Fatah homenageia terrorista responsável pelo atentado das olimpíadas de Munique

É preciso não esquecer que estes são os moderados! É com estes que Israel é forçado pelos americanos e europeus, ingenuamente ou de má-fé, a negociar.
Poderá sair algo de bom de negociações com um interlocutor assim?

Amplify’d from palwatch.org

Palestinian Terrorist Amin Al-Hindi was one of the senior planners of the murders of 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972. This week's Fifth Sitting of the Fatah Revolutionary Council headed by Mahmoud Abbas was named in his honor. The picture of the meeting shows Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas sitting in the center of the table and the text on the banner behind him reads: "Palestinian National Liberation Movement - Fatah Fifth Sitting of the Revolutionary Council Shahid (Martyr) Commander Amin Al-Hindi Sitting November 24-25, 2010 Ramallah - Palestine" [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 25, 2010]

Poster at the Fifth Sitting of Fatah’s Revolutionary Council, Ramallah Sitting named in honor of “The Shahid (Martyr) commander Amin Al-Hindi”

Earlier this year the official PA daily described his participation in the Olympic massacre, saying he was "one of the stars who sparkled... at the sports stadium in Munich." The attack itself was referred to as "just one of many shining stations" in his life. [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Aug. 20, 2010]

Palestinian Media Watch has reported that the Palestinian Authority already honored Al Hindi after he died earlier this year. PMW has reported on the ongoing Palestinian Authority glorification of terror

by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik Read more at palwatch.org

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/ghcy

Lapidação: um guia

Via Creeping Sharia [http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/]

Amplify’d from news.nationalpost.com

In Saturday’s National Post we look at the brutal practice of stoning. This method of execution is still practiced in certain countries, notably Iran, where it is used to punish adulterers and other criminals. The graphic below looks at how a stoning occurs (click on graphic for a full-size version):

Part one

Part two

See more at news.nationalpost.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/ggj7

Manifestantes Islâmicos opõem-se ao perdão de Ásia Bibi

Rafik: um lutador contra o islão.

Amplify’d from rafik-rafikresponde.blogspot.com

Como eu já havia dito antes, a nossa irmã em Cristo ainda esta em perigo, ela não estará salva ate a sua chegada ao Brasil. No Paquistão, a INOCÊNCIA de alguém NÃO IMPORTA. Asia Bibi tera que ser executada a qualquer custo, a menos, que ela seja salva do Paquistão.

Vou resumir a noticia do Associated Press e dar minha opinião sobre o caso.

O Presidente Paquistanês, não ira perdoar Ásia Bibi imediatamente por ter insultado o Islam. Ele pediu que o caso seja revisto e ele poderá perdoa-la, SOMENTE se o caso for demorar muito. Ela já esta na cadeia por UM ANO E MEIO e ainda eles querem mante-la por la mais tempo? O governo do Paquistão tem suas mãos sujas de sangue.

Logicamente o presidente do Paquistão esta com medo da revolta do povo e com medo da pressão internacional. Voce sabe, estes muçulmanos devotos querem ver a cabeça da Ásia Bibi rolar, ou vê-la pendurada em uma forca, não hesitarão em MATAR por Allah.

Um grupo de 250 Muçulmanos “linha dura” (fieis seguidores do modelo de vida que Maomé estabeleceu), promoveram um protesto na cidade de Lahore, alertaram com AMEAÇAS ao presidente para não perdoar a mulher. O crime supostamente cometido, parece não ter perdão.

Estes manifestantes, “cheios de amor e compaixão”, também ameaçaram o presidente para não tentar MUDAR A LEI DA BLASFÊMIA. Qualquer um que tente promover a mudança desta lei BURRA e RETROGRADA é ameaçado de morte no Paquistão.

Estes grupos sao PODEROSOS o suficiente e tem muita influencia na população do Paquistão. Com razão o presidente e os políticos em geral tem medo deles.

A frase que os manifestantes cantavam durante os protestos era: “Nos estamos prontos para sacrificar as nossas vidas pelo Profeta Maomé”. O problema não esta em morrer por uma causa, o problema esta em MATAR por uma causa.

O protesto foi organizado por um grupo SUNITA chamado “Movimento de Proteção a HONRA DO PROFETA”. Convenhamos, que um movimento como este, já é uma clara indicação que algo esta errado com a HONRA DE MAOMÉ.

Ele é acusado de: pedofilia, de promover prostituição legalizada (Muta), de promover violência domestica, de fingir ser profeta, de crimes contra a humanidade, de enriquecimento ilícito, de criar leis que beneficiam a si mesmo, de assassinatos e de promover ódio e guerras contra os seus inimigos, de ter tido um caso amoroso com uma escrava Copta chamada Maria, etc. As acusações contra a honra de Maomé são tantas que encheriam bibliotecas inteiras. Tudo esta registrado na vasta literatura Islâmica.

Será que existe alguma organização como esta para defender a Honra de Jesus também? Claro que não. Jesus não precisa de ninguém defender a sua honra porque ele não deve nada para ninguém. Ele foi o único ser humano que NUNCA PECOU.

Como pode algum RESPEITAR estas leis? Que tipo de critério voce esta usando para dizer que as leis Islâmicas sao igualmente validas e devem ser respeitadas?

Um Cristão, homem corajoso chamado Shahbaz Bhatti que é Ministro dos Assuntos da MINORIA, luta pela abolição desta lei burra e estúpida. Ele disse:

“Eu estou com medo das ameaças, mas eu estou pronto para sacrificar tudo por causa da JUSTIÇA em que eu acredito”

Imaginem como seria o Brasil se alguns dos nossos políticos tivessem somente uma fração da coragem deste homem.

Continuem orando por Ásia Bibi. A situação continua tão caótica como antes. Ela e a família ainda continuam correndo risco de vida. Por favor, continuem intercedendo diante da presidência da Republica para traze-la ao Brasil.

See more at rafik-rafikresponde.blogspot.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/gfvk

Defesa de Sabaditsch-Wolff: o islão segundo os muçulmanos

Será Sabaditsch-Wolff julgada pela lei austríaca ou pela lei islâmica?
Pela austríaca, dificilmente poderá ser condenada, uma vez que, segundo julgamos saber, apenas disse a verdade sobre o islão, tal como se encontra nas fontes islâmicas: Alcorão, Suná e outros documentos da teologia/jurisprudência (tudo a mesma coisa no islão). Pela sharia, é culpada porque, depois de tornar público o que descobriu naquelas fontes, se atreveu a expressar uma opinião negativa sobre o islão.

Amplify’d from gatesofvienna.blogspot.com

Below are the contents of the document file that will be used by the defense in the trial of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff:

The book that enjoys the central place of honor in the photo is ’Umdat al-salik wa ’uddat al-nasik, or The reliance of the traveller and tools of the worshipper. It is commonly referred to as Reliance of the Traveller when cited in English. This particular version is the Revised Edition (published 1991, revised 1994) and is “The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ’Umdat al-Salik by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 769/1368) in Arabic with Facing English Text, Commentary, and Appendices”, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller. The publisher is listed as amana publications in Beltsville, Maryland. It is considered an authoritative source on Sunni Islamic law, because it is certified as such by Al-Azhar University in Cairo. There is no higher authority on Sunni Islamic doctrine than Al-Azhar; it is the closest equivalent to the Vatican that can be found in Islam. So whatever you find in Reliance of the Traveller is definitive Islamic law. No Sunni Muslim jurist would argue against anything cited there. And, as we will soon discover, everything that “denigrates religious teachings” in Elisabeth’s seminar can be supported by one or more passages in al-Misri’s treatise. From beating your wife to excising your daughter’s genitalia: it’s all in there. However, this still may not be an adequate defense for quoting and referring to it. It has been well-established in a number of jurisdictions — including several in the West — that a non-Muslim who quotes the Koran accurately can still be convicted of “hate speech”. This aligns with the definition of Islamic slander (also to be found in Reliance) which considers anything that insults Islam, whether true or false, to be defamation. So Elisabeth may still be convicted. Under the Sharia rules used in the brave new world of the Islamic Caliphate of Eurabia, she actually is guilty. We’ll find out soon enough whether the Austrian judge is willing to buy into all this nonsense. Read more at gatesofvienna.blogspot.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/fxen

Julgamento de Sabaditsch-Wolff começa dia 23/11/2010

Começa hoje um processo a acompanhar com toda a atenção através de vários blogues, como os abaixo indicados.

É um processo da maior importância, uma vez que Sabaditsch-Wolff será julgada por ter proferido afirmações verídicas sobre o islão. Se for condenada, a análise crítica do islão na Áustria fica virtualmente proibida, facto que pode contagiar a jurisprudência europeia.
Por outro lado, o julgamento cria uma oportunidade altamente mediática para dar a conhecer ao cidadão médio, largamente ignorante da matéria, o que é o islão, não apesar dos media de massas, mas por seu intermédio, como foi o caso do julgamento de Geert Wilders, transmitido na televisão holandesa, o que permitiu que muitos holandeses ouvissem, pela primeira vez, alguns académicos do islão a dizer, preto no branco, o que o islão é: um complexo político-religioso totalitário com aspirações globais.

Amplify’d from gatesofvienna.blogspot.com

Like the trial of Geert Wilders, next week’s trial of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff will be a historic milestone in the resistance to the Islamization of Europe — or a tombstone for European civil liberties, if Elisabeth is convicted. The first hearing in Elisabeth’s case will take place in the Vienna court on November 23rd, starting at 9:00am CET (3:00am EST). In collaboration with Europe News, Tundra Tabloids, and the Save Free Speech website, I will be live-blogging the event as early as I can manage to get up that morning. The reporting team will aim to decipher exactly what the offense is that Elisabeth has been charged with. It is expected that the entire audio recording from the FPÖ seminars will be played in court, permitting the prosecutor to explain in detail what cannot be permitted to be said, and why the religiousness of Islamic teachings makes it so. The defense, for its part, can be expected to document the accuracy and truthfulness of what was said, thus focusing on the core problem: Is it illegal to speak the truth about Islam? The live-blogging will report core issues as they unfold during the day, which may become detailed and extensive. At the end of the day, an edited report of the highlights will be published at one or more of the participating sites. Stay tuned on Tuesday, and keep an eye on the live-blogging pages at Tundra Tabloids and the ESW defense site.

Previous posts about the hate speech case against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff: 2009 Dec 5 Fighting a Hate Speech Charge in Austria 11 Heckling the Counterjihad 14 Whose Law? 17 Defaming the Muslims of Pinkafeld 2010 Mar 11 A Mother and an Activist 20 An Austrian “Hate School” 22 Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff at the Freedom Defense Initiative 29 Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff and the Wiener Akademikerbund Sep 9 “Islam is a Political Ideology Disguised as a Religion” 16 “Justice Must Not Be Made the Handmaiden of Sharia” 17 The Truth Does Not Matter Oct 11 Interview With Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff 16 Is the Truth Illegal in Austria? 20 A Court Date for Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff 21 BPE Press Release on Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff 22 Elisabeth’s Voice: An Appeal 23 Elisabeth’s Voice: A Follow-Up 24 Raising Our Voices 25 Elisabeth’s Voice is Growing 27 Elisabeth’s Voice: More Information 27 A Bit More Media Attention? 28 We Are Elisabeth’s Voice 30 Elisabeth’s Voice in Amsterdam 31 Mark Steyn Joins Elisabeth’s Voice Nov 2 Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff: Target of Western Shariah 6 Anatomy of a Discussion with a Leftist Journalist 8 ESW in the WSJ 10 “The Left is Very Much the New Far Right” 11 Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff Versus the State of Denial 17 Elisabeth’s Voice: An Update 15 The New English Review Interviews Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff Read more at gatesofvienna.blogspot.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/fx55

O que se ensina nas mesquinas norte-americanas?

Supremacismo islâmico e jihad em nome de Alá!

Amplify’d from www.inquiryintoislam.com

ACCORDING TO the Muslim, Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, who testified before the U.S. State Department, 80 percent of mosques in America preach "extremist ideology."

Coming from an entirely different source, the Mapping Sharia Project sent trained people into mosques in the U.S. to find out how many of them are calling for jihad against America. They discovered that the majority of the mosques they've investigated so far do, in fact, promote jihad against America, in the Friday "sermons" (known as "khutbah") and in the literature available at the mosques. In a speech by Mark Steyn, he said (when answering a question) Canadian Mounties did a survey of Canadian imams. It found 85 percent of the imams in Canadian mosques were "hardcore radical jihadists." Saudi Arabia's oil wealth enables it to control around 90% of the world's Islamic institutions (source), and the Saudis promote hardcore, fundamentalist Islam. They pay for these mosques because it gives them control over what is taught and promoted at the mosques. Read more about this.Read more at www.inquiryintoislam.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/fug5

Eurábia: numa rua perto de si

Antevisão de um futuro próximo, se continuarmos de braços cruzados.

Amplify’d from www.bivouac-id.com

« Rue de la Polygamie », « Rue de la Charia », « Place Allah-Akbar », « Avenue du Halal impératif », « Place Mort aux infidèles » : les habitants de Rezé, dans la banlieue Sud de Nantes, ont eu la surprise hier matin de découvrir que les voies de leur ville avaient été rebaptisées.

L’opération, qui n’a pas été revendiquée, intervient dans la ville où réside le très médiatique Lies Hebbadj, le présumé « polygame de fait », plusieurs fois mis en examen et qui vient d’être condamné à 700 euros d’amende pour abus de confiance.

Alors qu’il était président de l’association culturelle musulmane de Rezé (ACMR) Lies Hebbadj avait pris contact avec la ville de Rezé pour demander la construction d’une mosquée. « Je n’ai aucune opposition sur le principe… » avait déclaré à l’époque le Maire socialiste de Rezé, Gilles Retière. Un avis qui manifestement n’a pas été du goût de tous les Rezéens.

Novopress.info, 2010, Dépêches libres de copie et diffusion sous réserve de mention de la source d’origine [http://breizh.novopress.info/] Read more at www.bivouac-id.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/fua4

Missionário espanhol no Paquistão: "Os islamitas sentem o cheiro do medo e acorrem para derramar sangue"

Amplify’d from www.minutodigital.com

En su internado viven jóvenes llegados de zonas rurales, donde les acuchillaron por no querer convertirse al islam. Se han cambiado el nombre y no pueden volver a sus pueblos. El colegio está en un barrio habitado por 50.000 cristianos, y eso atrae a los islamistas más violentos. Pablo J. Ginés ha entrevistado en La Razón a Miguel Ángel Ruiz, misionero en Pakistán y director del Centro de Formación Profesional Don Bosco en Lahore desde 2005.

–¿Cuándo ha pasado más miedo como misionero?

–Durante la crisis de las caricaturas danesas sobre Mahoma. Se convocó una marcha islamista para después del rezo del viernes en la mezquita, que iba a pasar por nuestro colegio. Lo vaciamos, enviamos a los chicos a sus casas, y dije a nuestros tres guardias de seguridad que no se dejasen ver, para no dar excusas a la violencia. Amigos musulmanes me invitaron a esconderme en su casa, pero mi deber era quedarme en el colegio. Ese día pasé miedo.

–¿Tres guardias de seguridad?

–Vamos a contratar un cuarto. Y el Gobierno de Paquistán nos ha dicho que nuestro colegio es objetivo de Al Qaida, y que tenemos que comprar un detector de metales.

–¿Y su momento más triste?

–La matanza de la aldea de Gojra el año pasado, cuando destruyeron 50 casas de cristianos y cuatro niños murieron quemados. Esa violencia sin sentido me hace sufrir mucho más que los desastres naturales o las inundaciones. Te puede hacer perder la fe en el ser humano. Y nadie hizo nada. Luego vienes a España y ves que te multan con mil euros por cortar un árbol, pero que no se defiende la vida humana.

–¿Dialogar con el islam?

–Es necesario pero, ¿quién es el interlocutor? ¿Y qué autoridad tiene? El respetadísimo Gran Muftí de la Universidad de Al-Azhar, en El Cairo, decretó que vestir hiyab no era una obligación islámica, que era sólo algo cultural y opcional. Las estudiantes de su propia universidad, favorables al velo, protestaron y lo desautorizaron. No hay autoridad central en el islam, sólo puedes hablar con personas concretas que te acepten como eres.

–¿Qué han hecho las embajadas en el caso de Asia Bibi?

–El nuncio me dijo que la mañana en que salió el caso, diez embajadores distintos le llamaron para expresar su apoyo, pero a nivel personal. Sus países y gobiernos no han hecho nada hasta ahora. Sólo conozco un caso en que países europeos se movieran por ayudar a un cristiano. Fue el año pasado, por un afgano converso al catolicismo en Europa, que al visitar Afganistán fue detenido. Italia protestó y Angela Merkel llamó a consultas al embajador paquistaní. Pero Paquistán es distinto, es una potencia nuclear. Sólo respetan a los americanos, Europa les parece débil, porque no tiene religión. Ningún país se ha movilizado para acabar con la Ley de Blasfemia pakistaní. El General Musharraf la intentó quitar en 2002, debatirla en el congreso. La alianza de partidos musulmanes, del norte del país, donde hay 25.000 madrasas, le amenazó con sacar un millón de estudiantes a las calles y derrocar su Gobierno si tocaba esa ley. Un día explotó una madrasa porque estaban manipulando explosivos y tenían un arsenal dentro. En Occidente nadie se enteró. Los islamistas controlan el Bajo Tribunal y la enseñanza. Si el Gobierno tomase el control de las escuelas, en diez años cambiaba todo a mejor.

–¿Existe el islam moderado?

–En Paquistán los saudíes invierten en fundamentalismo wahabista tanto como todos los demás países en ayuda al desarrollo. Omán, Abu Dhabi, los países del Golfo son un paraíso en comparación: las mujeres visten como quieren y puedes llevar una cruz en el cuello. Musharraf, admirador de Attaturk, hablaba de potenciar un «islam ilustrado». Yo sólo pido a Occidente que no tenga miedo: los islamistas huelen el miedo y acuden allí a derramar sangre. Atacaron a España porque la vieron débil, no porque tuviese tropas en Irak. Creo que el uso de la razón es lo único que cambiará al islam por dentro. Read more at www.minutodigital.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/ftzy

Um comentário à entrada anterior

A qual dá conta da constituição de uma Liga de Defesa da França (LDF) que se propõe fazer cumprir a lei francesa no que diz respeito à proibição de ocupar a via pública sem autorização das autoridade, coisa que alguns muçulmanos fazem semanalmente em vários locais de França. Queixam-se que não têm mesquitas suficientes (dá vontade de os mandar de volta para a terra deles: qualquer pessoas que tenha ido a países muçulmanos ter-se-á dado conta de que há mais mesquitas que mercados); e querem construí-las com dinheiros do tesouro francês!

O comentador prevê sarilhos, se realmente os membro da LDF concretizarem as suas intenções.

Amplify’d from vladtepesblog.com

A significant event in France.

The French Defence League, clearly an offshoot of the EDL or English Defence League, has issued a direct statement of intent to stop the regular shows of Muslim primacy in the Barbes district in France.

This means that large groups of organized vigilantes are doing something which as far as I know is unprecedented although perhaps not in the American West.

They are planning to actually enforce important laws against invaders and risk the wrath of the state itself for doing the job the state has chosen to consciously and deliberately neglect and ignore. One law specifically mentioned is the law of separation of church and state, the one mentioned is of 1905.

Other more banal laws might be the ones that guarantee French citizens reasonable access to their own roads and highways and access to and from their own homes, which Muslims have been blocking for years now with the flimsy excuse that they need to pray just then and there and for that amount of time.

The state will now likely take direct and harsh action against the LDF while ignoring the law breakers of the Muslim community, exactly as the British government is doing against the EDL and Tommy Robinson while actually financing various radical groups, in the case of Tower Hamlets, hundreds of millions of pounds sterling.

I predict this will be a volatile situation for any nation.

Eeyore for Vlad Read more at vladtepesblog.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/fsbq

A expulsão dos judeus dos países islâmicos, 1920-1970

Artigo extenso, do qual apresentamos o início para despertar o interesse do leitor:

Amplify’d from www.jcpa.org

The Expulsion of the Jews from Muslim Countries, 1920-1970: A History of Ongoing Cruelty and Discrimination

Shmuel Trigano

Between 1920 and 1970, 900,000 Jews were expelled from Arab and other Muslim countries. The 1940s were a turning point in this tragedy; of those expelled, 600,000 settled in the new state of Israel, and 300,000 in France and the United States. Today, they and their descendents form the majority of the French Jewish community and a large part of Israel's population.

In the countries that expelled Jews, a combination of six legal, economic, and political measures aimed at isolating Jews in society was instituted: denationalization; legal discrimination; isolation and sequestration; economic despoilment; socioeconomic discrimination; and pogroms or similar acts.

It is the custom to say that Zionism was responsible for this development. However, the region's anti-Semitism would have developed even without the rise of the state of Israel because of Arab-Islamic nationalism, which resulted in xenophobia.

The fact that these events have been obscured has served in the campaign to delegitimize Israel, and therefore to a large extent, the same population that suffered this oppression. The fate of Palestinian refugees, their proclaimed innocence, and the injustice they endured form the main thrust of this delegitimization. The Jewish refugees have suffered more than the Palestinian refugees and undergone greater spoliations. However, they became citizens of the countries of refuge, especially Israel and France, while Palestinians were ostracized from the Arab nations.

Between 1920 and 1970, 900,000 Jews were expelled from Arab and other Muslim countries: from Morocco to Iran, from Turkey to Yemen, including  places where they had lived for twenty centuries. The 1940s were a turning point in this tragedy; of those expelled, 600,000 settled in the new state of Israel, and 300,000 in France and Canada. Today, they and their descendants form the majority of the French Jewish community and a large part of Israel's population.

How does one explain this exodus? It is the blind spot of contemporary political consciousness and an object of denial. There is not even an expression to name this major event. "The Forgotten Exodus" is the most commonly used term. But it actually masks the nature and impact of this historical event. "Forgotten" by whom, other than ideologues? "Exodus" is an apt description of the situation but not of its causes, which the adjective "forgotten" occults even more. For those who underwent the expulsion have not forgotten it at all. Moreover, it is also an important historical fact.

This is a major transnational phenomenon. Jewish communities were expelled either in their entirety or almost so. Communities of some significance remain in Iran, Turkey, Morocco, and Tunisia. All the countries that expelled Jews have one thing in common: they belong to Islam (including Turkey and Iran, which are not Arab countries). However, it is hard to view this exodus as a whole. It largely took place over a thirty-year period (1940-1970) and covered a huge geographical area, from Morocco to Iran, from Turkey to Yemen.

The "Statute of the Jews"

Nevertheless, if one compares the facts in the various countries[1] an identical model emerges: Jews were systematically expelled after a de facto "Statute of the Jews" was instituted. A combination of six legal, economic, and political measures aimed at isolating Jews in society was instituted:

Denationalization

Legal discrimination

Isolation and sequestration

Economic despoilment

Socioeconomic discrimination

Pogroms or similar acts

1)    The Denationalization of the Jews

The Jews were isolated from their society by a legal process in many lands.

This was the preliminary stage of their exclusion, which was followed by expulsion. A number of legal measures in various countries illustrate this point.

In Egypt the most articulate evolution occurred. It began with the Treaty of Sèvres (1920), a peace treaty between the Allies and the Ottomans that dismembered the Ottoman Empire and opened the way to the further creation of Arab (and Israeli) states. It addressed the question of nationality in Egypt and can be considered the first infringement of the rights of autochthonous Jews. The notion of belonging to a race (article 105) rather than a nation was introduced, thereby dissociating Jews from the majority of the population of the country. The next step was the nationality laws of 1927 and 1929, which favored jus sanguinis (or right of blood). An Egyptian was from then on defined as somebody who had Arab-Muslim affiliation.

The London Convention (1936) granted Egypt independence under King Farouk, and it was followed by a worsening of the nationality laws. According to additional nationality laws (in 1950, 1951, 1953, and 1956), autochthonous Jews became stateless: 40,000 people were turned into "foreigners" in their own country. In 1956, after the Sinai War, a new dimension was added: Egyptian nationality was taken away from anyone who committed acts in favor of enemy states or states with no relations with Egypt. In practice, all Jews were suspected of dual loyalty. This led ultimately to the accusation that all Jews were Zionists.

In Iraq, by the law of 9 May 1950, Jews who left Iraq were stripped of their nationality.

In Libya, the nationality laws of 12 June 1951 (art. 11, clause 27) decreed that the personal status of non-Muslims would be governed by their (religious) courts, in the manner of dhimmis during the premodern period. Jews were no longer allowed to vote or to hold political office.

2) Legal discrimination

A number of legal measures imposed restrictions on businesses and associations. Jewish communities and organizations were placed under supervision. Arabic became the sole language of public services.

In Libya, in 1953, Jews were subjected to restrictions and became victims of economic boycotts. The Maccabi sports club was forcibly opened to Arab members in 1954. A decree was issued on 9 May 1957 obliging Libyans with relatives in Israel to register at the Libyan boycott office, even though at that point, 90 percent of the Jews had already left. On 3 December 1958, Tripoli's Jewish community ceased to be an independent entity. Thereafter it was overseen by a state-appointed commissioner. Legal exclusion worsened. In 1960, Jews were prohibited from acquiring new possessions. They were no longer allowed to vote, hold public office, or serve in the army or the police. On 2 April 1960, Alliance Israélite Universelle schools were closed.

Similar developments occurred in Lebanon. As early as 1947, Jewish students were expelled from Beirut University. Jewish "Zionist" organizations (such as the Maccabi sports club) were forbidden. Jews were discharged from public service positions and Jewish youth movements banned.

In Iraq, Jewish history and Hebrew language instruction were prohibited in Jewish schools during the 1920s. Jews were expelled from public service and education in the 1930s. The Jewish schools' curricula were censored in 1932.

In Iran, Zionist activities (differentiated from "Jewish" activities) were banned in 1979. In 2000, discrimination developed in public service, universities, and public companies.

In Yemen, sharia law was instated in 1913, worsening the situation of the dhimmi. Decrees specifying forced conversion for orphans were issued between  1922 and 1928, while Jews were excluded from public service positions and the army.

In Syria, real estate purchase was prohibited to Jews in 1947, and Jews began to be discharged from public service positions. In 1967, Muslim principals were appointed to Jewish schools.

In Morocco, after independence in 1956, a process of Arabization of public services began, cutting the Jews off from the larger society. A dahir (decree) Moroccanizing Jewish charitable organizations was issued on 26 November 1958, endangering their freedom.

In Egypt, a long process of discrimination in the public service began in 1929. In 1945-1948, Jews were excluded from the public service. In 1947, Jewish schools were put under surveillance and forced to Arabize and Egyptianize their curricula. Community organizations were forced to submit their member lists to the Egyptian state after May 1948 and until 1950. In 1949, Jews were forbidden to live in the vicinity of King Farouk's palaces.

In Tunisia, a law concerning Judaism (11 July 1958) put an end to Jewish communities, replaced them with temporary "Israelite worship commissions," and suppressed the personal status of the Jews (inherited from the dhimmi status, which obliged the Jews to depend on their religious tribunals for all matters related to their personal status). In Tunisia too, independence (1956) led to the Tunisification of public services.

Turkey under the Young Turks (1923-1945) created hard-labor battalions for non-Muslim conscripts in May 1941. Read more at www.jcpa.org

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/fqg1

Pena de morte para a blasfémia no islão

Robert Spencer reage a uma reportagem da CNN, a qual pretendia convencer os seus espectadores de que a pena de morte para a blasfémia no islão é uma prática sem fundamentos teológicos.
Para tal, recorre aos nosso conhecido e estimado Islam Q&A.

Em suma: enquanto o islão avança no Ocidente, os progressistas e os seus instrumentos mediáticos tratam de lhe limpar a face.

Amplify’d from www.jihadwatch.org

In a story about the Asia Bibi blasphemy case in Pakistan, CNN goes out of its way to say that the Qur'an and Hadith do not contain a death penalty for blasphemy, thereby implying that Asia Bibi is in danger of death because of cultural or political factors, not because of anything that needs to be addressed within Islam. This is a familiar mainstream media practice when it comes to stories about honor killing or genital mutilation: the story will inevitably assure the reader that the practice in question has nothing to do with Islam, and give no hint of why it is so widely tolerated and practiced in Islamic countries. This only assures that the human rights establishment will never address these issues properly, and thus these practices will continue.

"Family waits to see if mother, accused of blasphemy, will be hanged" by Reza Sayah for CNN, November 18 (thanks to Slothy):

Neither the Koran nor the prophet Muhammad's teachings in the Hadith call for the execution of blasphemers, but Islamic scholars and jurists from generations past included the death sentence when drafting Islamic law.

Islam QA disagrees, and uses both Qur'an and Hadith to make its argument:

I heard on a tape that whoever insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) should be executed even if he shows that he has repented. Should he be killed as a hadd punishment or because of kufr? If his repentance is sincere, will Allaah forgive him or will he go to Hell and his repentance will be of no avail? Praise be to Allaah. The answer to this question may be given by addressing the two following issues: 1 - The ruling on one who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) The scholars are unanimously agreed that a Muslim who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) becomes a kaafir and an apostate who is to be executed. This consensus was narrated by more than one of the scholars, such as Imaam Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Qaadi 'Iyaad, al-Khattaabi and others. Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/13-16 This ruling is indicated by the Qur'aan and Sunnah. In the Qur'aan it says (interpretation of the meaning): "The hypocrites fear lest a Soorah (chapter of the Qur'aan) should be revealed about them, showing them what is in their hearts. Say: '(Go ahead and) mock! But certainly Allaah will bring to light all that you fear.' If you ask them (about this), they declare: 'We were only talking idly and joking.' Say: 'Was it at Allaah, and His Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and His Messenger that you were mocking?' Make no excuse; you disbelieved after you had believed" [al-Tawbah 9:64-66] This verse clearly states that mocking Allaah, His verses and His Messenger constitutes kufr, so that applies even more so to insulting. The verse also indicates that whoever belittles the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is also a kaafir [unbeliever], whether he was serious or joking. With regard to the Sunnah, Abu Dawood (4362) narrated from 'Ali that a Jewish woman used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and say bad things about him, so a man strangled her until she died, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ruled that no blood money was due in this case. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in al-Saarim al-Maslool (1/162): This hadeeth is jayyid, and there is a corroborating report in the hadeeth of Ibn 'Abbaas which we will quote below. This hadeeth clearly indicates that it was permissible to kill that woman because she used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Abu Dawood (4361) narrated from Ibn 'Abbaas that a blind man had a freed concubine (umm walad) who used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and say bad things about him. He told her not to do that but she did not stop, and he rebuked her but she did not heed him. One night, when she started to say bad things about the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and insult him, he took a short sword or dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it and killed her. The following morning that was mentioned to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He called the people together and said, "I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right over him that he should stand up." The blind man stood up and said, "O Messenger of Allaah, I am the one who did it; she used to insult you and say bad things about you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not give up her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was kind to me. Last night she began to insult you and say bad things about you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her." Thereupon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Bear witness, there is no blood money due for her." (Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 3655) It seems that this woman was a kaafir, not a Muslim, for a Muslim could never do such an evil action. If she was a Muslim she would have become an apostate by this action, in which case it would not have been permissible for her master to keep her; in that case it would not have been good enough if he were to keep her and simply rebuke her. Al-Nasaa'i narrated (4071) that Abu Barzah al-Aslami said: A man spoke harshly to Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq and I said, 'Shall I kill him?' He rebuked me and said, 'That is not for anyone after the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) .'" (Saheeh al-Nasaa'i, 3795) It may be noted from this that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had the right to kill whoever insulted him and spoke harshly to him, and that included both Muslims and kaafirs. The second issue is: if a person who insulted the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) repents, should his repentance be accepted or not? The scholars are agreed that if such a person repents sincerely and regrets what he has done, this repentance will benefit him on the Day of Resurrection and Allaah will forgive him. But they differed as to whether his repentance should be accepted in this world and whether that means he is no longer subject to the sentence of execution. Maalik and Ahmad were of the view that it should not be accepted, and that he should be killed even if he has repented. They quoted as evidence the Sunnah and proper understanding of the ahaadeeth: In the Sunnah, Abu Dawood (2683) narrated that Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqaas said: "On the Day of the Conquest of Makkah, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) granted safety to the people except for four men and two women, and he named them, and Ibn Abi Sarh... As for Ibn Abi Sarh, he hid with 'Uthmaan ibn 'Affaan, and when the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) called the people to give their allegiance to him, he brought him to stand before the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He said, "O Prophet of Allaah, accept the allegiance of 'Abd-Allaah." He raised his head and looked at him three times, refusing him, then he accepted his allegiance after the third time. Then he turned to his companions and said: "Was there not among you any smart man who could have got up and killed this person when he saw me refusing to give him my hand and accept his allegiance?" They said, "We do not know what is in your heart, O Messenger of Allaah. Why did you not gesture to us with your eyes?" He said, "It is not befitting for a Prophet to betray a person with a gesture of his eyes." (Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 2334) This clearly indicates that in a case such as this apostate who had insulted the Prophet (S), it is not obligatory to accept his repentance, rather it is permissible to kill him even if he comes repentant. 'Abd-Allaah ibn Sa'd was one of those who used to write down the Revelation, then he apostatized and claimed that he used to add whatever he wanted to the Revelation. This was a lie and a fabrication against the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and it was a kind of insult. Then he became Muslim again and was a good Muslim, may Allaah be pleased with him. Al-Saarim 115. With regard to proper understanding of the ahaadeeth: They said that insulting the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) has to do with two rights, the right of Allaah and the right of a human being. With regard to the right of Allaah, this is obvious, because it is casting aspersions upon His Message, His Book and His Religion. As for the right of a human being, this is also obvious, because it is like trying to slander the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by this insult. In a case which involves both the rights of Allaah and the rights of a human being, the rights of the human beings are not dropped when the person repents, as in the case of the punishment for banditry, because if the bandit has killed someone, that means that he must be executed and crucified. But if he repents before he is caught, then the right of Allaah over him, that he should be executed and crucified, no longer applies, but the rights of other humans with regard to qisaas (retaliatory punishment) still stand. The same applies in this case. If the one who insulted the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) repents, then the rights of Allaah no longer apply, but there remains the right of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), which still stand despite his repentance. If it is said, "Can we not forgive him, because during his lifetime the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forgave many of those who had insulted him and he did not execute them?" The answer is: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sometimes chose to forgive those who had insulted him, and sometimes he ordered that they should be executed, if that served a greater purpose. But now his forgiveness is impossible because he is dead, so the execution of the one who insults him remains the right of Allaah, His Messenger and the believers, and the one who deserves to be executed cannot be let off, so the punishment must be carried out. Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/438 Insulting the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is one of the worst of forbidden actions, and it constitutes kufr and apostasy from Islam, according to scholarly consensus, whether done seriously or in jest. The one who does that is to be executed even if he repents and whether he is a Muslim or a kaafir. If he repents sincerely and regrets what he has done, this repentance will benefit him on the Day of Resurrection and Allaah will forgive him. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) wrote a valuable book on this matter, entitled al-Saarim al-Maslool 'ala Shaatim al-Rasool which every believer should read, especially in these times when a lot of hypocrites and heretics dare to insult the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) because they see that the Muslims are careless and feel little protective jealousy towards their religion and their Prophet, and they do not implement the shar'i punishment which would deter these people and their ilk from committing this act of blatant kufr [unbelief]. And Allaah knows best. May Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and all his family and companions. Read more at www.jihadwatch.org

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/fq4k