FREEDOM OR ANARCHY,Campaign of Conscience.

Joseph F Barber | Create Your Badge
This blog does not promote, support, condone, encourage, advocate, nor in any way endorse any racist (or "racialist") ideologies, nor any armed and/or violent revolutionary, seditionist and/or terrorist activities. Any racial separatist or militant groups listed here are solely for reference and Opinions of multiple authors including Freedom or Anarchy Campaign of conscience.

To be GOVERNED

Not For Profit - For Global Justice and The Fight to End Violence & Hunger world wide - Since 1999
"Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people" - John Adams - Second President - 1797 - 1801

This is the callout,This is the call to the Patriots,To stand up for all the ones who’ve been thrown away,This is the call to the all citizens ,Stand up!
Stand up and protect those who can not protect themselves our veterans ,the homeless & the forgotten take back our world today

To protect our independence, We take no government funds
Become A Supporting member of humanity to help end hunger and violence in our country,You have a right to live. You have a right to be. You have these rights regardless of money, health, social status, or class. You have these rights, man, woman, or child. These rights can never be taken away from you, they can only be infringed. When someone violates your rights, remember, it is not your fault.,


DISCOVER THE WORLD

Facebook Badge

FREEDOM OR ANARCHY,Campaign of Conscience

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

The Free Thought Project,The Daily Sheeple & FREEDOM OR ANARCHY Campaign of Conscience are dedicated to holding those who claim authority over our lives accountable. “Each of us has a unique part to play in the healing of the world.”
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.” - George Orwell, 1984

STEALING FROM THE CITIZENRY

The right to tell the Government to kiss my Ass Important Message for All Law Enforcers Freedom; what it is, and what it is not. Unadulterated freedom is an unattainable goal; that is what the founders of America knew and understood, which was their impetus behind the documents that established our great nation. They also knew that one of the primary driving forces in human nature is the unconscious desire to be truly free. This meant to them that mankind if totally left completely unrestricted would pursue all things in life without any awareness or acknowledgement of the consequences of his/her own actions leaving only the individual conscience if they had one as a control on behavior. This would not bode well in the development of a great society. Yet the founders of America chose to allow men/women as much liberty as could be, with minimum impact on the freedom or liberties of others

Thursday, March 24, 2016

DENYING RADICAL ISLAM: DEADLY FOR BRUSSELS

DENYING RADICAL ISLAM: DEADLY FOR BRUSSELS

Image result for RADICAL ISLAM:
To a Muslim terrorist, unbelievers are unbelievers, be they children, women, or men, and killing them is doing Allah’s work.
That’s why Muslim terrorists could carry out their horrific acts in Brussels this week, indiscriminately murdering and maiming people who, in all likelihood, never lifted a finger against a Muslim in their entire lives.

But before I explain this murderous mentality, it’s important that we say a word about terminology.It didn’t matter. To the radical Muslim, they are guilty and deserve to die.
I am constantly criticized for the use of the term “radical Islam,” some claiming that radical Islam is not Islam at all and others claiming that all Islam is radical.
In my judgment, both criticisms are wrong.
On the one hand, radical Islam represents a genuine stream of Islam. It can be traced back to Muhammad himself and to centuries of Islamic history and mountains of Islamic texts, and so it is completely justifiable to use the term “radical Islam,” and it is false to make the blanket statement that “Islam is a religion of peace.”
As for Islam being a “religion of peace,” was it a religion of peace during Muhammad’s warring years, which marked the culmination of his career? Was it a religion of peace during its expansionist conquests of Jerusalem, Egypt, Damascus, Cyprus, Armenia, Andalusia, Granada (Spain), all within a century of Muhammad’s death?
Was it a religion of peace during its near genocide of Middle Eastern and North African Christians during the last century of its so-called Golden Age (the 13th century)?
Is this the description of a religion of peace? “The Holy War, as it is known in Islamic Jurisprudence, is basically an offensive war. This is the duty of Muslims in every age when the needed military power becomes available to them. This is the phase in which the meaning of Holy War has taken its final form. Thus the apostle of God said: ‘I was commanded to fight the people until they believe in God and his message. …'” (Citing Egyptian scholar Dr. Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti from his book “Jurisprudence in Muhammad’s Biography,” p. 174.)
On the other hand, there is a less violent stream of Islam that also traces itself back to Muhammad, and it is a stream that differs in many ways from radical Islam, deploring attacks like those in Paris and Brussels in the name of Islam.
That’s why many leading Islamic scholars today have denounced ISIS, with some, like Shaykh Muhammad Al-Yaqoubi, writing books like “Refuting ISIS: A Rebuttal of its Religious and Ideological Foundations.”
So, while we can dispute whether radical Islam is real Islam (or the only Islam), we cannot dispute is that there are Quranic texts and Islamic traditions that can be cited to support these acts of barbarous violence.
This means that radical Muslims are not creating this violent ideology out of thin air. They are doing what they do in the name of Allah and in the spirit of Muhammad based on their interpretation of the texts.
In short, radical Muslims are at war with the non-Islamic (or, more particularly, non-radical-Islamic) world.
As explained on the Oxford Islamic Studies website, in Muslim thinking, the world is divided into Dar al-Islam (meaning, “Territory of Islam. Region of Muslim sovereignty where Islamic law prevails”) and Dar al-Harb (meaning, “Territory of war. Denotes the territories bordering on dar al-Islam [territory of Islam], whose leaders are called upon to convert to Islam.”)
Radical Islam, then, is at war with all forms of non-radical Islam (including differing forms of radical Islam), which is why Muslims kill more Muslims than any other group of people, with Shiites murdering Sunnis and vice versa, among other factional wars.
And radical Islam is at war with all non-Muslims, in particular with the West (because of our worldly ways, America being called the “great Satan”) and with Israel (the ultimate hated people, called the “little Satan”).
Taking this a step further, the Quran (5:33) explicitly states that “the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.”
What does it mean to cause “corruption” (or “mischief”) in the land? Christian apologist David Wood explains that there are many possible interpretations that have been offered, some of which are used to justify terrorist attacks against the West (or against non-Muslims in general).
As for “waging war” against Islam, the capturing of an ISIS terrorist in Brussels a few days ago would certainly be considered an act of war against Islam, and so the coordinated, murderous attacks that followed would be considered just retaliation, part of the Islamic holy war (jihad).
I would urge, then, that rather than getting into a battle about whether radical Islam is a legitimate or illegitimate interpretation of Islam, we must acknowledge its existence, we must recognize that it is embraced by many millions of Muslims, and we must understand that, in its eyes, you and I are the enemies, and so killing us is doing Allah’s work.
Tragically, just two months ago, the people of Brussels launched an international campaign to tell the world that their city was safe from terror.
How much better it would have been for them to recognize the lethal danger of radical Islam that was lurking right within their own neighborhoods, devoting their energies instead to exposing and uprooting these terrorist cells.
We in America would do well to follow suit. Denial can be deadly.

DENYING RADICAL ISLAM: DEADLY FOR BRUSSELS

Image result for RADICAL ISLAM:
To a Muslim terrorist, unbelievers are unbelievers, be they children, women, or men, and killing them is doing Allah’s work.
That’s why Muslim terrorists could carry out their horrific acts in Brussels this week, indiscriminately murdering and maiming people who, in all likelihood, never lifted a finger against a Muslim in their entire lives.

But before I explain this murderous mentality, it’s important that we say a word about terminology.It didn’t matter. To the radical Muslim, they are guilty and deserve to die.
I am constantly criticized for the use of the term “radical Islam,” some claiming that radical Islam is not Islam at all and others claiming that all Islam is radical.
In my judgment, both criticisms are wrong.
On the one hand, radical Islam represents a genuine stream of Islam. It can be traced back to Muhammad himself and to centuries of Islamic history and mountains of Islamic texts, and so it is completely justifiable to use the term “radical Islam,” and it is false to make the blanket statement that “Islam is a religion of peace.”
As for Islam being a “religion of peace,” was it a religion of peace during Muhammad’s warring years, which marked the culmination of his career? Was it a religion of peace during its expansionist conquests of Jerusalem, Egypt, Damascus, Cyprus, Armenia, Andalusia, Granada (Spain), all within a century of Muhammad’s death?
Was it a religion of peace during its near genocide of Middle Eastern and North African Christians during the last century of its so-called Golden Age (the 13th century)?
Is this the description of a religion of peace? “The Holy War, as it is known in Islamic Jurisprudence, is basically an offensive war. This is the duty of Muslims in every age when the needed military power becomes available to them. This is the phase in which the meaning of Holy War has taken its final form. Thus the apostle of God said: ‘I was commanded to fight the people until they believe in God and his message. …'” (Citing Egyptian scholar Dr. Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti from his book “Jurisprudence in Muhammad’s Biography,” p. 174.)
On the other hand, there is a less violent stream of Islam that also traces itself back to Muhammad, and it is a stream that differs in many ways from radical Islam, deploring attacks like those in Paris and Brussels in the name of Islam.
That’s why many leading Islamic scholars today have denounced ISIS, with some, like Shaykh Muhammad Al-Yaqoubi, writing books like “Refuting ISIS: A Rebuttal of its Religious and Ideological Foundations.”
So, while we can dispute whether radical Islam is real Islam (or the only Islam), we cannot dispute is that there are Quranic texts and Islamic traditions that can be cited to support these acts of barbarous violence.
This means that radical Muslims are not creating this violent ideology out of thin air. They are doing what they do in the name of Allah and in the spirit of Muhammad based on their interpretation of the texts.
In short, radical Muslims are at war with the non-Islamic (or, more particularly, non-radical-Islamic) world.
As explained on the Oxford Islamic Studies website, in Muslim thinking, the world is divided into Dar al-Islam (meaning, “Territory of Islam. Region of Muslim sovereignty where Islamic law prevails”) and Dar al-Harb (meaning, “Territory of war. Denotes the territories bordering on dar al-Islam [territory of Islam], whose leaders are called upon to convert to Islam.”)
Radical Islam, then, is at war with all forms of non-radical Islam (including differing forms of radical Islam), which is why Muslims kill more Muslims than any other group of people, with Shiites murdering Sunnis and vice versa, among other factional wars.
And radical Islam is at war with all non-Muslims, in particular with the West (because of our worldly ways, America being called the “great Satan”) and with Israel (the ultimate hated people, called the “little Satan”).
Taking this a step further, the Quran (5:33) explicitly states that “the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.”
What does it mean to cause “corruption” (or “mischief”) in the land? Christian apologist David Wood explains that there are many possible interpretations that have been offered, some of which are used to justify terrorist attacks against the West (or against non-Muslims in general).
As for “waging war” against Islam, the capturing of an ISIS terrorist in Brussels a few days ago would certainly be considered an act of war against Islam, and so the coordinated, murderous attacks that followed would be considered just retaliation, part of the Islamic holy war (jihad).
I would urge, then, that rather than getting into a battle about whether radical Islam is a legitimate or illegitimate interpretation of Islam, we must acknowledge its existence, we must recognize that it is embraced by many millions of Muslims, and we must understand that, in its eyes, you and I are the enemies, and so killing us is doing Allah’s work.
Tragically, just two months ago, the people of Brussels launched an international campaign to tell the world that their city was safe from terror.
How much better it would have been for them to recognize the lethal danger of radical Islam that was lurking right within their own neighborhoods, devoting their energies instead to exposing and uprooting these terrorist cells.
We in America would do well to follow suit. Denial can be deadly.


No comments :