But that’s only when they aren’t rioting and fighting with the unarmed Italian police. You can be sure that most of these filthy ingrates didn’t have it half this good in the hellholes they crawled out of.
Idiot who draws on the experience of ONE PERSON to condemn an entire continent.
“In a deeply disturbing development in the Muslim invasion of Europe, Europeans are being forced from their homes to accommodate the invaders… Swedes’ homes may be confiscated to accommodate asylum seekers using obscure legislation from 1992, the “Threat and Risk Assessment Commission”… “German nurse shocked after being forced out of flat to make way for […]
At least 21 people have been killed and 100 wounded in Bangui, the capital of Central African Republic. as Muslims attacked a mainly Christian neighborhood, medical officials and witnesses have said.
Saturday’s attack came after a Muslim man was killed and his body was found dumped in the street, witnesses and a Muslim group spokesman, Ousmane Abakar, told news agencies.
Two years of violence, which erupted after Muslim Seleka rebels seized power in the majority Christian country in 2013, has killed thousands of people and forced hundreds of thousands to leave their homes.
The fighting divided the country when Muslims were chased from the south.
There had not been any attacks in Bangui, which is secured by French and UN soldiers, for months until a grenade attack earlier in September.
In Saturday’s incident, angry Muslims left their stronghold in the 3rd district of Bangui and attacked the largely Christian Fifth district using automatic weapons.
Residents fled to other parts of the capital and attackers burned houses and cars, witnesses said.
UN helicopters, part of a peacekeeping force, flew overhead.
Originally published by PJ Media.
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz freedom Center.
Of all the points presidential candidate Ben Carson made in defense of his position that he “would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation,” most poignant is his reference to taqiyya, one of Islam’s doctrines of deception.
According to Carson, whoever becomes president should be “sworn in on a stack of Bibles, not a Koran”:
“I do not believe Sharia is consistent with the Constitution of this country,” Carson said, referencing the Islamic law derived from the Koran and traditions of Islam. “Muslims feel that their religion is very much a part of your public life and what you do as a public official, and that’s inconsistent with our principles and our Constitution.”
Carson said that the only exception he’d make would be if the Muslim running for office “publicly rejected all the tenants of Sharia and lived a life consistent with that.”
“Then I wouldn’t have any problem,” he said.
However, on several occasions Carson mentioned “Taqiyya,” a practice in the Shia Islam denomination in which a Muslim can mislead nonbelievers about the nature of their faith to avoid religious persecution.
“Taqiyya is a component of Shia that allows, and even encourages you to lie to achieve your goals,” Carson said.
There’s much to be said here. First, considering that the current U.S. president has expunged all reference to Islam in security documents and would have Americans believe that Islamic doctrine is more or less like Christianity, it is certainly refreshing to see a presidential candidate referencing a little known but critically important Muslim doctrine.
As for the widely cited notion that taqiyya is a Shia doctrine, this needs to be corrected, as it lets the world’s vast majority of Muslims, the Sunnis, off the hook. According to Sami Mukaram, one of the world’s foremost authorities on taqiyya,
Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it … We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream … Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era.
Taqiyya is often associated with the Shias because, as a persecuted minority group interspersed among their Sunni rivals, they have historically had more reason to dissemble. Today, however, Sunnis living in the West find themselves in the place of the Shia. Now they are the minority surrounded by their historic enemies—Western “infidels”—and so they too have plenty of occasion to employ taqiyya.
Nor would making Muslims swear on Bibles be very effective. As long as their allegiance to Islam is secure in their hearts, Muslims can behave like non-Muslims—including by praying before Christian icons, wearing crosses, and making the sign of the cross—anything short of actually killing a Muslim, which is when the taqiyya goes too far (hence why Muslims in the U.S. military often expose their true loyalties when they finally reach the point of having to fight fellow Muslims in foreign nations).
For those with a discerning eye, taqiyya is all around us. Whether Muslim refugees pretending to convert to Christianity (past and present), or whether an Islamic gunman gaining entrance inside a church by feigning interest in Christian prayers—examples abound on a daily basis.
Consider the following anecdote from Turkey. In order to get close enough to a Christian pastor to assassinate him, a group of Muslims, including three women, feigned interest in Christianity, attended his church, and even participated in baptism ceremonies.
“These people had infiltrated our church and collected information about me, my family and the church and were preparing an attack against us,” said the pastor in question, Emre Karaali: “Two of them attended our church for over a year and they were like family.”
If some Muslims are willing to go to such lengths to eliminate the already downtrodden Christian minorities in their midst—attending churches and baptisms and becoming “like family” to those “infidels” they intend to kill—does anyone doubt that a taqiyya-practicing Muslim presidential candidate might have no reservations about swearing on a stack of Bibles?
Precedents for such treachery litter the whole of Islamic history—and begin with the Muslim prophet himself: During the Battle of the Trench (627 AD), which pitted Muhammad and his followers against several non-Muslim tribes collectively known as “the Confederates,” a Confederate called Naim bin Masud went to the Muslim camp and converted to Islam. When Muhammad discovered the Confederates were unaware of Masud’s deflection to Islam, he counseled him to return and try somehow to get his tribesmen to abandon the siege. “For war is deceit,” Muhammad assured him.
Masud returned to the Confederates without their knowledge that he had switched sides and began giving his former kin and allies bad advice. He also intentionally instigated quarrels between the various tribes until, thoroughly distrusting each other, they disbanded and lifted the siege, allowing an embryonic Islam to grow. (One Muslim website extols this incident for being illustrative of how Muslims can subvert non-Muslims.)
In short, if a Muslim were running for president of the U.S. in the hopes of ultimately subverting America to Islam, he could, in Carson’s words, easily be “sworn in on a stack of Bibles, not a Koran” and “publicly reject all the tenants of Sharia.” Indeed, he could claim to be a Christian and attend church every week.
It speaks very well about Carson that he is aware of—and not hesitant to mention—taqiyya. But that doctrine’s full ramifications—how much deceiving it truly allows and for all Muslim denominations, not just the Shia—needs to be more widely embraced.
The chances of that happening are dim. Already “mainstream media” like the Washington Post are taking Carson to task for “misunderstanding” taqiyya—that is, for daring to be critical of anything Islamic. These outlets could benefit from learning more about Islam and deception per the below links:
While I was doing some research, I ran across a youtube video that jumped out like a neon sign. It was taken at an Islamic conference in a large room with several hundred people. The speaker was talking about the non-Muslim perception of radical Muslims and in a short 3:22 second video he cleared up any question one may have about the difference between a moderate Muslim and a radical Muslim. In his arrogant presentation, he asked this convention of ‘moderate Muslims” specific questions about their core beliefs and had the audience respond to those questions by raising their hands. One important question he raised was: How many of you agree that the punishments described in the Koran and the Sunnah, whether it is death, whether it is stoning for adultery, whatever it is, if it is from Allah and his messenger, that is the best punishment ever possible for humankind, and that is what we should apply in the world? Well, who agrees with that? Nearly every hand went up.
This video exposed what Muslims think worldwide. It got me curious, so I started investigating. I wanted to know the difference in a moderate Muslim and a radical Muslim. What I found was a devious plot put in place by the Muslim Brotherhood in 1982 to take over the world through any means necessary. Hence, the concept of the “moderate Muslim” was born. In a document called “The Project” a plan was laid out for a terrorist “secret apparatus” that eventually would culminate in the creation of Hamas in December 1987 and the unveiling of the Hamas charter in August 1988. It was a 14-page plan written in Arabic and dated December 1, 1982 that outlined a 12-point strategy to “establish an Islamic government on earth.”
Through subterfuge, lies, deception, and murder the Muslim Brotherhood has carefully implemented this evil plan into the fabric of every nation in the west. Consequently, there is no free nation on earth who is not fighting their jihad against them. The Muslim Brotherhood is entrenched in America to the point that they are influencing, if not actually writing our laws, in the process of bringing about what they call “political jihad.”
The immigration bill from the Gang of Eight is an example of Muslims effecting law in America. The National Review exposes their participation in an article dated May 5, 2013.
The current bill added the words “legal and advocacy” to this section. Thus, it now reads “nonprofit organizations including those with legal and advocacy experience working with immigrant communities.” Apparently the senators wanted to make sure that leftist and Islamist advocacy organizations (CASA, La Raza, MALDEF, and CAIR and other Islamist groups) would not simply be grant recipients themselves, but would also be entrenched on the “New Immigrant Councils” that will help guide strategy, funding, and implementation at the local level.
At CAIR’s website we see that:
CAIR’s government affairs department represents the interests of the American Muslim community before the U.S. Congress, the White House, and federal agencies. The department is responsible for actively monitoring legislation and government activities that affects Muslims and responding on behalf of the American Muslim community. To ensure that the Muslim community is being represented, we provide a Muslim perspective to policy makers and answer questions from government officials about issues related to Islam and Muslims. The department also promotes legislative action alerts, distributes legislative fact sheets, submits testimony to Congress and sponsors a number of activities designed to bring Muslim concerns to the government.
The department builds networks and coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding to support domestic policies that promote civil rights, diversity and freedom of religion and oppose policies that limit civil rights, permit racial, ethnic or religious profiling, infringe on due process, or that prevent Muslims and others from participating fully in American civic life.
The department also works to increase Muslim participation in the political arena, and works with CAIR chapters regularly sponsor voter registration and get out the vote drives, candidate forums, and campaign volunteer opportunities across the country.