identities of the Middle East, p. 75
With the overthrow of the Pahlavi dynasty in 1979, traditional notions of identity returned to Iran, as can be seen by the unabashed embrace of the classic futuh interpretation of Persian history in the propaganda of the Iran-Iraq War:
The Iraqis, on their side, call the Iranians Furs, a somewhat derogatory term in medieval times, with a suggestion that the Persians were the heirs of the Zoroastrians defeated at the battle of Qadisiyya in A.D. 637. This battle, which shattered the military power of the Iranian emperors and led to the incorporation of all their lands and peoples in the Muslim Arab Empire, is claimed with pride by both sides. For the Iraqis, it was a victory of Arabs over Persians... For the soldiers of the Islamic Republic, it was victory of Muslims over heathens, and a blessed beginning of the Islamization of the peoples of Iran.
The Political Language of Islam, p. 121
Acceptance in Pakistan of futuh "salvation history" can be seen in current expressions of alienation from both the political as well as cultural legacies of its pre-Islamic past:
In September 1979, on Defense of Pakistan Day, there was a long article in the Pakistan Times on Bin Qasim as a strategist. The assessment was military, neutral, fair to the soldiers of both sides. It drew a rebuke from the chairman of the National Commission on Historical and Cultural Research.
"Employment of appropriate phraseology is necessary when one is projecting the image of a hero. Expressions such as 'invader' and 'defenders' and 'the Indian Army' fighting bravely but not being quick enough to 'fall upon the withdrawing enemy' loom large in the article. 'Had Raja Dahar defended the Indus heroically and stopped Qasim from crossing it, the history of the subcontinent might have been quite different.' One fails to understand whether the writer is applauding the victory of the hero or lamenting the defeat of his rival?"
Among the Believers, p. 141
 
The excavated city of Mohenjo-Daro... is one of the archaeological glories of Pakistan and the world. The excavations are now being damaged by waterlogging and salinity, and appeals for money have been made to world organizations. A feature letter in the Dawn offered its own ideas for the site. Verses from the Koran, the writer said, should be engraved and set up in Mohenjo-Daro in "appropriate places": "Say (unto them, O Mohammed): Travel in the land and see the nature of the sequel for the guilty ... Say (O Mohammed, to the disbelievers): Travel in the land and see the nature of the consequence for those who were before you. Most of them were idolators."
Among the Believers, pp. 141-142
An interesting cultural adaptation found mainly here, though, is the widespread claim of descent from the Arab (or Moghul) conquerors:
"Islam doesn't show on my face. We have nearly all, subcontinental Muslims, invented Arab ancestors for ourselves. Most of us are sayeds, descendants of Mohammed through his daughter Fatima and cousin and son-in-law Ali... Everybody has got an ancestor who came from Arabia or Central Asia."
Beyond Belief, p. 307
 
The last Nawab of Bahawalpur was fanatical about the ancestry he claimed. In Bahawalpur and Pakistan and the subcontinent he was an Arab of the Abassids and a conqueror, a man drawing his wealth from the country, but not part of it. He wore the fez to make the point.
Beyond Belief, p. 331 " [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia as of 5/12/2007]>>>.
 
As can be seen, Islamic Imperialism worked as follows, wrongfully capture a people and subgate them, then brain wash them, just like a cancer conquers the human body.   Also, they continue to occupy and do not want to give back what rightly belongs to others, but seek to keep the occupied brain washed.
 
In fact, they tried this wicked approach on Spain, but the subjeducated people fought back and eventually recovered their land and nation.   Let's look into this briefly, <<<"Many like to place the blame on others for what results from their own willful acts.  With Islam this has been the case from at least 711 AD forward.  In 711 AD they attacked Spain and through the years overran most of the country, but when they got kicked out finally about seven hundred years after they started their illegal occupation they screamed about all the wonderful things they did for those they subjected; what utter nonsense." [source - The Sponsors of Unprovoked Attacks and Criminal Acts Responsible For All That Occurs: by Iris the Preacher, 2006]>>>.
 
So as we can see, Islam from its very beginnings was out to greedily take that which belonged to others, to subjugate the enslaved, and to brain wash them.  This evil actions succeeded in most cases except for Spain, and the occupation of the subjugated nations continues until the present.
 
PRESENT DAY ARAB IMPERIALISM AND LUST FOR VIOLENCE:
 
 
 
As stated in the last topic, occupation of the subjugated nations continues until the present as the aim of Islamic Imperialism.  Take what is now occurring in Thailand as an example, <<<" The premier blamed the assault on the Mujahideen Islam Pattani, one of several Muslim separatist groups accused of killing about 50 police officers over the previous three years. The banned Pattani United Liberation Organization (PULO) had boasted in May 2003 that Thai security forces were "falling like leaves" as Muslims fought to free the south from Bangkok's rule... In years past, the Muslim separatist groups in southern Thailand and the Communist Party of Thailand dabbled in drug trafficking to raise funds to support their political and operational objectives. As of 2000 there was little if any data linking indigenous terrorists to drug trafficking in Southeast Asia. The Communist Party had not been a viable organization in Thailand for years, and the Muslim separatist movement had fractured into a number of organizations known more for their banditry than their political activities. Drug trafficking did not, therefore, contribute to any significant terrorism on the part of these organizations. In fact, there were no credible reports of any terrorist groups either being based in or conducting terrorist activity within the Kingdom of Thailand. ... During 2000 authorities responded with military force and legal action to separatist activity in the south. In February, security forces dealt a severe blow to the New Pattani United Liberation Organization -- a Muslim separatist group -- when they killed its leader Saarli Taloh-Meyaw. Authorities claim that he was responsible for 90 percent of the terrorist activities in Narathiwat, a southern Thai province. In April, police arrested the deputy leader of the outlawed Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN) -- a Southern separatist group -- in Pattani. The case was still pending before the court at year's end. Authorities suspected Muslim separatists conducted several small-scale attacks on public schools, a government-run clinic, and a police station in the south. ... Southern Thailand's terrorist incidents in 2002raised questions about potential Al Qaeda Network involvement. These attacks were the handiwork of a small number of highly organized, experienced insurgents from 4-8 Muslim groups, each numbering no more than 30 people, that have embarked on a concerted and well-planned campaign of ambushes, murders, weapons thefts and criminal extortion since the Thaksin government transferred security responsibilities from the Army to the police last summer. Although some of their activities may have been inspired by the Thai Government's assistance to the US war on terror, Southern Thailand's stability has always been a direct reflection of Bangkok's degree of control. These groups had not increased their capability to conduct a sustained terrorist campaign and the current threat from Thai Muslim separatist terrorist groups in the region still remains limited despite the recently increased violence attributed to them...On 10 June 2003 Thai police broke up a cell of the Islamic militant group Jemaah Islamiyah and foiled a plot to bomb embassies in the country. Three Thai men alleged to be members of Jemaah Islamiyah, the group suspected in last year's bombing on the Indonesian resort island of Bali, were arrested in raids on their homes in the Muslim.dominated Narathiwat province, 710 miles south of Bangkok. The development followed the May 16 arrest in Bangkok of Arifin bin Ali, 42, a Singaporean alleged to be a senior member of the terror group.
Thai Muslim separatists may have called on support from the Malaysian Kampulan Mujahedin. The Malaysian group has links to the regional terror organization, Jemaah Islamiyah, which has ties to the al-Qaida terror network. There was talk decades ago about creating a Muslim state in parts of Thailand, Cambodia, and Malaysia, but this has largely disappeared. Some religious leaders in the past, about 60- or 80-years ago, they had some idea to separate southern Thailand as an independent state. Even some, they want to join with Selantan state, Terranganu, and Cambodia and become an Islamic state." [source - GlobalSecurity.org, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/thailand2.htm on 5/12/2007]>>>.   And this is just one example of modern day Islamic activity that shows it is no different now than when Islam was founded in the Seventh Century.   To wit, as stated previously, Islam from its very beginnings was out to greedily take that which belonged to others, to subjugate the enslaved, and to brain wash them.  This evil actions succeeded in most cases except for Spain, and the occupation of the subjugated nations continues until the present.
Of course the example of Thailand is just one small example.   Let's look at things briefly elsewhere in the world.   One newspaper in Australia, The Weekend Australian, highlighted the world condition and showed where most of the world's violence was emanating from as follows: <<<"Did you know that 90-95% of the conflicts in the world today are Muslims fighting non-muslims or each other? " [source - The Weekend Australian, November 26-27, 2005 AD]>>>.
Let's look at some more facts, <<<"Islam is intolerant of other religions, so much so that Christians in Nigeria, Sudan and middle eastern countries are killed for practicing their religion. Muslims are also responsible for burning down their churches. Sydney has recently seen an attack on four churches for similar reasons. (December 16, 2005) How can we tolerate such intolerance?">>.[7]
 
Says it all, so clearly Islam should be redefined as something other than a religion. So it is very necessary that this greed and hate be addressed. Remember, Matthew 5:9, "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God." (AV).
 
Let's consider the facts as continually revealed in the world news that shows if any thing that the newspaper editor may have been a little low when he said 95 percent of the violence in the world was caused by Muslims. Here are some instances of terrorism by members of Islam:[7]
 
(1) World Trade Center - 9/11 - unprovoked attack and mass murder by Muslims.[8]
(2) London Subway Bombing by Muslims [9]
(3) Continued mosque bombings in Iraq by Muslims.[10]
(4) Suicide bombings in Israel by Muslims.[11]
(5) Suicide bombing of a wedding reception in Jordan by Muslims.[12]
(6) Daily roadside bombings in Iraq by Muslims.[13]
(7) Train bombings in Spain my Muslims.[14]
(8) Riots and car burnings and murders in France by Muslims.[15]
(9) Suicide bombings in Iraq by Muslims.[16]
(10) Car and truck bombings in Iraq by Muslims.[17]
(11) Unprovoked murder of 8 Israelis and the kidnapping of 2 by Muslims to provoke turmoil and violence in Lebanon and Israel by Muslims.[18]
(12) Unprovoked murder of 2 Israelis and the kidnapping of 1 by Muslims to provoke turmoil and violence in Gaza by Muslims.[19]
(13) Bombing of restaurants and cafes in Bali, Indonesia by Muslims.[20]
(14) Bombing of a trains in India by Muslims.[21]
(15) Take over of a grammar school in Russia resulting in the deaths of many students by Muslims.[22]
(16) Attempted shoebombing of a plain by a Muslim.[23]
(17) Conspiracy to bomb about 10 planes going from UK by Muslims.[24]
(18) Attempted murder of several Indian politicians in Kashmir by Muslims.[25]
(19) Many violent acts by Muslims in Afghanistan.[26]
(20) Murder of a girl by Shiite Muslims in Iran.[27]
(21) Conspiracy to bomb trains in Germany - as previously posted for you.[28]
(22) And the list could go on and on, get it?
References:
[7] The Weekend Australian, November 26-27, 2005 AD
[8] World Trade Center bombing, by Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[9] Explosions Hit Three Tube Stations, One Bus, Thursday, July 21, 2005, Fox News
[10] By Ellen Knickmeyer and K.I. Ibrahim, Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, February 23, 2006; Page A01
[11] Suicide attack, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[12] Zarqawi Calls for Jordan King's Head, Friday, November 18, 2005
[13] The Daily Star, 03/21/2006, Vol. 5 #644
[14] CBS News, WASHINGTON, March 12, 2004
[15] Free Republic, News/Activism 05/30/2006 5:46:30 PM PDT, and, The Telegraph, By Colin Randall in Paris (Filed: 31/05/2006)
[16] Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[17] CNN, Thursday, March 18, 2004 Posted: 4:59 PM EST (2159 GMT)
[18] Telegraph (UK), Israeli crisis is a smoke screen for Iran's nuclear ambitions, By Con Coughlin(Filed: 14/07/2006)
[19] Associated Press
[20] aljazeera.net, Bali a soft target, experts say, By Marianne Kearney in Jakarta, Indonesia, Monday 03 October 2005, 20:20 Makka Time, 17:20 GMT
[21] MSNBC, Associated Press, Updated: 6:26 p.m. ET July 12, 2006
[22] Beslan school hostage crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[23] CNN, CNN NEWSNIGHT AARON BROWN, Debate Over Guantanamo Detainees Continues, Aired January 21, 2002 - 22:00 ET
[24] TIME, The Daily Dish, by Andrew Sullivan, The Alleged UK Terror Plot, 16 Aug 2006 09:58 am
[25] The New Yorker, BETWEEN THE MOUNTAINS - India and Pakistan are caught in a dangerous struggle over Kashmir. But what do its people want? by Isabel Hilton , Issue of 2002-03-11
[26] USA Today, USA's Muslims under a cloud, Updated 8/10/2006 9:13 AM ET
[27] NITV Satellite TV station located in Los Angeles, on Masjed Soleymaani Hastam, and [FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great, and (in German) Iran/forum/viewtopic.php of Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia' and http://sosiran97.home.comcast.net/MasjedSoleymaaniHastam.mp3, and
[28] AOL NEWS, War on Terror, and Netscape.com, Third Lebanese Arrested in German Train Terror Plot , (via dailystar.com.lb)
[source - Large Religions are False Religions - Their Fruitage, by Iris the Preacher].
In fact, they are even to this day trying to start violence in North America with a view to Islamic Imperialism.   Let's consider the Fort Dix fouled plan to commit murder with respect furtherance of their wicked goal.   <<<" WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The federal government has charged five alleged Islamic radicals with plotting to kill U.S. soldiers at Fort Dix in New Jersey.
A sixth was charged with aiding and abetting the illegal possession of firearms by three of the others.
"The philosophy that supports and encourages jihad around the world against Americans came to live here in New Jersey and threaten the lives of our citizens through these defendants," New Jersey U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Christie said at a news conference Tuesday. (Watch how the suspects' trip to a video store led to the arrest )
The men were arrested Monday night and heard the charges against them Tuesday in federal court. They will be held without bond pending a hearing Friday, according to Michael Drewniak, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey....
One quote from the alleged recordings was defendant Mohamad Ibrahim Shnewer saying, "My intent is to hit a heavy concentration of soldiers. ... This is exactly what we are looking for. You hit four, five or six Humvees and light the whole place [up] and retreat completely without any losses."...
Their goal was to figure out how to kill as many American soldiers as possible, Christie said.
The men had surveyed a number of bases but settled on Fort Dix because one of the defendants said he knew the base "like the back of his hand" because he had delivered pizza there, Christie said. (About Fort Dix)" [source - CNN in May, 2007]>>>.
So as we can see, Islamic Imperialism is alive and well and a great danger to all freedom loving people everywhere as its goal is the same as in the past, namely to  greedily take that which belonged to others, to subjugate the enslaved, and to brain wash them.   Be careful, you could be next.
Yet Islam has the nerve to scream about justified temporary occupation while showing no sign of ending their occupations, many of which have lasted for centuries.
WRONGFUL ISLAMIC OCCUPATION UNTIL TODAY:
As stated previously, Today, many in Islam decry the temporary occupation of Iraq by a coalition that wants nothing better than to leave, but does not see how it can until members of Islam stop killing each other because they belong to different flavors of Islam - until the country is stabilized.   Yet, these same members of Islam, many of which have been occupying other's lands for centuries see no wrong in so doing - what a corrupt double standard.   For example, they wrongly occupy much of Palestine, but the entire Palestine was given not to the descendants of Abraham's son, Ishmael, from whom the Arabs descended, but to the descendants of Abraham's son, Isaac, by none other than the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, and Jacob, creator of all there is, himself, as clearly recorded in Numbers 34:1-28, previously quoted in the Introduction.
Even the Qur'an clearly testifies to a Kingdom of the Hebrews in Palestine so the members of Islam have no excuse for not knowing they have been illegally occupying this country since the Seventh Century.  <<<" The distorted Bible knockoff, the Quran, gives abundant testimony to the existence to the ancient kingdom of the Hebrews that has recently come out of a long hiatus. This will now be shown from three different versions of the Quran that testify to this kingdom under King Solomon and a visit by the Queen of Sheba.
 
AN-NAML (THE ANT, THE ANTS), Sura 27:
 
027.020
YUSUFALI: And he took a muster of the Birds; and he said: "Why is it I see not the Hoopoe? Or is he among the absentees?
PICKTHAL: And he sought among the birds and said: How is it that I see not the hoopoe, or is he among the absent?
SHAKIR: And he reviewed the birds, then said: How is it I see not the hoopoe or is it that he is of the absentees?

See Part 2

Part 3

Islamic view of Solomon
[b]Main article: Islamic view of Solomon
See Similarities between the Bible and the Qur'an
Solomon also appears in the Qur'an, where he is called Sulayman, which is Solomon in Arabic (Sulaiman or Suleiman).  The Qur'an refers to Solomon as the son of David, as a prophet and as a great ruler imparted by God with tremendous wisdom, favor, and special powers just like his father, David. The Quran states that Solomon had under his rule not only people, but also hosts of hidden beings (i.e., jinn). It also states that Solomon was able to understand the language of the birds and ants, and to see some of the hidden glory in the world that was not accessible to common human beings. The Islamic view on Solomon is based entirely on revelation's to Muhammed which comprise part of the Qur'an." [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]>>, [source - The Quran Testifies to The Kingdom of the Hebrews:, by Iris the Preacher, 2007]>>>.[/b]

[b]Yet, even though their Qur'an, as shown by direct quotes from three different versions/translations of the Qur'an, clearly show that the land of Palestine clearly belongs to the Hebrews, the descendents of Abraham's son Isaac, and not to the descendents of Abraham's son Ishmael, Islam greedily wants all of Palestine.   They still occupy a large part of it - Gaza and the west bank.   They, although they scream about even temporary occupation of Iraq for legitimate and beneficial reasons, they stubbornly refuse to get out of all of Palestine which does not belong to them; in fact, they routinely harass the rightful owners and challenge their right to exist - how hateful and wicked.[/b]

[b]But this is not the only area that they are wrongfully occupying.  Turkey is another and it rightfully belongs to the Byzantine Empire; Pakistan and Afghanistan both of which originally were part of 'greater India' and were the property of Buddhist and Hindu people.   Islam should return these lands to their rightful owners and deprogram those whose ancestors were brain washed.
Let's just consider for a minute how 'greater India' was occupied by Islam to see how horrible the wicked wrong was.[/b]

[b]Satyameva Jayate, Truth Alone Triumphs, as sponsored by Jai Maharaj, stated the following, <<<"Genocide committed in the name of Allah: 3,000,000 Bangladeshi Hindus Killed during the Pakistan-Bangladesh war in 1971. From 1894 to 1896 Abdul Hamid, Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, killed 150,000 Armenian Christians. In India, Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur along with his disciples was burned to death by the Moghul ruler Aurangzeb in 1675. Another Sikh, Bhai Mati Das was sawn into right and left halves while he was still alive. In July 1974, 4,000 Christians living in Cyprus were killed by Fahri Koroturk, president of Turkey and his Islamic army. From 1843 to 1846 10,000 Assyrian Christians including women and children were massacred by the Muslims. From 1915 to 1918 750,000 Assyrians were killed in the name of Islamic Jihad. In 1933 thousands of Assyrian villagers were murdered by the Iraqi soldiers in Northern Iraq. Since 1990 more than 10,000 Kashmiri Hindus have been brutally murdered by Islamic fundamentalists. Over 280,000 Ugandans killed during the reign of Idi Amin from 1971 to 1979. Over 30,000 Mauritanians have been killed by the Islamic dictators since 1960. In 1980, 20,000 Syrians were murdered under the rule of Hafez Al-Assad, President of Syria. Since 1992 120,000 Algerians have been murdered by the Islamic fundamentalist army" [source - Satyameva Jayate, Truth Alone Triumphs, as sponsored by Jai Maharaj, http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/ ]>>>.[/b]
 
[b]And, <<<" K. S. Lai, the greatest of all historians in India said, <<"Islam received a definite check in India. In other words, while countries like Arabia, Persia, Mesopotamia and Syria succumbed to the onslaught of Islam and converted en masse, the sword of Islam was blunted in India. This check provided provocation and enthusiasm to some Muslim conquerors and rulers to take to the task of proselytization with great zeal and earnestness. Their exertions and achievements find repeated mention in official and non-official chronicles and similar other works. Sometimes, besides broad facts, actual data and figures in this regard are also available. All this information is very helpful in estimating Muslim numbers as they grew from almost a cipher. ">>.
 
He went on to quote, <<"By the year 1000 of the Christian Era the extreme north-western parts of India, in the trans-Indus region, had become introduced to Islam. As early as C.E. 664, consequent upon an invasion of Kabul and its environs (which then formed part of India), by Abdur Rahman, a few thousand inhabitants are reported to have been converted to Islam" [source - Ferishtah, Tarikh-i-Ferishtah, Persian text, Nawal Kishore Press, Lucknow 1865, Vol.1, p.16.]>>, and <<"Subuktagin also fought against the Hindus and converted some of them. But all these events took place in the trans-Indus region, and we may, therefore, agree with Lanepoole in saying that in C.E. 1000 there were no Muslims in northern India east of the Indus."[source - Stanley Lane-Poole, Medieval India under Muhammadan Rule (London, 1926), p.1.}>>.
 
But conversion by the proverbial sword and the stealing of other's land was only to grow worse. <<" However, there were some small settlements of Muslims in Sind, Gujarat and the Malabar Coast. Parts of Sind were conquered by Muhammad bin Qasim Sakifi in C.E. 712. Whichever towns he took, like Alor, Nirun, Debul and Multan, in them he established mosques, appointed Muslim governors, and propagated the Muhammadan religion." [source - Chachnama, trs. in H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, History of India as told by its own Historians, 8 Vols., London, 1867-77, (here after as E and D), Vol. I, p. 207.]>>. And to continue, <<"In Debul, for instance, he enslaved and converted some women and children, and left a contingent of 4,000 Muhammadans to garrison the place." [source - Al Biladuri, Futuh-ul-Buldan, trs. E and D, I, p.120]>>.
 
Forced conversions were to become a way of life and standard operating principle of (SOP) of Islam as shown by, <<" In Multan about 6,000 persons were made to accept Islam. Al Biladuri's narrative indicates that the people of Sawandari, Basmad, Kiraj, and Alor were converted in large numbers." [source - Al Biladuri, Futuh-ul-Buldan, trs. E and D, I, p.122 to 124]>>; another large forced conversion was, <<"by Muhammad bin Qasim Sakifi to Hajjaj also point to large number of conversions." [source - Chachnama, op. cit., pp. 163-64. Also pp. 205-07, 208]>>.
 
<<"Muhammad bin Qasim remained in Sind for a little more than three years." [source - Elliot's Appendix in E and D, I, p.439]>>. <<"After his recall not only the Arab power in Sind declined rapidly, but also most of the neo-converts returned to their former faith. Al Biladuri informs that 'in the days of Tamim, the Musalmans (had) retired from several parts of India... nor have they up to the present time (he wrote in the middle of the ninth century) advanced so far as in days gone by". When Hakim succeeded Tamim, "the people of India had returned to idolatry excepting those of Kassa, and the Musalmans had no place of security in which they could take refuge"." [source - Biladuri, op. cit., p.126, Also cf. Idrisi, E and D, I, Nuzhat-ul-Mushtaq]>>, <<"Sir Dension Ross also says that "after the recall of Muhammad bin Qasim, the Muslim retained some foothold on the west bank of the river Indus, but they were in such small numbers that they gradually merged into Hindu population. In Mansura (the Muslim capital of Sind) they actually adopted Hinduism." [ source - Dension Ross, Islam, p.18.]>>.
 
Conversions made at the point of the proverbial sword did not always hold as shown by, <<" In brief, because of the efforts of Muhammad bin Qasim and Caliph Umar II (C.E. 717-24) some Hindus in Sind had been converted to Islam, but by the time of Caliph Hashim (724-43), when Tamim was the governor of Sind, many of these Sindhi converts had returned to Hinduism. Those who continued to retain the new faith remained confined mostly to cities, particularly Multan. After Mahmud of Ghazni's attack on Multan their number seems to have gone up for, writing in the twelfth century, Al Idrisi says: "The greater part of the population (of Multan) is Musalman, so also the Judicial authority and civil administration." [ However, up to C.E. 1000 there were very few Muslims in Sind." [sources - Al Idrisi, p.83. and Elliot's Appendix, E and D, I, p.459]>>.
 
IT GETS WORSE - I.E., VIOLENCE AND FORCED CONVERSIONS BY MUSLIMS:
 
History shows that around the year 1,000 violence, pillaging, and conversions at the proverbial point of the sword, etc. my Muslims in India gets worse. <<" In the year C.E. 1000 the first attack of Mahmud of Ghazni was delivered. The region of Mahmud's activity extended from Peshawar to Kanauj in the east and from Peshawar to Anhilwara in the South. In this, wherever he went, he converted people to Islam. In his attack on Waihind (near Peshawar) in 1001-3, Mahmud is reported to have captured Jayapal and fifteen of his principal chiefs and relations some of whom, like Sukhpal, were made Musalmans. At Bhera all the inhabitants, except those who embraced Islam, were put to the sword. Since the whole town is reported to have been converted the number of converts may have been quite large. At Multan too conversions took place in large numbers for, writing about the campaign against Nawasa Shah (converted Sukhpal), Utbi says that this and the previous victory (at Multan) were 'witnesses to his exalted state of proselytism'" [sources - Kitab-i-Yamini, Eng. trs. of Utbi's work by James Reynolds, (London) 1858, pp. 451-52, 455, 460, 462-63 and Utbi, Tarikh-i-Yamini, E and D, II, pp.27, 30, 33, 40, 42, 43, 45, 49. Also Appendix in E and D, II, pp.434-78]>>. <<"In his campaign in the Kashmir Valley (1015) Mahmud 'converted many infidels to Muhammadanism, and having spread Islam in that country, returned to Ghazni'. In the latter campaigns, in Mathura, Baran and Kanauj, again, many conversions took place. While describing 'the conquest of Kanauj', Utbi sums up the situation thus: 'The Sultan levelled to the ground every fort..., and the inhabitants of them either accepted Islam, or took up arms against him." In short, those who submitted were also converted to Islam. In Baran (Bulandshahr) alone 10,000 persons were converted including the Raja. During his fourteenth invasion in C.E. 1023, Kirat, Nur, Lohkot and Lahore were attacked. The chief of Kirat accepted Islam, and many people followed his example. According to Nizamuddin Ahmad, 'Islam spread in this part of the country by the consent of the people and the influence of force'. Conversion of Hindus to Islam was one of the objects of Mahmud. Al Qazwini writes that when Mahmud went "to wage religious war against India, he made great efforts to capture and destroy Somnat, in the hope that the Hindus would then become Muhammadans" [source - Zakaria al Qazwini, Asar-ul-Bilad, E and D, I, p.98]>>; and <<"Sultan Mahmud was well-versed in the Quran and was considered its eminent interpreter."[source - C.E. Bosworth, The Ghaznavids (Edinburgh, 1963), p. 129. Utbi, Reynolds trs. op. cit., pp.438-39 and n.]>>; <<"He ardently desired to play the role of a true Muslim monarch and convert non-Muslims to his faith. Tarikh-i-Yamini, Rausat-us-Safa and Tarikh-i-Ferishtah, besides many other works, speak of construction of mosques and schools and appointment of preachers and teachers by Mahmud and his successor Masud." [source - Utbi, trs. Reynolds, op.cit., pp. 322-25, 462. Utbi, E and D, II, p.37 Ferishtah, op. cit., I, p.44.]>>; <<"Wherever Mahmud went, he insisted on the people to convert to Islam. Such was the insistence on the conversion of the vanquished Hindu princes that many rulers just fled before Mahmud even without giving a battle. "The object of Bhimpal in recommending the flight of Chand Rai was, that the Rai should not fall into the net of the Sultan, and thus be made a Musalman, as had happened to Bhimpal's uncles and relations, when they demanded quarter in their distress." [source - Utbi, E and D, II, p.49.]>>; <<" There is no doubt that the invasions of Mahmud of Ghazni brought good crop of converts, and a few more Muslims were added through the influence of Muslim Mashaikh and traders in Gujarat and Malabar. But if the example of Sind provides any precedent, it is possible that many Hindus forcibly converted to Islam during Mahmud's raids returned to their former faith. Very few Muslims were left in Sind after the decline of Arab rule. A local Karmatian Muhammadan dynasty was, however, ruling at Mansura and Multan. Mahmud of Ghazni destroyed it root and branch (1010) and Multan was deserted" [source - Ferishtah, op. cit., I, p.27, M. Habib, Sultan Mahmud of Ghaznin, Delhi reprint, 1951, p.34,]>>.
 
CONTINUED FORCED CONVERSIONS AND STEALING OF HINDU LANDS:
 
<<"About the end of the twelfth century, Muhammad Ghori established Muslim rule in India on a durable basis. When he captured Bhatinda in 1190-91, he placed in its command Qazi Ziyauddin with a contingent of 1200 horse." [source - Camb. Hist. India, III, p.40.]>>; <<"In 1192 he invaded Hindustan with an army of 120,000. A good number of his soldiers would have been killed in the sanguinary battle with Prithviraj. A major portion of the remainder would have stayed on in India under Qutbuddin Aibak, who must not have been left empty handed in an alien and hostile country." [source - Hasan Nizami says that 'the Sultan then returned to Ghazna... but the whole army remained... at the mauza of Indarpat'. (Taj-ul-Maasir, E and D, II, p.216). Surely Muhammad Ghori would not have gone back all alone.]>>.
 
It get's even worse, <<" Aibak entered upon a series of conquests. He despatched Ikhtiyaruddin Bakhtiyar Khalji to the East and himself captured Kol (modern Aligarh) in 1194. There "those of the garrison who were wise and acute were converted to Islam, but those who stood by their ancient faith were slain with the sword" [source - Taj-ul-Maasir, E and D, II, p.216]>>; <<"In 1195 when Raja Bhim of Gujarat was attacked, 20,000 prisoners were captured," [source - Ferishtah, I, p.62.]>>; <<"and in 1202 at Kalinjar 50,000," [source - Hasan Nizami, p.231. Also Ferishtah, I, p.53. Habibullah, The Foundation of Muslim Rule in India, (Allahabad, 1961), pp.69 and 334 (n.26), has missed to cite Hasan Nizami's assertion that 50,000 were enslaved.]>>; <<"and we may be sure that (as in the case of Arab conquest of Sind) all those who were made slaves were compelled to embrace the religion of the masters to whom they were allotted." [source - Titus. Islam in India and Pakistan (Calcutta, 1959), p.31.]>>; <<"Ferishtah specifically mentions that on the capture of Kalinjar "fifty thousand Kaniz va ghulam, having suffered slavery, were rewarded with the honour of Islam" [source - Ferishtah, I, p.63.]>>; <<"According to Ferishtah three to four hundred thousand Khokhars and Tirahias were also converted to Islam by Muhammad Ghori." [source - Ferishtah, I, pp.59-60.]>>.
 
MASSACREE OF BUDDHIST BY VIOLENCE LUSTFUL MEMBERS OF ISLAM:
 
Genocide and massacres and stealing of others lands and forced conversions continued as Islam's SOP <<"Ikhtiyaruddin Bakhtiyar Khalji's military exploits in the east also resulted in conversions to Islam. About the end of the twelfth or the beginning of the thirteenth century," [source & comments by S.K. Lal - The exact date of the raid is difficult to determine. Ishwari Prasad, Medieval India (Allahabad, Fourth Impression, 1940), p.138 places it" probably in 1197", Wolseley Haig (C.H.I., III,pp.45-46) a little earlier than this, and Habibullah, op. cit., pp.70 and 84, n. 78 in 1202-03.]>>; <<"he marched into Bihar and attacked the University centres of Nalanda, Vikramshila and Uddandapur, erecting a fortress at the site of Uddandapur or Odantapuri." [source - Indian Antiquary, IV, pp.366-67.]>>; <<"The Buddhist monks in these places were massacred and the common people, deprived of their priests and teachers, turned some to Brahmanism and some to Islam. Buddhism did not die out immediately or completely in Bihar." [source - Fuhrer, The Sharqi Architecture of Jaunpur, pp.70-73.]>>; <<"But Bakhtiyar's raid on Bihar did deliver a shattering blow to Buddhism and its lost followers were gained mainly by Islam. Muslim sway extended from Varanasi through the strip of Shahabad, Patna, Monghyr and Bhagalpur district," [source - Habibullah, op. cit., p.147]>>.
 
<<" During the time of Qutbuddin Aibak a large number of places were attacked and prisoners captured for which actual figures or written evidence are available. Figures of any conversions during campaigns to Kanauj, Varanasi (where the Muslims occupied "a thousand" temples)." [source - Ferishtah, I, p. 58]>>; <<"Ajmer (attacked thrice), Gujarat, Bayana and Gwalior, and the campaigns carried out right up to Bengal are not available. However, since the notices of medieval chroniclers are usually full of exaggeration where figures of the defeated or captured non-Muslims are concerned, it would be reasonable to take into consideration only those which are specifically mentioned, any exaggeration being rounded off by those which are not." [source - Indian Muslims, Who Are They by K.S. Lal]>>[source - Islam, Violent From The Beginning Using India as An Example:, by Iris the Preacher, 2006]>>>.[/b]

[b]And, <<<" Now here are the facts, the reality, of the murder, genocide of over 80 million endividuals in India by Muslims, <<"With the invasion of India by Mahmud Ghazni about 1000 A.D., began the Muslim invasions into the Indian subcontinent and they lasted for several centuries. The Muslim invasions continued even when the Muslims were ruling India, like the invasion of the Mongols during the reign of the Khiljis or the invasion of the Mughals in the early sixteenth Century when the Lodis were ruling Delhi. The last notable invasion of the Muslims from outside was the invasion of Nadir Shah in 1739, during which he unleashed a great horror on the native population.
 
During these seven hundred years of Muslim invasions and their conquest and rule of India, the Hindus were the greatest sufferers. It is difficult to estimate the number of Hindus who lost their lives during these campaigns, the number of Hindus who lost their lives in the religious persecution perpetrated on the native population by the Muslim rulers or the number of Hindus who were forcibly converted to Islam.
 
According to Prof. K.S. Lal, the author of the Growth of Muslim population in India, the Hindu population decreased by 80 million between 1000 AD, the year Mahmud Ghazni invaded India and 1525 AD, a year before the battle of Panipat.
 
One can safely add another 20 million Hindus to this list to account for the number that were killed during the Mughal rule or the rule of the Muslim rulers in the Deccan plateau. By all known accounts of world history, as pointed out by Koenard Elst in his book the Negationism in India, destruction of about 100 million hindus is perhaps the biggest holocaust in the whole world history." [source - The biggest holocaust in world history by Jayaram V]>>...
Now let's look at what others had to say about this greatest of all genocides:
 
Historian Will Durant wrote his book The Story of Civilization:, <<"The Mohammadan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within." [source - "The Story of Civilization, " by Will Durant the great American historian].
 
French historian Alain Danielou wrote in his book Histoire de l'Inde:, <<"From the moment when the Muslims arrive in India, the history of India does not have any more great interest. It is long and monotonous series of murder, massacres, spoilations, destruction." [source - "Histoire de l'Inde," by Alain Danielou, great French historian]>>.
 
Hindu sage Padmanabha described in his KanhaDade Prabandha in 1456 AD the story of the Islamic invasion of Gujarat of 1298 AD:, <<"The conquering army burnt villages, devastated the land, plundered people's wealth, took Brahmins ( priestly hindu class ) and children and women of all classes captive, flogged with thongs of raw hide, carried a moving prison with it, and converted the prisoners into obsequious slaves.
 
Tarikh-i-Yamini of Utbi the sultan's secretary wrote in the 11th century:The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously at Thanesar that the stream was discoloured, notwithstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it. The Sultan returned with plunder which is impossible to count." [source - "the story of the Islamic invasion of Gujarat of 1298 AD:, " (English translation), by Padmanabha, a famous Hindu of the 15 th. Century].
 
As shown, Islam engaged in a henious genocide clearly showing them to be a false religion that ignored the basic human right of freedom of conscience and belief, and even went so far as putting a 'head tax" on those they did not murder who continued to practice their own religion to exert pressure to convert." [source - Only a False Religion Commits Genocide Against Others: by Iris the Preacher 2007].
 
CONCLUSION;
 
As stated in the introduction, <<<" Since its inception Islam claims to be a peaceful religion, but in practice it has been anything but peaceful.   In fact, it was responsible for among other things, bringing on or being the cause of the Crusades, but trying to throw the blame for them on others.   Let's look at the facts, <<<" Throughout history Islam which claims to be a religion of peace has attacked apostate (counterfeit) Christians and has attempted to steal land and people from them, and then cried fowl when they struck back.  How ridicules and hypocritical that is for any group; to wit, to initiate blood guilt and then yell when the other group defends itself and strikes back.">>>.   And the evidence presented in this article clearly proves it is anything but a peaceful religion, and today it is as violent as ever as clearly shown in this article beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Islam yells and screams about occupation, but they are the world's greatest wrongful occupiers and brain washers.   Also, they are totally unwilling to give back occupied territory as clearly shown in the case of Palestine and elsewhere.   Its like the real criminal pointing at everyone else and calling them criminals to cover up the fact that he is the real criminal.
 
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,
 
1) http://religious-truths.forums.com/
 
2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/ 
 
3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/
 
4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/
 
5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/
 
6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/ 
 
7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/
 
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to, http://religious-truths.forums.com/default/digital-book-on-18-part-follow-christ-bible-study-3?replies=6#post-1421
 
Your Friend in Christ Iris89 
 
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to www.jw.org! [/b]

BEWARE MUSLIM WICKED DARK ‘ANGELS’ THAT WANT YOUR HEAD 12-25-2014
 
One Muslim apologist, Iftikhar, posted the following as part of his misguided rant on 12/24/2014:
 
<<[[ Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. (190) And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. (191) This is CLEARLY stands for fighting in SELF-DEFENCE against persecution.
…Muslims have been angels in comparison.]]>>
 
Now let’s examine his reference to <<[[ Muslims have been angels in comparison ]]>>
 
Here are the REALITIES FROM THE NEWS:
Britain's Female Jihadists  [[The results of home and mosque education in the U.K., (United Kingdom)]]
by Soeren Kern
September 21, 2014 at 5:00 am
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4714/britain-female-jihadists
"My son and I love life with the beheaders." — British jihadist Sally Jones.
Mujahidah Bint Usama published pictures of herself on Twitter holding a severed head while wearing a white doctor's jacket; alongside it, the message: "Dream job, a terrorist doc."
British female jihadists are now in charge of guarding as many as 3,000 non-Muslim Iraqi women and girls held captive as sex slaves.
"The British women are some of the most zealous in imposing the IS laws in the region. I believe that's why at least four of them have been chosen to join the women police force." — British terrorism analyst Melanie Smith.
Great Britain is now the leading European source of female jihadists in Syria and Iraq.
As many as 60 Muslim women between the ages of 18 and 24 are believed to have left Britain to join the jihadist group Islamic State [IS] during the past twelve months alone, according to British terrorism analysts.
Dozens more have inquired about joining IS since the beheading of American journalist James Foley in Syria in August 2014 set off a frenzy of enthusiasm within jihadist circles.
Many of the women seem to be motivated by the hope of finding a jihadist husband, analysts say, apparently because they covet the cultural and religious "prestige" conferred upon Muslim widows whose husbands have died as "martyrs" for Allah. [[Iftikhar does not tell the truth when he says ISIS is not Muslim.]]
Until recently, most of the British women affiliated with IS have been restricted to performing domestic chores such as cleaning and cooking. Lately, however, some women have become restive and have demanded a greater role in the IS enterprise.
Several British women are now engaged in IS recruiting efforts, using social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to encourage a new wave of British jihadists to travel to Syria and Iraq.
A half-dozen other women have been incorporated into a female-only militia called the Al-Khansaa brigade, based in the Syrian city of Raqqa, where the IS has set up its headquarters.
Al-Khansaa—named after a seventh-century female Arab poet who was a contemporary of the Muslim Prophet Mohammed—was established in February 2014 with the purpose of exposing male enemy jihadists who try to disguise themselves by wearing women's clothing in order to avoid detection and detention at IS checkpoints.
The brigade was also established to detain civilian women in Raqqa who do not follow the Islamic State's strict interpretation of Islamic Sharia law, including the requirement that all women be fully covered in public and that they be accompanied by a male chaperone.
In an interview with the blog "Syria Deeply," Abu Ahmad, an IS official in Raqqa, explained the rationale behind Al-Khansaa. He said:
"We have established the brigade to raise awareness of our religion among women, and to punish women who do not abide by the law.[[Muslim Sharia law]]  There are only women in this brigade, and we have given them their own facilities to prevent the mixture of men and women."
British terrorism analyst Melanie Smith told the Daily Telegraph that Al-Khansaa is a Sharia law police brigade whose social media accounts are run by British women and written in English.
"The British women are some of the most zealous in imposing the IS laws in the region," Smith said. "I believe that's why at least four of them have been chosen to join the women police force."
The Al-Khansaa brigade has now expanded its remit to operating brothels for the use of IS fighters. The result is that British female jihadists are now in charge of guarding as many as 3,000 non-Muslim Iraqi women and girls who are being held captive as sex slaves, according to British media.
"It is the British women who have risen to the top of the Islamic State's Sharia police and now they are in charge of this operation," another analyst told the Daily Mirror. "It is as bizarre as it is perverse."
A key figure in the Al-Khansaa brigade is said to be Aqsa Mahmood, a 20-year-old woman from Glasgow, Scotland who left for Syria in November 2013. Mahmood attended private schools and had wanted to become a doctor, but she dropped out of university without warning and vanished overnight in order to become a jihadist and marry an IS fighter.
Using the jihadist name of Umm Layth (Arabic for "Mother of the Lion") on Twitter (account now suspended), Mahmood has encouraged other British Muslim women to leave their families behind in order to join the jihad in Syria. She wrote:
"Biggest tip to sisters: don't take detours, take the quickest route, don't play around with your Hijrah [religious pilgrimage] by staying longer than 1 day for safety and get in touch with your contacts as soon as you reach your destination."
Mahmood, who says she is dedicated to the "pursuit of Allah's pleasure," added: "Once you arrive in the land of jihad, [IS] is your family."
In two tweets Mahmood described the kinship she felt with fellow Muslims in the Islamic State. Before referring to the place as "paradise," she concluded:
"Wallahi [I swear] I will never be able to do justice with words as to how this place makes me feel or what Ansaar of Shaam [helpers of Syria] have done for me and Allah only knows how much I love and appreciate these people for His sake..."
In another post, Mahmood called on Muslims to imitate those who murdered British soldier Lee Rigby outside the Woolwich Barracks in London in May 2013. "Follow the examples of your brothers from Woolwich, Texas and Boston," she wrote, referring also to the shooting in Fort Hood, Texas in November 2009 and the Boston Marathon bombings in April 2013.
Mahmood also called on Muslims to conduct jihad operations on British streets. In a recent tweet, she counselled: "If you cannot make it to the battlefield, then bring the battlefield to yourself."[[A British soldier was beheaded on a London street by Muslim wicked dark ‘angels’.]]
She also wrote about martyrdom: "Allahu Akbar, there's no way to describe the feeling of sitting with the Akhawat [sisters] waiting on news of whose Husband has attained Shahadah [martyrdom]."
British media have published photographs of a burqa-clad Mahmood holding a shotgun, and of a child holding an AK-47 machine gun.
Mahmood's parents have said they cannot understand why their daughter ran away from home to become a jihadist: [[They well know, but will NOT openly credit it to their teaching of hate, love for violence, and no respect for non-Muslims and their property.]]
"Our daughter was brought up with love and affection in a happy home, attended Craigholme private school, went to university and was always taught to show respect for mankind and was well integrated into this society. She may believe that the jihadists of ISIS are her new family but they are not and are simply using her.
"If our daughter, who had all the chances and freedom in life, could become a bedroom radical, then it is possible for this to happen to any family." [[They forgot to mention they are ISOLATIONIST.]]
Another British jihadist linked to the Al-Khansaa brigade, a 21-year-old medical student who goes by the name Mujahidah Bint Usama, published pictures of herself on Twitter holding a severed head while wearing a white doctor's jacket. The gruesome image appears alongside the message "Dream job, a terrorist doc," followed by images of smiley faces and love hearts. [[They were NOT taught love for fellow human at home.]]
Usama's Twitter account has now been suspended, but in her description of herself she wrote: "Running away from jihad will not save you from death. You can die as a coward or you can die as a martyr."
Yet another British jihadist, a 22-year-old convert to Islam named Khadijah Dare, has vowed to become the first female jihadist to execute a British or American captive. [[Go view a picture of a Muslim beheading a non-Muslim at   http://desivoice.yuku.com/topic/4759/Video-of-Muslim-Beheading-Atheist#.VJwXWsCsA ]]
Writing under the Twitter name Muhajirah fi Sham (Arabic for "immigrant in Syria"), Dare asked for links to video footage of the beheading of James Foley. In a slang-filled tweet she wrote:
"Any links 4 da execution of da journalist plz. Allahu Akbar. UK must b shaking up ha ha. I wna b da 1st UK woman 2 kill a UK or US terorrist!(sic)".
In another tweet, Dare wrote:
"All da people back in Dar ul kufr [land of disbelievers] what are you waiting for ... hurry up and join da caravan to where the laws of Allah is implemented.
"No one from Lewisham [a borough in southeast London] has come here apart from an 18-year-old sister shame on all those people who afford fancy meals and clothes and do not make hijra [Mohamed's flight from Mecca to Medina in 622]. Shame on you."
Dare was born in London and converted to Islam at age 18, when she began worshipping at the Lewisham Islamic Center, a mosque linked to the radical cleric Abu Hamza and the two killers of Lee Rigby.  [Mosques are teaching hate, a love of violence, and disrespect for the person and property of non-Muslims]]
Dare moved to Syria in 2012 to marry a Swedish jihadist named Abu Bakr. The marriage was arranged through his mother on Facebook and she did not meet him until the day of their wedding. Dare recently published pictures of her son holding an AK-47 rifle.
In a Channel 4 documentary that aired in July 2013, Dare, who at that time went by the name Maryam, said:
"I couldn't find anyone in the UK who was willing to sacrifice their life in this world for the life in the hereafter... I prayed, and Allah ruled that I came here to marry Abu Bakr."
She also called on other British Muslims to join the jihad:
"You need to wake up and stop being scared of death...we know that there's heaven and hell. At the end of the day, Allah's going to question you. Instead of sitting down and focusing on your families or your study, you just need to wake up…."
On August 31, the Daily Mirror reported that Dare's jihadist rants have turned her into a "celebrity jihadi" who has become an "immense threat" due to her popularity. The newspaper reported that British security services have now made finding her a "top priority" over fears that radical Muslims are answering her calls to leave the UK to join IS in the Middle East.
In a four-minute video entitled, "Answering the Call–Foreign Fighters (Mujahedeen) in Syria," a burka-clad Dare appears firing an AK-47 rifle and pleading with fellow Brits to fight by her side in Syria. Speaking in a London accent, she said:
"These are your brothers and sisters as well and they need your help. So instead of sitting down and focusing on your families or focusing on your studies, you need to stop being selfish because time is ticking."
Not all British female jihadists are in their teens and twenties. A 45-year-old British convert to Islam named Sally Jones recently issued threats via Twitter to behead Christians. Jones, who changed her name to Umm Hussain al-Britani, wrote: "You Christians all need beheading with a nice blunt knife and stuck on the railings at Raqqa. Come here I'll do it for you!"
Police say Jones, who also goes by the name Sakinah Hussain, travelled to Syria in late 2013 after converting to Islam and developing an online romance with a 20-year-old British jihadist from Birmingham named Junaid Hussain.
Hussain, who uses the alias Abu Hussain al-Britani, was jailed in 2012 for running a computer hacking group known as Team Poison. He escaped to Syria in 2013 while on bail, and has been posting extremist messages on social media pledging to conquer the world and kill infidels.
Police fear Hussain is masterminding plan to teach jihadists how to empty the bank accounts of rich and famous Britons to fund terror attacks.
According to British media, Jones, originally from Kent in southeast England, was once an aspiring musician with an all-girl punk rock band but ended up spending a lifetime on social welfare benefits. She is now raising her 10-year-old son from a previous marriage as a Muslim under the Islamic State.
In an interview with The Sunday Times, Jones reflected on her new circumstances: "My son and I love life with the beheaders."
Soeren Kern[/url] is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based [url=http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/]Gatestone Institute[/url]. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on [url=http://www.facebook.com/Soeren.Kern]Facebook[/url] and on [url=http://twitter.com/SoerenKern]Twitter.  [source - retrieved from  http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4714/britain-female-jihadists  on  12/25 /2014]
CONCLUSION:
 
Why do Muslims have so many WICKED DARK ‘ANGELS’ among them?  Simple they worship a wicked old middle eastern Moon god, Allah, who is nothing but a mythical puppet god put forth by none other than Satan the Devil.
 
Yes, there is a genuine true God, who is Almighty God (YHWH)as clearly shown in the Bible as follows:
 
Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations.  Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.  Psalms 90:1 -2  (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
 
Many wonder who or what made God, but this question overlooks the fact that he always existed.   Mosers showed in the above scripture that he always existed.  Isaiah clearly showed the same fact when he said at Isaiah 40:28, “Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.”  [AV]. 
Similarly, the letter of Jude refers to God as existing “for all past eternity.”—Jude 25.
 
Those scriptures show us that God is “the King of eternity,” as the apostle Paul describes him. (1 Timothy 1:17) This means that God has always existed, no matter how far back in time we cast our gaze.   And he will always exist in the future. (Revelation 1:8)   Thus, his eternal existence is a fundamental attribute of the Almighty God (YHWH).
 
Why do we find this idea difficult to grasp?   Because our limited life span gives us a completely different concept of time from that of Jehovah.   Because God is eternal, to him a thousand years are like a day. (2 Peter 3:8)   To illustrate: Could a grasshopper, which lives as an adult for only about 50 days, fathom our life span of 70 or 80 years?   Hardly! Yet, the Bible explains that we are like grasshoppers in comparison with our Grand Creator.   Even our ability to reason is dwarfed by his. (Isaiah 40:22; 55:8, 9)   So it is not surprising that there are aspects of Jehovah’s nature that escape full human understanding.
 
Although the concept of an eternal God may be hard to grasp, we can see that it makes sense.   If someone else had created God, that person would be the Creator.  Yet, as the Bible explains, Jehovah is the one who “created all things.” (Revelation 4:11) Furthermore, we know that the universe at one time did not exist. (Genesis 1:1, 2)   Where did it come from? Its Creator had to exist first. He also existed before there were any other intelligent beings, such as his only-begotten Son and the angels. (Job 38:4, 7; Colossians 1:15) Clearly, then, he existed alone first. He could not have been created; nothing was in existence that could have created him.
 
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,
 
1) http://iris89.conforums.com/ 
 
2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/ 
 
3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/
 
4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/
 
5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/
 
6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/ 
 
7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/
 
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to, http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study
 
Your Friend in Christ Iris89 
 
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to www.jw.org! 
 

ISLAM’S OUTRAGEOUS ACTS AGAINST HUMANITY AND FREEDOM WITH THE CHARLIE  HEBDO THE LATEST:
INTRODUCTION:
Many look on religion to be a beneficial force in the world, but ISLAM is anything but that.  It is an anti-freedom force against humanity and freedom.   Its activist members commit one atrocity after another against others while those cold moderates, non-activist, cheer them on, and the religion itself is guilty as it never takes corrective or disciplinary action against any of its members – when did you ever hear of an excommunication or similar disciplinary action against a member of Islam?
One well known author said this with respect the Charlie Hebdo atrocity:
<<[ Salman Rushdie Says ‘I Stand WithCharlie Hebdo’ After Paris Attack
* Nolan Feeney @NolanFeeneyJan. 7, 2015    
The author has received death threats for his work
Award-winning author Salman Rushdie, who once received death threats for portrayals of Islam in his work, expressed his support for the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo after an attack that killed at least 12 on Wednesday.
“I stand with Charlie Hebdo, as we all must, to defend the art of satire, which has always been a force for liberty and against tyranny, dishonesty and stupidity,” he wrote in a statement posted by the Guardian. Gunmen killed at least 12 people in the paper’s offices before fleeing the scene in France’s deadliest terrorist attack in recent memory.
“Religion, a medieval form of unreason, when combined with modern weaponry becomes a real threat to our freedoms,” Rushie wrote. “This religious totalitarianism has caused a deadly mutation in the heart of Islam and we see the tragic consequences in Paris today.”
FRONT PAGES REACT TO PARIS TERROR ATTACK
In 1988, some conservative Muslims accused Rushdie’s fourth novel, The Satantic Verses, of blasphemy and insulting Islam. Rushdie received death threats and Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini, then the Supreme Leader of Iran, issued a fatwa for his death the following year.
“‘Respect for religion’ has become a code phrase meaning ‘fear of religion,’” Rushdie wrote. “Religions, like all other ideas, deserve criticism, satire, and, yes, our fearless disrespect.”
Read more: The Provocative History of the French Weekly Newspaper Charlie Hebdo  [source - retrieved from   http://time.com/3657541/charlie-hebdo-paris-terror-attack-salman-rushdie/  on  1/8/2015]]>>
MUSLIM ATROCITIES ARE NOT AN Anomaly , but standard operating methodology:
Suicide bombings are a salient feature of Islam, but many Muslims try to avoid answering on this by saying the Jews do it also; whereas, in reality only one Jew back in the 1940 was ever a suicide bomber.   This is patently dishonest to cite this anomaly when it is in reality Muslim standard operating methodology.    Let’s look at REALITY:
<<[ Israeli study: Suicide attacks nearly doubled worldwide in 2014
Conflict in the Middle East, and the rise of Islamic State, helped drive a spike in attacks. Researchers also noted a sharp increase in incidents in Nigeria and Afghanistan.
 
By Christa Case BryantJanuary 7, 2015 11:18 AM?
*
*
The worldwide incidence of suicide bombings nearly doubled last year, driven largely by worsening conflict inIraq, according to a new Israeli study. Most were carried out by Sunni Muslim militants in the Middle East, but researchers also found a significant uptick in other parts of the Muslim world, including Nigeria.
 
Related Stories
1. Militant attack deaths soar to all-time high: report Reuters
 
2. Suicide Bombings Against Trains and Buses are Lethal but Few in Number PR Newswire
 
3. Iraq Shi'ite Ashoura ritual escapes major attacks Reuters
 
4. US airstrikes target Islamic State leaders in Iraq Associated Press
 
5. Egypt's Ansar militants swear allegiance to Islamic State:
 
statement Reuters
The rise in attacks was driven chiefly by non-state organizations, particularly the Islamic State (IS) in Iraq andSyria, amid a backdrop of weakening government and increasingly religious overtones in both fresh and ongoing conflicts.
 
There were a total of 592 attacks last year, a 94 percent increase over 2013, according to Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies (INSS). Those attacks killed about 4,400 people, compared with 3,200 the year before.
 
 “IS conquests in Iraq and Syria, followed by the mid-2014 declaration of the Islamic caliphate by IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, led to an escalation in violence, including the widespread use of suicide attacks by the group,” concluded the report.
 
Indeed, attacks in Iraq accounted for nearly three-quarters of all those carried out in the Middle East – the worst year for such attacks in Iraq since 2008. The number of attacks in Syria remained steady at 41, of which IS claimed responsibility for one quarter. As the Syrian war increasingly spilled over into Lebanon, suicide bombings there quadrupled to 13. And Libya, torn by rival armed factions, saw 11 such attacks.
While self-annihilation as a tactic of war has a long history, Sri Lanka’s Tamil Tigers is credited with refining its modern form, including the use of suicide vests and female bombers to assassinate leaders and sow sectarian fear among civilians. The group was defeated in 2009 by Sri Lanka’s military.
Today the tactic is more readily associated with militancy in the Middle East and other non-Arab Muslim countries, including Afghanistan and Nigeria. The INSS study identified a doubling in such attacks in Afghanistan and a tenfold spike in Nigeria, which saw 32 attacks. The number of suicide bombings perpetrated by women tripled to 15, all but one of which were carried out in Africa.
 
The study said no confirmed suicide bombings were carried out during last summer’s conflict in Gaza, contrary to Israeli media reports. A 2014 Pew study found that Palestinians in Gaza were the most supportive among more than a dozen countries or territories surveyed of suicide attacks in the name of Islam. According to the Pew study, nearly two-thirds of respondents in Gaza agreed that suicide bombings could often or sometimes be “justified against civilian targets in order to defend Islam from its enemies.”
 
The INSS study notes that the perpetrators of suicide attacks, praised by many Muslims as martyrs and resistance heroes, rarely succeed in killing foreign occupiers: only 3 percent of such attacks in 2014 targeted foreign forces. Indeed, the vast majority of victims were Muslims, many of them members of security forces.
 
Some academics, including University of Chicago political scientist Robert Pape, have argued that the tactic has become popular over the past decade or more among militant groups because of its effectiveness against foreign militaries and elected governments.
 
Of the 188 suicide attacks carried out by 1980 and 2001, Prof. Pape found that all but nine occurred within the context of a campaign to secure political or territorial concessions. He links these suicide bombings with the withdrawal of French and American troops from Lebanon in the 1980s, the withdrawal of Israel from Lebanon, Gaza, and parts of the West Bank, and the release of a jailed Kurdish leader in Turkey, among other successes.  [source - retrieved from  http://news.yahoo.com/israeli-study-suicide-attacks-nearly-doubled-worldwide-2014-161844565.html  on  1/8/2015]]>>
 
And this did not even factor suicide airplane pilot 9/11/2001 attack on the World Trade Center, NYC, that murdered about 3,000 by Muslims which was cheered on the streets of London, Cairo, Amman, Alexander, etc. by Muslims.
 
ISLAM HAS ALWAYS BEEN A WICKED AND VIOLENT ENTITY FROM ITS INCEPTION:
Let’s take a quick look at its violent and wicked history.   Islam has spilled blood since its foundation in the Seventh Century.    Let's look at its very beginnings, a raid on a camel caravan with spilling of blood.
<<<" Raid on B. Qudah at Dhat al-Salasil by Amr b. al-As - September, 629CE
Having suffered a terrible defeat in the hands of B. Qudah at Dhat Atlah, coupled with the ignoble retreat of the Muslim army from Mu'tah, Muhammad's prestige was greatly affected. It is said that he also received intelligence that a number of tribes, including B. Qudah were now preparing to attack Medina. To salvage his reputation he now empowered Amr b. al-As, the new convert of Islam, to push for a decisive raid on the stubborn B. Qudah tribe. Amr b. al-As was very furious that some of these tribes had taken the side of the Byzantine party during the Mu'tah battle. It was time to punish them-Muhammad determined.
 
So with three hundred (300) men and thirty horses, Amr b. al-As set out to decimate the rebellious B. Qudah who were settled at Dhat al-Salasil. It was at a distance of ten days march from Medina. Amr b. al-As' grandmother (i.e., the mother of al-As b. Wail, the father of Amr b. al-As) was a woman from Qudah or Bali tribe and Muhammad sent Amr b. al-As to convert her and her people to Islam by force. When Amr arrived at Dhat al-Salasil he found that the enemy had heavily outnumbered the Muslims.
 
Because of the feeble Islamic forces at his disposal Amr b. al-As sought reinforcement from Muhammad. The messenger of Allah quickly sent Abu Bakr b. Quhafa with an additional two hundred (200) men to assist Amr b. al-As. Thus, the total number of men now numbered five hundred (500)." [source - "Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims," The Root of Terrorism a la Islamic style Chapter 15, by  Abul Kasem ]
 
So as we can see, Islam started out with the spilling of innocent blood of those running the peaceful caravan of commerce, and it continued that way until the present.    Yet members of this sham religion claim it is a religion of peace.   This false claim makes one think of what Adolph Hitler said, <<<" 'The broad mass of a nation -..will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one'---Adolf Hitler (1889-1945)">>>.
 
EARLY BLOOD SPILLING BY ISLAM:
 
Next, came the <<<"Raid on B. Juhayna at al-Khabat (the expedition of fish) by Abu Ubaydah ibn Jarrah - October, 629CE
 
In the next month, Muhammad sent Abu Ubaydah b. Jarrah along with three hundred (300) men to attack and punish the tribe of Juhaynah at al-Khabat, on the seacoast, five nights journey from Medina. This was a very difficult expedition and the Muslims suffered from intense hunger-so much so, that they had to divide the dates by number. They even ate the leaves of trees for a month. However, there was no fighting as the enemy had fled when they heard of the arrival of the Muslims.
In the end, the Muslims caught a dead-sea creature (a whale) that came ashore and ate it for half a month (or twenty days, according to Ibn Ishak). This is why this raid is also known as the 'expedition of fish.' They brought some of that stale meat to Muhammad and he ate it too.">>>.
 
<<<"Sahih Bukhari records that the Muslims ate the mountain like fish for eighteen days. Here is the Hadith:
Volume 3, Book 44, Number 663:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
"Allah's Apostle sent an army towards the east coast and appointed Abu 'Ubaida bin Al-Jarrah as their chief, and the army consisted of three-hundred men including myself. We marched on till we reached a place where our food was about to finish. Abu- 'Ubaida ordered us to collect all the journey food and it was collected. My (our) journey food was dates. Abu 'Ubaida kept on giving us our daily ration in small amounts from it, till it was exhausted. The share of everyone of us used to be one date only." I said, "How could one date benefit you?" Jabir replied, "We came to know its value when even that too finished." Jabir added, "When we reached the sea-shore, we saw a huge fish which was like a small mountain. The army ate from it for eighteen days. Then Abu 'Ubaida ordered that two of its ribs be fixed and they were fixed in the ground. Then he ordered that a she-camel be ridden and it passed under the two ribs (forming an arch) without touching them.">>>.
This practice of spilling blood of the innocents continued right on in early Islam.   Here is a short list of some of these blood spilling afairs:
[1] Beheading the leader of B. Jusham at al Ghabah by Abd Allah ibn Hadrad - November, 629CE [still being practiced today by members of Islam.]
 
[2] Raid on a passing caravan at Batn al-Idam by Abd Allah b. Abi Hadrad - November, 629CE [An example of desert piracy and blood spilling.]
 
[3] Raid on B. Khudra at Suria by Abu Qatadah - December, 629CE [An example of blood spilling of the innocent.]
 
[4] The Occupation of Mecca by Muhammad - January, 630CE [Yet another example of blood spilling of the innocent.]
 
Footnotes, <<<"Hadith from Sahhi Bukhari on Muhammad's exclusive right to shed blood at the holy sanctuary:
Volume 3, Book 34, Number 303:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
Allah's Apostle said, "Allah made Mecca a sanctuary and it was neither permitted for anyone before, nor will it be permitted for anyone after me (to fight in it). And fighting in it was made legal for me for a few hours of a day only. None is allowed to uproot its thorny shrubs or to cut down its trees or to chase its game or to pick up its Luqata (fallen things) except by a person who would announce it publicly." 'Abbas bin 'Abdul-Muttlib requested the Prophet, "Except Al-Idhkhir, for our goldsmiths and for the roofs of our houses." The Prophet said, "Except Al-Idhkhir." 'Ikrima said, "Do you know what is meant by chasing its game? It is to drive it out of the shade and sit in its place." Khalid said, "('Abbas said: Al-Idhkhir) for our goldsmiths and our graves.">>>.
<<<"On the killing of the singing girl, Sunaan Abu Dawud records:
Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2678:
Narrated Sa'id ibn Yarbu' al-Makhzumi:
The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: on the day of the conquest of Mecca: There are four persons whom I shall not give protection in the sacred and non-sacred territory. He then named them. There were two singing girls of al-Maqis; one of them was killed and the other escaped and embraced Islam.">>>.
<<<"Those killings of the Meccan women smacks in the face of Islam's claim that the religion forbids the killing of women in a war. In fact, we can cite Sahih (authentic) Ahadith to demonstrate that the killings of polytheist women and children and old men are definitely sanctioned by Muhammad. Here are a few samples:
 
Sahih Muslim: Book 019, Number 4321:
It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.
Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2664:
Narrated Samurah ibn Jundub:
The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Kill the old men who are polytheists, but spare their children." [source - [source - "Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims," The Root of Terrorism a la Islamic style Chapter 16, by  Abul Kasem, email address on 05/24/2007 = nirribilli@gmail.com  ]
 
[5] The Destruction of al-Uzza at Nakhla by Khalid b. al-Walid - January, 630CE [Yet another example of blood spilling of the innocent.]
 
[6] The Destruction of Suwa at Ruhat by Amr b. al-As - January, 630CE [Yet another example of blood spilling of the innocent.]
 
[7] The Destruction of al-Manat at al-Kadid by Sa'd b. Zayd al-Ashhali - January, 630CE [Yet another example of blood spilling of the innocent, one being a poor black lady.]
 
[8] Plunder of B. Jadhimah at Tihamah by Khalid b. al-Walid - January, 630CE [Yet another example of blood spilling of the innocent.]
 
footnote, <<<"Here is Sahi Hadith from Sahih Bukhari on the level of atrocity and cruelty perpetrated on B. Jadhimah by the Muslims:
Volume 5, Book 59, Number 628:
Narrated Salim's father:
The Prophet sent Khalid bin Al-Walid to the tribe of Jadhima and Khalid invited them to Islam but they could not express themselves by saying, "Aslamna (i.e. we have embraced Islam)," but they started saying "Saba'na! Saba'na (i.e. we have come out of one religion to another)." Khalid kept on killing (some of) them and taking (some of) them as captives and gave every one of us his Captive. When there came the day then Khalid ordered that each man (i.e. Muslim soldier) should kill his captive, I said, "By Allah, I will not kill my captive, and none of my companions will kill his captive." When we reached the Prophet, we mentioned to him the whole story. On that, the Prophet raised both his hands and said twice, "O Allah! I am free from what Khalid has done.">>>.
[9] Second Raid on B. Hawazin or the Battle of Hunayn by Muhammad - January, 630CE 630CE [Yet another example of blood spilling of the innocent.]
 
[10] The Destruction of the idol Yaghuth at Dhu al-Kaffyan by Tufayl ibn 'Amr al-Dawsi - January, 630 [Yet another example of blood spilling of the innocent.]
 
[11] The Siege of Taif by Muhammad - January, 630CE [Yet another example of blood spilling of the innocent.]
 
Footnote, <<<"Hadith from Sahih Bukhari on the release of the captives of B. Hawazin:
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 716: Narrated Marwan and Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:
When the delegates of the tribe of Hawazin came to the Prophet and they requested him to return their properties and captives. The Prophet stood up and said to them, "I have other people with me in this matter (as you see) and the most beloved statement to me is the true one; you may choose either the properties or the prisoners as I have delayed their distribution." The Prophet had waited for them for more than ten days since his arrival from Ta'if. So, when it became evident to them that the Prophet was not going to return them except one of the two, they said, "We choose our prisoners." The Prophet got up amongst the people and glorified and praised Allah as He deserved and said, "Then after, these brethren of yours have come to us with repentance, and I see it logical to return them the captives. So, whoever amongst you likes to do that as a favor, then he can do it, and whoever of you likes to stick to his share till we recompense him from the very first war booty which Allah will give us, then he can do so (i.e. give up the present captives)." The people unanimously said, "We do that (return the captives) willingly." The Prophet said, "We do not know which of you has agreed to it and which have not, so go back and let your leaders forward us your decision." So, all the people then went back and discussed the matter with their leaders who returned and informed the Prophet that all the people had willingly given their consent to return the captives. This is what has reached us about the captives of Hawazin. Narrated Anas that 'Abbas said to the Prophet, "I paid for my ransom and Aqil's ransom.">>>.
[12] The Raid on B. Tamim by Uyana b. Hisn - July, 630CE [Yet another example of blood spilling of the innocent.]
 
And the list of early blood lettings of the innocent by Islam could go on for many pages, but it is being stopped here as enough have been listed to establish the fact that early Islam  was guilty of much blood letting per the name of this article, "Blood, Blood, and More Blood, the Story of Islam:"
 
CONTINUED EARLY BLOOD SPILLING BY ISLAM IN THE MIDDLE AGES:
 
A few salient examples will be given to illustrate how Islam, the sham religion,  never stopped its evil and wicked blood spilling hate, greed, and lust for violence during the middle ages:
 
[1] <<<" Malik Kafur, the general of Alauddin Khalji, gave the Raja of Dwarsamudra a choice between Islam, death or payment of a huge idemnity.25 But under Muhammad bin Tughlaq there is greater insistence on the vanquished Hindu princes to embrace Islam. The most glaring example of this is that during the Warangal campaign all the eleven sons of the Raja of Kampila were made Muslims. Muhammad bin Tughlaq converted many people in this fashion. When Firoz Tughlaq invaded Jajnagar (Orissa), he captured the son of the Rai of Sikhar, converted him to Islam, and gave him the name of Shakr Khan.
 
The process of enslavement during war went on under the Khaljis and the Tughlaqs. Alauddin had 50,000 slaves37 some of whom were mere boys,38 and surely many captured during war. Firoz Tughlaq had issued an order that whichever places were sacked, in them the captives should be sorted out and the best ones (fit for service with the Sultan) should be forwarded to the court.39 Soon he was enabled to collect 180,000 slaves.40 Ziyauddin Barani's description of the Slave Market in Delhi (such markets were there in other places also) during the reign of Alauddin Khalji, shows that fresh batches of slaves were constantly replenishing them.41>
[ Indian Muslims:Who Are They-K.S. Lal Chapter 3-Proselytization in Provincial-Muslim Kingdoms -http://www.voiceofdharma.org/books/imwat/ch3.htm]>>>.
 
[2] <<<" Starting with Al-Bilãdhurî who wrote in Arabic in the second half of the ninth century, and coming down to Syed Mahmudul Hasan who wrote in English in the fourth decade of the twentieth, we have cited from eighty histories spanning a period of more than twelve hundred years. Our citations mention sixty-one kings, sixty-three military commanders and fourteen sufis who destroyed Hindu temples in one hundred and fifty-four localities, big and small, spread from Khurasan in the West to Tripura in the East, and from Transoxiana in the North to Tamil Nadu in the South, over a period of eleven hundred years. In most cases the destruction of temples was followed by erection of mosques, madrasas and khãnqãhs, etc., on the temple sites and, frequently, with temple materials. Allãh was thanked every time for enabling the iconoclast concerned to render service to the religion of Muhammad by means of this pious performance.
 
Mahmûd of Ghazni robbed and burnt down 1,000 temples at Mathura, and 10,000 in and around Kanauj. One of his successors, Ibrãhîm, demolished 1,000 temples each in Hindustan (Ganga-Yamuna Doab) and Malwa. Muhammad Ghûrî destroyed another 1,000 at Varanasi. Qutbu'd-Dîn Aibak employed elephants for pulling down 1,000 temples in Delhi. "Alî I 'Ãdil Shãh of Bijapur destroyed 200 to 300 temples in Karnataka. A sufi, Qãyim Shãh, destroyed 12 temples at Tiruchirapalli. Such exact or approximate counts, however, are available only in a few cases. Most of the time we are informed that "many strong temples which would have remained unshaken even by the trumpets blown on the Day of Judgment, were levelled with the ground when swept by the wind of Islãm".>
[HINDU TEMPLES :WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM -Volume II :The Islamic Evidence- SITA RAM GOEL -Section III FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH-8. Summing up- http://www.voiceofdharma.org/books/htemples2/ch8.htm]>>>.
 
[3] << <Islamic imperialism knew no code of honor. The only rule of war they observed without fail was to fall down the helpless civil population after a decisive victory had been won on the battlefield. They sacked and burnt down villages and towns after the defenders had died fighting or had fled. The cows, the Brahmins and Buddhist Bhikshus invited their special attention in a mass murder of non-combatants. Their temples and shrines were their special targets in an orgy of pillage and destruction. Those that they did not kill, they captured and sold as slaves. The scene was described by Kanhadde Prabandha (1456 A.D) in the following words: "The conquering army burnt villages, devastated the land, plundered people's wealth, took Brahmins and children and women of all classes captive, flogged with thongs of raw hide, carried a moving prison with it, and converted the prisoners into obsequious Turks." [source: Story of Islamic Imperialism in India - By Sita Ram Goel ASIN 8185990239 p. 41-42-, http://www.hinduwisdom.info/Islamic_Onslaught.htm ]>>>.
 
[4] <<<" These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage. When these warriors settled in India, they ruled as absolute despots over a cowed Hindu populace. For generations, their descendants took their martial superiority over their subjects for granted. "... And a substantial number of Pakistani Muslims are secretly convinced that they are inherently superior to the Hindus. One irony, of course, is that contrary to their wishful thinking, the vast majority of Muslims in the subcontinent have more Hindu blood in their veins than there is Arab, Afghan, Turkish or Persian blood. Many of the invaders took Hindu wives and concubines." [source: Demons from the past - By Ifran Husain - dailytimes.com.pk- http://www.hinduwisdom.info/index_new.htm ]>>>.
 
[5] <<<" "From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliation's, and destruction's. It is, as usual, in the name of 'a holy war' of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races." Mahmoud Ghazni, continues Danielou, "was an early example of Muslim ruthlessness, burning in 1018 of the temples of Mathura, razing Kanauj to the ground and destroying the famous temple of Somnath, sacred to all Hindus. His successors were as ruthless as Ghazni: 103 temples in the holy city of Benaras were razed to the ground, its marvelous temples destroyed, its magnificent palaces wrecked." Indeed, the Muslim policy vis a vis India, concludes Danielou, seems to have been a conscious systematic destruction of everything that was beautiful, holy, refined." [source - Histoire de l' Inde - By Alain Danielou p. 222 or A Brief History of India-, http://www.hinduwisdom.info/Islamic_Onslaught.htm#Slaughter%20of%20the%20Hindu s]>>>.
 
[6] <<<" It is significant that one of the very few place-names on earth that reminds us not of the victory of the winners but rather of the slaughter of the losers, concerns a genocide of Hindus by the Muslims.
A few known historical figures can be used to justify this estimate. The Encyclopaedia Britannica recalls that in December 1398 AD, Taimurlane ordered the execution of at least 50,000 captives before the battle for Delhi; likewise, the number of captives butchered by Taimurlane's army was about 100,000.
The Britannica again mentions that Mughal emperor Akbar ordered the massacre of about 30,000 captured Rajput Hindus on February 24, 1568 AD, after the battle for Chitod, a number confirmed by Abul Fazl, Akbar's court historian. Afghan historian Khondamir notes that during one of the many repeated invasions on the city of Herat in western Afghanistan, which used to be part of the Hindu Shahiya kingdoms '1,500,000 residents perished.' 'Thus, 'it is evident that the mountain range was named as Hindu Kush as a reminder to the future Hindu generations of the slaughter and slavery of Hindus during the Moslem conquests.' "[source: Where's India's holocaust museum? - By Francois Gautier - rediff.com-ttp://www.hinduwisdom.info/Islamic_Onslaught.htm#Slaughter%20of%20the%20Hindu s ]>>>.
 
[7] The contemporary French writer François Gautier has said, <<<"The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese."[http://www.hinduholocaust.com/HinduHolocaustMuseum.htm]>>>.
 
[8] K. S. Lai, the greatest of all historians in India said, <<<"Islam received a definite check in India. In other words, while countries like Arabia, Persia, Mesopotamia and Syria succumbed to the onslaught of Islam and converted en masse, the sword of Islam was blunted in India. This check provided provocation and enthusiasm to some Muslim conquerors and rulers to take to the task of proselytization with great zeal and earnestness. Their exertions and achievements find repeated mention in official and non-official chronicles and similar other works. Sometimes, besides broad facts, actual data and figures in this regard are also available. All this information is very helpful in estimating Muslim numbers as they grew from almost a cipher. "[source - comparable account of terror-tactics of the Muslim army as described by Persian chroniclers and Vidyapati in Kirtilata in K.S.Lal]>>>.
 
[9]  Genocide and massacres and stealing of others lands and forced conversions continued as Islam's SOP <<<"Ikhtiyaruddin Bakhtiyar Khalji's military exploits in the east also resulted in conversions to Islam. About the end of the twelfth or the beginning of the thirteenth century," [source & comments - by S.K. Lal - The exact date of the raid is difficult to determine. Ishwari Prasad, Medieval India (Allahabad, Fourth Impression, 1940), p.138] places it" probably in 1197", [source - Wolseley Haig (C.H.I., III,pp.45-46] a little earlier than this, and [source - Habibullah, op. cit., pp.70 and 84, n. 78 in 1202-03.]>>; <<"he marched into Bihar and attacked the University centres of Nalanda, Vikramshila and Uddandapur, erecting a fortress at the site of Uddandapur or Odantapuri." [source - Indian Antiquary, IV, pp.366-67.]>>; <<"The Buddhist monks in these places were massacred and the common people, deprived of their priests and teachers, turned some to Brahmanism and some to Islam. Buddhism did not die out immediately or completely in Bihar." [source - Fuhrer, The Sharqi Architecture of Jaunpur, pp.70-73.]>>; <<"But Bakhtiyar's raid on Bihar did deliver a shattering blow to Buddhism and its lost followers were gained mainly by Islam. Muslim sway extended from Varanasi through the strip of Shahabad, Patna, Monghyr and Bhagalpur district," [source - Habibullah, op. cit., p.147]>>>.
 
[10] Islam continued with its same standard operating procedure, (SOP), <<<" With this conceptual framework let us examine the structure and organization of Muslim community in Hindustan in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Punjab saw the emergence of Muslims as a local community consequent to the invasions of Mahmud of Ghazni. But for a few immigrants in the shape of Ghaznavid officers and soldiers, the bulk of Muslims were converts from the indigenous Hindu population. Similar was the case in "pockets" of Sind, Gujarat, Bihar and Malabar. The process of their conversion was hurried. All of a sudden the invader appeared in a city or a region, and in the midst of loot and murder, a dazed, shocked and enslaved people were given the choice between Islam and death. Those who were converted were deprived of their scalp-lock or choti and, if they happened to be caste people, also their sacred thread." [source - Indian Muslims, Who Are They by K.S. Lal and his footnote comments were, "The exact date of the raid is difficult to determine. Ishwari Prasad, Medieval India [source - Allahabad, Fourth Impression, 1940), p.138] places it" probably in 1197", [source - Wolseley Haig (C.H.I., III,pp.45-46)] a little earlier than this, and [source - Habibullah, op. cit., pp.70 and 84, n. 78 in 1202-03."]>>>.
 
[11] Now here are the facts, the reality, of the murder, genocide of over 80 million endividuals in India by Muslims, <<<"With the invasion of India by Mahmud Ghazni about 1000 A.D., began the Muslim invasions into the Indian subcontinent and they lasted for several centuries. The Muslim invasions continued even when the Muslims were ruling India, like the invasion of the Mongols during the reign of the Khiljis or the invasion of the Mughals in the early sixteenth Century when the Lodis were ruling Delhi. The last notable invasion of the Muslims from outside was the invasion of Nadir Shah in 1739, during which he unleashed a great horror on the native population.
 
During these seven hundred years of Muslim invasions and their conquest and rule of India, the Hindus were the greatest sufferers. It is difficult to estimate the number of Hindus who lost their lives during these campaigns, the number of Hindus who lost their lives in the religious persecution perpetrated on the native population by the Muslim rulers or the number of Hindus who were forcibly converted to Islam.
 
According to Prof. K.S. Lal, the author of the Growth of Muslim population in India, the Hindu population decreased by 80 million between 1000 AD, the year Mahmud Ghazni invaded India and 1525 AD, a year before the battle of Panipat.
 
One can safely add another 20 million Hindus to this list to account for the number that were killed during the Mughal rule or the rule of the Muslim rulers in the Deccan plateau. By all known accounts of world history, as pointed out by Koenard Elst in his book the Negationism in India, destruction of about 100 million hindus is perhaps the biggest holocaust in the whole world history." [source - The biggest holocaust in world history by Jayaram V]>>>.
 
This clearly showing that the Muslims were responsible for the greatest genocide in all of human history, but let's look at more facts with respect this crime against humanity.
 
Let's look at a quote from Chapter 5 of a history book by India's greatest historian, K.S. Lal, see information about him in the footnote at end of quote, <<<"Factors Contributing to the Growth of Muslim Population, Conversions -
Islam has spread in many parts of the world through wars and campaigns[[Its spread was not peaceful but by the proverbial sword]]. In the medieval Indian chronicles the sovereign is always mentioned as 'the king of Islam', the territories of his empire are referred to as the 'land of Islam', its armies as 'soldiers of Islam', and its religious and Judicial head as 'Shaikh-ul-Islam'. The monarch was committed to make Islam the true basis of private and public life through the enforcement of the Shariat and to convert the people to the "true faith". In India the Muslim rulers' keenness to obtain converts in war is vouched by many chroniclers. The Tarikh-i-Muhammadi gives a clear idea of the psychology of the rulers in this regard. Its author was a contemporary of Sultan Nasiruddin Mahmud, the son of Firoz Tughlaq. He says that while fighting Rai Subir (Sumer) in the vicinity of Iraj, the Sultan thought: 'If I will give orders to the army to fight (outright), they will not leave even a trace of the Kafirs [[none Muslims]] in the region, but if I shall advance slowly, then probably these people will agree to embrace Islam."3
 
What professor Mohammad Habib writes concerning the Mongol applies equally to Turkish expeditions. "In 1330 the country was invaded by the Mongols who indulged in arson, rape and murder throughout the Valley (of Kashmir). The king and the Brahmans fled away but among the inhabitants who remained... Muslim ways of life were gradually adopted by the people as the only alternative..."4 Thus warfare brought captives, and captives were made Musalmans. Such was not the situation only in the North; in South also such methods of conversion prevailed, especially during wars between Bahmani and Vijayanagar kingdoms. Throughout the medieval period such wars were common, and forcible conversions [[Conversions by the proverbial sword.]] helped in the rapid growth of Muslim population.
 
The rulers used force and persuasion in equal measure. Their resources were great. They could give jobs, honours, and titles and many other economic concessions and status benefits as inducements to conversion, and many people would have taken advantage of these facilities. We have referred to Mubarak Khalji's encouragement to Hindus to accept Islam by presenting the convert with a robe and a gold ornament. People used to be converted in this fashion right up to the reign of Aurangzeb and perhaps even thereafter. There were other methods too.
 
The Banshasmriti of Satya Krishna Biswas states that in Bengal the Rajas and Zamindars who could not deposit land revenue by a certain date had to convert to Muhammadanism. The Banshasmriti narrates an isolated incident, but as this regulation of the thirteenth century had been revived by Murshid Quli Khan, or had continued right up to his times, many local Rajas and Zamindars would have been converted in the course of four centuries, for full payment of land tax by due date was not always possible. Firoz Tughlaq (1351-88) instructed his revenue collectors to convert Hindus to Islam.5 He rescinded the Jiziyah to lure people to become Muhammadans, and this measure brought large additions to Muslim population. In his Fatuhat-i-Firoz Shahi, Sultan Firoz Tughlaq candidly writes: "I encouraged my infidel subjects to embrace the religion of the prophet and I proclaimed that everyone who repeated the Kalima of tauhid and became Musalman should be exempt from Jiziyah... Information of this came to the ears of the people at large, and great number of Hindus presented themselves, and were admitted to the honour of Islam. Thus they came forward day by day from every quarter, go on coming to this day, and adopting the faith, are exonerated from the Jiziyah, and are favoured with Khilats and presents."6 [[Taxed enslaved subjects that would NOT convert to try and force their conversion; i.e., no affording of the basic human right of freedom of conscience]]. [source - Studies in Medieval Indian History, pp.171-172 by K.S. Lal]>>>.
 
Now let's look at what others had to say about this greatest of all genocides:
 
Historian Will Durant wrote his book The Story of Civilization:, <<<"The Mohammadan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within." [source - "The Story of Civilization, " by Will Durant the great American historian]>>>.
 
French historian Alain Danielou wrote in his book Histoire de l'Inde:, <<<"From the moment when the Muslims arrive in India, the history of India does not have any more great interest. It is long and monotonous series of murder, massacres, spoilations, destruction." [source - "Histoire de l'Inde," by Alain Danielou, great French historian]>>>.
 
Hindu sage Padmanabha described in his KanhaDade Prabandha in 1456 AD the story of the Islamic invasion of Gujarat of 1298 AD:, <<<"The conquering army burnt villages, devastated the land, plundered people's wealth, took Brahmins ( priestly hindu class ) and children and women of all classes captive, flogged with thongs of raw hide, carried a moving prison with it, and converted the prisoners into obsequious slaves.">>>.
 
Tarikh-i-Yamini of Utbi the sultan's secretary wrote in the 11th century: <<<"The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously at Thanesar that the stream was discoloured, notwithstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it. The Sultan returned with plunder which is impossible to count." [source - "the story of the Islamic invasion of Gujarat of 1298 AD:, " [source - English translation), by Padmanabha, a famous Hindu of the 15 th. Century].
 
[12] Also, hateful, greedy, and lustful for violence members of Islam set out in the Eighth Century to steal all of Spain and to kill all that resisted, <<<" In 711 AD, the non-White Muslim invasion finally reached Spain, having swept up out of the Saudi Arabian peninsula, conquered Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and North Africa to the Gibraltar Strait.
Launching a ferocious assault across the narrow strait, the Muslims defeated the Gothic kingdom in stages and managed to establish what became known as Moorish rule over the greatest part of Spain and Portugal, with only the very northern parts remaining in Gothic hands." [source - MARCH OF THE TITANS - A HISTORY OF THE WHITE RACE, Chapter 22: Lessons in Decline: Spain and Portugal]
 
ISLAM CONTINUES WITH THEIR VIOLENT WAYS AS SHOWN IN THAILAND TODAY:
 
Let's look at how Islam is using its usual SOP in three provinces of Thailand today, 2006. An article in the New York Times clearly shows that Islam has remained violent until today, <<"In Thailand, a New Model for Militants? ...
 
October 1, 2006
HAT YAI, Thailand - The bomb that exploded outside New Cherry Ancient Massage was among the most sinister kinds - a lethal sucker punch timed to detonate moments after two other blasts had lured onlookers into the streets of this tourist town.
 
The homemade device, hidden in a motorcycle parked outside the busy parlor, killed five people, including a Canadian teacher and three masseuses. All 30 surviving massage workers quit on the spot. Within days, the parents of the three dead women came to take their daughters' bodies home.
 
"One father asked, 'Why my child? She was a good girl,' " said New Cherry owner Boonchai Sangmankung. "And I couldn't answer him. I don't know myself. Why do the attacks continue? Why are more innocent people killed every day?"
 
Since 2004, militants in Thailand's predominantly Muslim south have waged a bloody separatist insurgency against the cultural elite of this largely Buddhist nation, targeting teachers, monks, community leaders and government officials. So far, 1,700 people have been killed, yet the campaign of almost-daily bombings, arson attacks, kidnappings and assassinations has gone largely unnoticed in a Western world fixated on higher-profile Islamic terrorism campaigns in Iraq and elsewhere.
 
"The violence in southern Thailand is quite significant compared to many other world conflicts today," said Panitan Wattanayagorn, a political scientist at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok. "The U.S. lost 3,000 soldiers in three years in Iraq. This death toll is not far behind." ...
 
Many Muslim residents still chafe over what they consider a century of abusive rule. But experts differ over the roots of the insurgency. Some say it's a battle over religious freedom, others say it's a fight for territory and self-rule. Still others say it's both...
 
In the first six months of 2006, two people died every day, on average: A Buddhist teacher was gunned down in front of his fourth-grade class by men dressed as students. A salesman was beheaded outside a crowded teashop. The owner of an elephant troupe was shot seven times by assailants who had lined up with children to buy tickets for a show.
 
In August, 22 small bombs exploded nearly simultaneously in banks throughout southern Yala province, killing one person and bringing commerce to a standstill. Two months earlier, 50 bombs went off in a single day at government offices and police stations.
 
Last year, 15 militants stormed a Buddhist temple and hacked two monks to death before setting fire to their bodies. Thai officials believe that 30,000 Buddhists have fled the south since the attack. Insurgents also have targeted fellow Muslims suspected of conspiring with a military known for its brutality in dealing with the Islamic militants...[source - By John M. Glionna, Times Staff Writer on 10/01/2006]>>.
 
 
First, before detail, let's look at Swami Vivekananda said which is as true today as when he said it in 1893.
 
<<"Sectarianism, bigotry, and its horrible descendant, fanaticism, have long possessed this beautiful earth. They have filled the earth with violence, drenched it often and often with human blood, destroyed civilization, and sent whole nations to despair. Had it not been for these horrible demons, human society would be far more advanced than it is now." [source - Swami Vivekananda (1893)]>>.
 
Swami Vivekananda clearly saw the damage being done by false religion and stated it in a few well used words.
 
PRESENT DAY BLOOD SPILLING BY ISLAM:
 
At present members of Islam are still in their SOP - spilling blood of innocent people all over the world, and especially so in Iraq, Pakistan, Thailand, the United States, India, etc.  We shall look at a few salient cases of this modern day blood spilling by Islam:
 
[1] Let's look at how Islam is using its usual SOP in three provinces of Thailand today, 2006. An article in the New York Times clearly shows that Islam has remained violent until today, <<<"In Thailand, a New Model for Militants? ...
October 1, 2006
HAT YAI, Thailand - The bomb that exploded outside New Cherry Ancient Massage was among the most sinister kinds - a lethal sucker punch timed to detonate moments after two other blasts had lured onlookers into the streets of this tourist town.
 
The homemade device, hidden in a motorcycle parked outside the busy parlor, killed five people, including a Canadian teacher and three masseuses. All 30 surviving massage workers quit on the spot. Within days, the parents of the three dead women came to take their daughters' bodies home.
 
"One father asked, 'Why my child? She was a good girl,' " said New Cherry owner Boonchai Sangmankung. "And I couldn't answer him. I don't know myself. Why do the attacks continue? Why are more innocent people killed every day?"
 
Since 2004, militants in Thailand's predominantly Muslim south have waged a bloody separatist insurgency against the cultural elite of this largely Buddhist nation, targeting teachers, monks, community leaders and government officials. So far, 1,700 people have been killed, yet the campaign of almost-daily bombings, arson attacks, kidnappings and assassinations has gone largely unnoticed in a Western world fixated on higher-profile Islamic terrorism campaigns in Iraq and elsewhere.
 
"The violence in southern Thailand is quite significant compared to many other world conflicts today," said Panitan Wattanayagorn, a political scientist at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok. "The U.S. lost 3,000 soldiers in three years in Iraq. This death toll is not far behind." ...
 
Many Muslim residents still chafe over what they consider a century of abusive rule. But experts differ over the roots of the insurgency. Some say it's a battle over religious freedom, others say it's a fight for territory and self-rule. Still others say it's both...
 
In the first six months of 2006, two people died every day, on average: A Buddhist teacher was gunned down in front of his fourth-grade class by men dressed as students. A salesman was beheaded outside a crowded teashop. The owner of an elephant troupe was shot seven times by assailants who had lined up with children to buy tickets for a show.
 
In August, 22 small bombs exploded nearly simultaneously in banks throughout southern Yala province, killing one person and bringing commerce to a standstill. Two months earlier, 50 bombs went off in a single day at government offices and police stations.
 
Last year, 15 militants stormed a Buddhist temple and hacked two monks to death before setting fire to their bodies. Thai officials believe that 30,000 Buddhists have fled the south since the attack. Insurgents also have targeted fellow Muslims suspected of conspiring with a military known for its brutality in dealing with the Islamic militants...[source - By John M. Glionna, Times Staff Writer on 10/01/2006]>>>.
 
[2] In the United States and elsewhere, an Australian newspaper did a summary of the violence and were quite conservative in their findings as the percentage should probably be higher than they gave in their summary. <<<" The Newspaper article is but a summary of evidence from around the world some of which was presented immediately below it, all from reliable world news sources. I presented a newspaper with a summary of it as it would take a many volume book to present it all. Apparently you fail to read the news daily with regard to how many murders are being committed daily in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Thailand, Indonesia, Egypt, etc. by members of Islam. Also, you show you fail to listen to Al Jazzera and BBC to hear the proof of what the newspaper summarized - do you dig it? The world would be a much more tranquil and peaceful place without Islam, and even more so without apostate (counterfeit) so called Christianity. Let's look once more at what I posted in the past:
 
The Weekend Australian (newspaper) had this to say on the matter,
<<"Did you know that 90-95% of the conflicts in the world today are Muslims fighting non-muslims or each other?
Islam is intolerant of other religions, so much so that Christians in Nigeria, Sudan and middle eastern countries are killed for practicing their religion. Muslims are also responsible for burning down their churches. Sydney has recently seen an attack on four churches for similar reasons. (December 16, 2005) How can we tolerate such intolerance?">>.[7]
 
Says it all, so clearly Islam should be redefined as something other than a religion. So it is very necessary that this greed and hate be addressed. Remember, Matthew 5:9, "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God." (AV).
 
Let's consider the facts as continually revealed in the world news that shows if any thing that the newspaper editor may have been a little low when he said 95 percent of the violence in the world was caused by Muslims. Here are some instances of terrorism by members of Islam:[7]
 
(1) World Trade Center - 9/11 - unprovoked attack and mass murder by Muslims.[8]
(2) London Subway Bombing by Muslims [9]
(3) Continued mosque bombings in Iraq by Muslims.[10]
(4) Suicide bombings in Israel by Muslims.[11]
(5) Suicide bombing of a wedding reception in Jordan by Muslims.[12]
(6) Daily roadside bombings in Iraq by Muslims.[13]
(7) Train bombings in Spain my Muslims.[14]
(8) Riots and car burnings and murders in France by Muslims.[15]
(9) Suicide bombings in Iraq by Muslims.[16]
(10) Car and truck bombings in Iraq by Muslims.[17]
(11) Unprovoked murder of 8 Israelis and the kidnapping of 2 by Muslims to provoke turmoil and violence in Lebanon and Israel by Muslims.[18]
(12) Unprovoked murder of 2 Israelis and the kidnapping of 1 by Muslims to provoke turmoil and violence in Gaza by Muslims.[19]
(13) Bombing of restaurants and cafes in Bali, Indonesia by Muslims.[20]
(14) Bombing of a trains in India by Muslims.[21]
(15) Take over of a grammar school in Russia resulting in the deaths of many students by Muslims.[22]
(16) Attempted shoebombing of a plain by a Muslim.[23]
(17) Conspiracy to bomb about 10 planes going from UK by Muslims.[24]
(18) Attempted murder of several Indian politicians in Kashmir by Muslims.[25]
(19) Many violent acts by Muslims in Afghanistan.[26]
(20) Murder of a girl by Shiite Muslims in Iran.[27]
(21) Conspiracy to bomb trains in Germany - as previously posted for you.[28]
(22) And the list could go on and on, get it?
 
References:
[7] The Weekend Australian, November 26-27, 2005 AD
[8] World Trade Center bombing, by Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[9] Explosions Hit Three Tube Stations, One Bus, Thursday, July 21, 2005, Fox News
[10] By Ellen Knickmeyer and K.I. Ibrahim, Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, February 23, 2006; Page A01
[11] Suicide attack, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[12] Zarqawi Calls for Jordan King's Head, Friday, November 18, 2005
[13] The Daily Star, 03/21/2006, Vol. 5 #644
[14] CBS News, WASHINGTON, March 12, 2004
[15] Free Republic, News/Activism 05/30/2006 5:46:30 PM PDT, and, The Telegraph, By Colin Randall in Paris (Filed: 31/05/2006)
[16] Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[17] CNN, Thursday, March 18, 2004 Posted: 4:59 PM EST (2159 GMT)
[18] Telegraph (UK), Israeli crisis is a smoke screen for Iran's nuclear ambitions, By Con Coughlin(Filed: 14/07/2006)
[19] Associated Press
[20] aljazeera.net, Bali a soft target, experts say, By Marianne Kearney in Jakarta, Indonesia, Monday 03 October 2005, 20:20 Makka Time, 17:20 GMT
[21] MSNBC, Associated Press, Updated: 6:26 p.m. ET July 12, 2006
[22] Beslan school hostage crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
SEE PART 2 ON ISLAM’S OUTRAGEOUS ACTS AGAINST HUMANITY AND FREEDOM WITH THE CHARLIE  HEBDO THE LATEST: 

Hi Everyone
 
REALITY CHECK – Let’s face it, Islam is responsible for over 95% of the religiously inspired violence and intolerance in the world today. If there were no Islam, there would be no Paris attack on Charlie Hebdo (Brown), no London Subway or Bus Bombing, no murder of over 3,000 and destruction of NYC, World Trade Center, beheading of British soldier in London, no ISIS, no Taliban, and the world would be much more peaceful.
 
Solution – dissolve Islam and have a much more peaceful world. For more details, go to, http://w11.zetaboards.com/ReligiousTruths/topic/8349408/1/  and read reality.
 
Let’s see his response to the above facts, his UNPLESANT REALITY!
 
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,
1) http://iris89.conforums.com/
2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/
3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/
4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/
5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/
6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/
7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/
 
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go  http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study
 
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
 
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to www.jw.org!