Islam Attack

The Islamic Political Invasion …
SoundCloud Political Islam, Bill Warner PhD
CSPI Center for the Study of Political Islam
This site is a compilation of educational material regarding Islam and understanding the Islamic radical threat. Included is a call to enforce American law and project American values regarding free speech and human rights.

Muhammad is the ultimate ideal for those who follow the Islamic tradition. Understanding the Quran and the messenger Muhammad is central to our ability to defeat this threat. Of course we must also recognize and respect that there are a great many good people that live and survive within Islamic society.

Islam devotes a great amount of energy to the Kafir (the disgusting non-muslim). The majority (64%) of the Koran is devoted to the Kafir, and nearly all of the Sira (Biography) 81% deals with Mohammed’s struggle with them. The Hadith (Traditions) devotes 37% of the text to Kafirs. Overall, the Trilogy devotes 51% of its content to the Kafir - the non-muslim. reference: Center for the Study of Political Islam : Kafirs in the Trilogy, Chart

The Doctrine of Islam is political, and the spiritual part that is taken from Judaism and Christianity presented as biblical cannon becomes in fact anti-semitic and anti-christian rhetoric.

The spiritual sayings of Islam that allude to the tolerance and peace promoted by Islam, are in truth broken references to admonishments spoken to muslims about how they should treat other muslims and not other religions - in other words what we see from the outside is Islamic propaganda.

Would you consider the warlord Muhammad your friend, and would you follow him by your own measure if you knew what he had done? Muhammad is the supreme model and ultimate ideal for those who follow the Islamic tradition which in it’s essence is a prescription for dominance over other cultures thru tactical subterfuge. Political Islam will surprise the misinformed - learn about it - educate yourself!

Of special note, the rationale that is being forwarded for the need of immigration is erroneous! That being that the population is declining. We were told that the world could not support an ever expanding population, and so citizens were encouraged to restrict childbirth. If we truly need more population all the government has to do is say so and I think we can fairly match any population increase needed. Also, we would be much better off allowing greater immigration from South America than from a country whose baseline impetus is ‘Death to America’.

Lets get real shall we? - we’re all too worried about what other people think that it’s stifling critical thought and appropriate action.
1. Call to Enforce US American Law & Project American Values

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits government from encouraging or promoting ("establishing") religion in any way. That's why we don't have an official religion of the United States. This means that the government may not give political nor financial support to any religion.

Islam must not be given any support or special religious ‘rights’ that infringe upon the public and American culture.

Declare any law that violates the Constitution and Bill of Rights Null and Void - Void Sharia as a ‘pseudo’ religious legal system intended to subvert American legal code. Sharia must not be allowed any kind of sanction in America. Sharia law can include rulings such as wife beating, punishments of torture, and retribution killing - clearly not under the applied protections provided by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Engage in a united project to actively protect, support and encourage the immigration of persecuted minorities from around the globe. Islamists are not that minority and are instead the persecutors whose mandate is to force everyone to accept sharia law - stop the immigration of Islamic Imams intolerant of other religions and who are intolerant of our laws, including freedom of speech.

Provide public education about Islam and Sharia Law to improve cultural awareness and discourse. This education should be provided by independent researchers and not be applied under the supervision and auspices of groups connected to any political Islamic organization.

Stop the silencing and placement of fetters on police and government officials regarding Islamic crimes against the public. Democracy hinges on free speech and free public discourse.

Have a robust deportation program. Incarcerate Islamic fundamentalist Imams and proponents in totally separate compounds since, along with Islamic propaganda in public education institutions, prisons are another targeted breeding ground for Islamic recruitment.

Realize that there is a contingent of good and spiritual muslims who have lived under the oppression of authoritarian and fundamentalist expressions of government who wish to maintain their cultural heritage, provide service, and have good lives - not under Sharia law (this falls under the don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater clause.) Yes that would make them a target, but we will stand with them and not against.

2. Deep Assessment and Unique Considerations

My line of inquiry goes like this; Is there some way I can find agreement with the statement ‘there is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his Messenger.’ honestly and without being coerced? What would need to take place for me to come to this recognition?

My personal thought on the topic goes thus; I notice that the interesting part of learning Islam, whether it be from Islamic or Western scholars, is that it requires interpretation. For instance, what I’ve learned so far is that there is this term called the ‘rule of abrogation’. My mentioning this term is not to engage in proving or disproving an interpretation - just notice that there is a certain way of ‘weighting’ the teachings in order to put emphasis on one part over the other.

Another point has to do with my ignorance of the topic of Islam. I always thought that Islam was connected to Judaism just like Christianity because both ‘borrowed’ from the ancient Hebrew texts. Is not the God Creator of Islam that of the Bible? Or is the one true God Creator of Israel different from the one true God of Islam?

Are both ‘One True God of Creation’ somehow different therefore there are actually more than ‘One True God Creator’? I suppose that would be a source for unreasonable argument.

The question of timing comes to mind. In the old testament, there’s ‘a time for peace and a time for war.’ For Muhammad, and according to the rule of abrogation, there seems to be only one time for peace early on - then it turned into a continuous time for war.

What would qualify Muhammad as the last Prophet? Is it because he had some special quality in himself? It would seem that the emphasis is in fact that he wrote something unique and final in his discourse from the One True Creator God of everyone. What was that one final kernel?

Muhammad himself seemed to be a rather normal person with perhaps a few more interesting attitudes than most. I don’t believe that Muhammad was claiming any sort of divinity, rather acting as a conduit. The messages seemed to reinforce the importance of Muhammad so to gather a following, of an ever increasing tribe of peoples.

This is were the use of force becomes interesting. But I want to land on the one thing that precedes the use of force - that is intent. To use the most positive light possible, which I believe is the one glue that holds Islam together, has tribal roots.

3. Messenger and Murderer. Incongruent or just seventh century politics as usual?

Why is it necessary to lie to the Kafir (the disgusting unbeliever)? The answer is that lying makes it easier to convert or enslave someone to Islam (submission to ‘Allah’ as defined by Muhammad thru dreams of Gabriel’s instructions), and is considered a mercy.

The method prescribed in the ’scriptural’ doctrine of Muhammad gained thru the direct instructions from the angel ‘Gabriel’ and by Muhammad's experience in politics was to first lie, then to gag, tax, enslave and murder his opponents whenever he had the advantage - or whenever there was a threat to his advantage such as someone speaking the truth. What effect does this type of leadership have on the people that fall under it’s er... laws?

Is the core of Islam’s doctrine dictatorial? What kind of world view is ‘submission’ to ‘Allah’ as defined by Muhammad’s dreams of Gabriel’s instructions and would it actually lead to world peace? Where is its proof? Is it characteristic of Gabriel to endorse genocide?

Since ‘Allah’ was the name of the moon god of Muhammad’s tribe, how does that play into Muhammad becoming the last prophet of the Jews?
Stacks Image 203517

Dr. Bill Warners books/kindle available at Amazon

Stacks Image 203406
Stacks Image 203418
Stacks Image 203526
Stacks Image 203630
Stacks Image 203671
Brother Rasheed interviewing Robert Spencer about Islam

Instead of being treated equally, Islamic doctrine mandates that muslims are a privileged class that have extra rights over 'the disgusting non-muslim'. This is exactly the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood in the West. This is not a case about religious discrimination, this is about granting a special case for Islamic law in the United States. Robert Spencer points out that Islamic law is in variance with the Constitution in numerous ways; in its denial of freedom of speech, denial of the freedom of thought, and denial of equality of rights of all people before the law.

Constitutional principal demands that there be no allowance for the accommodation of Islamic law within the United States. Islam presents itself a menace to American society because its code demands everything that is anti-American! Sharia law is anti-American throughout! The Islamic immigrants are not only mainly men near the 20’s ready to do whatever it takes to get their way - they are that PLUS indoctrinated in an ideology that hates American tolerance and human rights.

Robert Spencer’s books available at Amazon:

Stacks Image 203626
vote trump not because he’s likable and wonderfully bright, vote because it’s right

Our nation was founded as an enterprise, concerning freedom and respect of all mankind! It’s membership is, as you all know, ‘we the people’. We are all bound to this endeavor. Guided by the hand of God, a God we can all recognize no matter our culture or religion because we strive to do what’s right! This author believes Trump will be a great president. Politics is not new to him since he seems to have had his eye on them for quite some time. But he is not a politician - our forefathers were mainly entrepreneurs.
Donald J Trump for President produced by The Levee Studios
The Silent Majority

The Silent Majority
The Pledge to Renew America is a commitment by elected officials, candidates and the American people to support real government reform. Our desire to restore our government’s ability to serve the people must be matched by our will to see this through. Transparency and the rule of law are fundamental to our cause and political correctness must take a back seat to speaking honestly about the state of our nation and resolving the issues which subvert the power of the people.

Each of us must do our part to renew our government. By signing this pledge, you agree to support these basic tenants of reform. Support manifested not only with your votes as an elected official or as an American citizen, but also your commitment to participate in the process that will “restore the faith and trust of the American people in their government”.[1]
[1] Contract with America, 1994
LEAKED: George Soros Funding #BlackLivesMatter via @Liz_Wheeler
Published on Aug 24, 2016
George Soros is a different type of entrepreneur. Soros prefers to work in the background where he can buy political pressure in order to forward his cause without engaging in honest democratic debate. This is compounded by an effort to squelch oppositional free speech and promote open sedition by funding ‘Black Lives Matters™’. Unfortunately, it would appear that the leadership of the Democratic Party no longer believes in the democratic process either, and seems to have professionalized the appearance of supporting Democracy.
LEAK: George Soros Documents Expose Him
Published on Aug 26, 2016

One America's Sani Unutoa has details into the George Soros leak. Thousands of documents expose where Soros' money goes.
Islamophobia™ is not equivalent to homophobia nor any other type of phobia. It is a catch-phrase used by Islamic propagandists to squelch freedom of speech. Americans demand an honest discourse about the hate speech that can be found today in mainstream Islamic doctrine. The people ask that our government properly identify and vet the subversive Islamic political forces who’s agenda is to supplant the Constitution of the United States with the gradual acceptance of (submission to) Sharia Law.
The effort of George Soros can easily be connected to influencing the current global immigration crisis. The crisis generated by decisions made at the top by ‘democratic’ leadership has an upside - for the financial brokers. This is because crisis brings financial opportunity.
Published on Aug 4, 2016
Kitty Werthmann, an Austrian World War II survivor, gives her account of Hitler's takeover of Austria. The similarities to today's left and their "progressive agenda", are staggering! This is a MUST WATCH!
Stacks Image 203615
Stacks Image 203669
Stacks Image 203550
The Constitution of the Iroquois Nations Great Law of Peace was an influence on the Constitution of the United States
Stacks Image 203651
Stacks Image 203552

Constitutional Questions

Article 6 of the US Constitution states that the Constitution is the highest law of the land and cannot be subjugated to any other legal code. The fundamental claim of Sharia is that it is the highest law in the world and that all other legal codes must submit to Islamic law.

While the Supremacy Clause ensures that the Constitution will always remain our nation’s law - In America and elsewhere there is a massive contradiction that is being ignored, that Sharia law is being allowed thru American courts under the guise of ‘Freedom of Religion’.

Secondly, in regard to the first amendment under the free exercise clause; although the government cannot restrict a person's religious beliefs, it can limit the practice of faith when a substantial and compelling state interest exists. The courts have found that a substantial and compelling State Interest exists when the religious practice poses a threat to the health, safety, or Welfare of the public.

And, a state can constitutionally regulate the time, place, and manner of soliciting upon the streets and of conducting meetings in order to safeguard the peace, order, and comfort of the community.

The state can also protect the public against frauds perpetrated under the cloak of religion
. The Angolan government states a ban on Islam since 2015 “the process of legalization of Islam has not been approved by the Ministry of Justice and Human rights, their mosques are closed until further notice. Islam is deemed contradictory to the customs of Angola culture - it is pronounced a sect”. [A sect is a subgroup of a religious, political or philosophical belief system, usually an offshoot of a larger religious group.] Do we declare Islam a supremacist cult since to declare it a sect suggests agreement that Islam has a linage prior to Muhammad?
Request for state legislation that includes the wording ‘For any domestic issue, no court should consider or use as precedent any foreign or international law, regulation, or court decision.’
How to Contact Your Elected Officials
Learn how to get in touch with your federal, state, and local elected leaders.
Stacks Image 203680
Use GovTrack to find out who represents you in Congress and what bills they have sponsored :
Stacks Image 203695
Stacks Image 203674
Stacks Image 203560

Why is the push for globalization tied to executive decisions which leave out democratic debate? Is globalization or the resistance to globalization a ‘simple’ matter? Will globalization take place with the consent of the people, or by force of arms and restraint of inherent freedoms? Obamas legacy may prove equivalent to that of a traitor to the United States and its people.

The voice of Jihad and Globalism.
Is the Jihad vision of one religion similar to the Globalist vision of a ‘One World’ trade and legal governance system? Is the strained focus to make it happen a type of myopathy that does not appreciate the small interactions among individual people that gather themselves for a great cause? Is that democracy gone awry? Saying and thinking they are acting for the greater good, while being directed by the sin of ego holding itself above

Stacks Image 203402
Islamic State has “fully operational branches” in 18 countries
August 3, 2016 12:25 pm By Christine Williams 16 Comments

According to a leaked document, the Islamic State has “fully operational branches” in 18 countries, representing a tripling in the expansion of areas the jihadi group is now operating in around the world.

Not long ago, it was reported that the Islamic State was quietly preparing for the loss of the caliphate, due to the dwindling numbers of its jihad fighters in Iraq and Syria, which was attributed to the U.S.-led coalition and Russian-backed forces. Intelligence officials warned that this loss was already making the Islamic State desperate, so the jihad group was compensating for the loss via a new phase of jihad planning in the West, including more insidious and covert operations.

The Islamic State issues repeated calls for lone wolf attacks; it has foreign fighters in the tens of thousands; it has promised to infiltrate the refugee stream; and in today’s news, it was announced that 36-year-old Nicholas Young, a Metro Transit police officer in DC,  was arrested at his workplace, Metropolitan Police Headquarters in Washington, and charged with attempting to provide material support to the Islamic State, marking the first time a U.S. law enforcement officer has been accused of trying to aid the Islamic State.

Still, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and their liberal cronies — at home and abroad — a group that sadly includes the Pope, refuse to publicly acknowledge that the West is at war with Islamic jihadists. Yet this is a ‘pseudo’ religious war that could ultimately be a terminal threat to public safety and freedoms.

The greatest human rights violation today is the persecution of religious minorities within Islamic countries. Christians are the largest numbers by far. Half of Iraqi Christians have fled rather than die. Countless numbers of their churches have been destroyed. Syrian towns that have been Christian for 2000 years are being annihilated. The 1300 year march of terror against the Copts continues in Egypt today. Christians jailed in Iran are tortured. Christians and Hindus are persecuted to near annihilation in Pakistan. Also Buddhists in Thailand, Hindus in India and Jews in Israel are routinely assaulted and murdered. In addition, sex slavery and other human rights atrocities run rampant.

Islamic tyranny is threatening America and the world! This enemy that heralds civilizational destruction is cloaked in what is called a religion - but it is in fact a doctrine that tolerates no other culture or religion. Islam is a ‘religion’ that couches and promotes slavery and murder - and it is avowed to destroy human rights.
Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Muslims are the biggest threat to Muslims, contrary to Obama and Islamophobia narrative
August 24, 2016 2:35 pm By Christine Williams

In September 2014, Obama stated that “ISIL is not ‘Islamic.’ No religion condones the killing of innocents. And the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim.”

That statement is as ludicrous, as Muslims killing Muslims is a longstanding practice. Published in an article by the Asian Image, a news site for British Muslims and Hindus:

“So, whilst we may well moan of Islamophobia, let’s face it, the biggest threat to Muslims are in fact other Muslims.” Glasgow shopkeeper Asad Shah was murdered for “disrespecting Islam” and then there was the killing of a Rochdale Muslim leader by fellow Muslims for “practicing black magic”.

If Muslims are to be concerned about being victimized, they need to look in their own backyard, as Muslim-on-Muslim attacks are a much bigger threat to Muslims than the invented term “Islamophobia.”  Some Muslims just don’t think other Muslims are Muslim enough, so they kill them and/or marginalize them:
“As a Muslim you are more likely to be abused for your belief by another Muslim on social media than you are from a non-Muslim.”

The fact is that Muslims are killing Muslims in droves, but Israel and Westerners get condemned. Since 1948, over 10 million Muslims have been killed by Muslims. The propaganda about “Islamophobia” is glaring, and is clearly an agenda-driven tool to subjugate Westerners into dhimmitude.

“Muslim on Muslim hatred is far more of a problem than hatred against non-Muslims”, Asian Image, by Amjad Malik, August 23, 2016:
The idea that one deserves to die for blasphemy is something that has been common in Muslim culture for many years.

Recently, Tanveer Ahmed was sentenced for the brutal murder of Asad Shah. The case heard that Ahmed was incensed over the beliefs held by Mr Shah. He then travelled to Glasgow to brutally murder the family man and shopkeeper.

What was shocking was he held no remorse for the killing. This belief that one will be rewarded in the afterlife for upholding the name of Islam in this way is clearly a major issue within the Muslim community not only here but worldwide.

Individuals are being taught that blasphemy should be punishable by death. Speaking up against such incidents is the job of all the imams and religious leaders in this country. But you are unlikely to hear clear condemnations.
To condemn this is to some way suggest that you agree with the opposing view.

Which isn’t the case at all but you will find most Muslims will not publicly speak up about blasphemy in case they themselves get drawn into the argument. It is an argument you are unlikely to win.

In this case Ahmed clearly did not feel that Mr Shah had the right to follow his own beliefs. Sadly, I have spoken to many people who do agree with that.

You have Imams and religious leaders who will publicly talk of Islam being a religion of peace but privately condone the killing of individuals who are deemed to have blasphemed. Even if the case is unclear we will condemn them.

What is just as worrying is that in the UK we now have groups and individuals who are have learnt the benefit of keeping quiet on particular issues.

This is not just a Muslim problem though as all religions have similar questions to answer.

As a Muslim you are more likely to be abused for your belief by another Muslim on social media than you are from a non-Muslim. This can be anything from Eid celebrations to simply commemorating the Prophet’s birthday.
One only has to view the opinions of the next generation of ‘Islamic experts’ on social media who will spend hours and days encouraging their army of followers to spread this narrative.

This is not just a male thing either. It is clear that women are as equally prone to this idea that they must abuse others who do not follow the ‘correct path.’ We Muslims have become obsessed with pointing out minor differences and the belief prevails that one is more superior than the next person because one follows a different school of thought.

And whilst we may well like to highlight the rampant Islamophobia, you are unlikely to say anything of the religious schools of thought and organizations that clearly are teaching young children that they are inherently better Muslims than others in their own community…

…We have groups and schools who receive public money and are following set beliefs that hammer home the message that one is more of a Muslim because one follows a particular Islamic theology. These are not extremists. Publicly not anyway.

So, whilst we may well moan of Islamophobia, let’s face it, the biggest threat to Muslims are in fact other Muslims…
Islamic Supremacism: The True Source of Muslim ‘Grievances’
Why Muslim sensitivities are so easily bruised.
May 14, 2015

Raymond Ibrahim - Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. 

In the ongoing debate (or debacle) concerning free speech/expression and Muslim grievance—most recently on exhibition in Garland, where two “jihadis” opened fire on a “Prophet Muhammad” art contest organized by Pamela Geller—one thing has become clear: the things non-Muslims can do to provoke Islamic violence is limitless—and far exceeds cartoons.

Writes Victor Davis Hanson for example:
[Pamela] Geller, and not the jihadists who sought to kill those with whom they disagreed, was supposedly at fault. Her critics could not figure out that radical Muslims object not just to caricatures and cartoons, but to any iconographic representation of Mohammed. Had Geller offered invitations to artists to compete for the most majestic statue of the Prophet, jihadists might still have tried to use violence to stop it. Had she held a beauty pageant for gay Muslims or a public wedding for gay Muslim couples, jihadists would certainly have shown up.  Had she offered a contest for the bravest Islamic apostates, jihadists would have galvanized to kill the non-believers. Had she organized a support rally for Israel, jihadists might well have tried to kill the innocent, as they did in Paris when they murderously attacked a kosher market.

But it’s even worse than that.  The list of things that non-Muslims can do to provoke Islamic violence grows by the day and accords with the list of things subjugated “infidels” must never do, lest they provoke their Islamic overlords as laid out by Islamic law, or Sharia.

As such, the West needs finally to come to terms with the root source of these ubiquitous, easily sparked “Muslim grievances.”

Enter Muslim supremacism.
Islamic doctrine—which teaches that Muslims are superior to non-Muslims,  who are further compared to dogs and cattle—imbues Muslims with this sense of supremacism over the rest of mankind.  And a good portion of Islamic history—when Muslims were for centuries on the warpath, subjugating large swathes of the Old World—further enforced it.

This sense of Islamic supremacism was dramatically humbled after European powers defeated and colonized much of the Muslim world.  Bred on the notion that “might makes right,” Muslims, for a time, even began emulating the unapologetic and triumphant West.  Turkey, for example, went from being the epitome of Islamic supremacy and jihad against Christian Europe for five centuries to desperately emulating Europe in all ways.  By the mid-1900s, Turkey became perhaps the most Westernized/secularized “Muslim” nation.

Today, however, as Western peoples willingly capitulate to Islamic mores—in the name of tolerance, multiculturalism, political correctness, or just plain cowardice—Muslims are becoming more emboldened, making more demands and threats, as they realize they need not militarily defeat the West in order to resuscitate their supremacist birthright.  (More appeasement from the bullied always brings about more demands from the bully.)

To understand all this, one need only look to Muslim behavior where it is dominant and not in need of pretense, that is, in the Muslim world.  There, non-Muslim minorities are habitually treated as inferiors.  But unlike the many Western appeasers who willingly accept a subservient role to Islam, these religious minorities have no choice in the matter.

Thus in Pakistan, as Christian children were singing carols inside their church, Muslim men from a nearby mosque barged in with an axe, destroyed the furniture and altar, and beat the children.  Their justification for such violence?  “You are disturbing our prayers…. How dare you use the mike and speakers?”

And when a Muslim slapped a Christian and the latter reciprocated, the Muslim exclaimed “How dare a Christian slap me?!” Anti-Christian violence immediately ensued.

All of this revolves around what I call the “How Dare You?!” phenomenon.  Remember it next time “progressive” media, politicians, and other talking heads tell you that Muslim mayhem and outbursts are products of grievances against the West. Missing from their rationale is the supremacist base of these grievances.

The Conditions of Omar, a foundational medieval Muslim text dealing with how subjugated “infidels” must behave, spells out their inferiority vis-à-vis Muslims.  Among other stipulations, it commands conquered Christians not to raise their “voices during prayer or readings in churches anywhere near Muslims” (hence the axe-attack in Pakistan).  It also commands them not to display any signs of Christianity—specifically Bibles and crosses—not to build churches, and not to criticize the prophet.  (See Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians for my translation of “The Conditions of Omar.”)

If the supremacist nature of Islamic law is still not clear enough, the Conditions literally commands Christians to give up their seats to Muslims as a show of respect.

By way of analogy, consider when Rosa Parks, a black woman, refused to give up her bus seat to white passengers.  Any white supremacist at the time had sincere grievances: how dare she think herself equal?

But were such grievances legitimate? Should they have been accommodated?  Are the endless “grievances” of Muslims legitimate and should they be accommodated?  These are the questions missing from the debate about easily bruised Muslim sensitivities.

One can go on and on with examples from all around the Islamic world:
In Turkey, a Bible publishing house was once stormed and three of its Christian employees tortured, disemboweled, and finally murdered.  One suspect later said: “We didn’t do this for ourselves, but for our religion [Islam]…. Our religion is being destroyed.”

In Egypt, after a 17-year-old Christian student refused to obey his Muslim teacher’s orders to cover up his cross, the teacher and some Muslim students attacked, beat, and ultimately murdered the teenager.
These Turkish and Egyptian Muslims were truly aggrieved: Islamic law makes clear that Christians must not “produce a cross or Bible” around Muslims. How dare the Egyptian student and Turkish Bible publishers refuse to comply—thus grieving their Muslim murderers?

In Indonesia, where it is becoming next to impossible for Christians to build churches, Christians often congregate outside to celebrate Christmas—only to be attacked by Muslims hurling cow dung and bags of urine at the Christians as they pray.

These Muslims are also sincerely aggrieved: how dare these Christians think they can be a church when the Conditions forbid it?

In short, anytime non-Muslims dare to overstep their Sharia-designated “inferior” status—which far exceeds drawing cartoons—supremacist Muslims will become violently aggrieved.

From here, one can begin to understand the ultimate Muslim grievance: Israel.
For if “infidel” Christian minorities are deemed inferior and attacked by aggrieved Muslims for exercising their basic human rights, like freedom of worship, how must Muslims feel about Jews—the descendants of pigs and apes, according to the Koran—exercising power and authority over fellow Muslims in what is perceived to be Muslim land?

How dare they?!
Of course, if grievances against Israel were really about justice and displaced Palestinians, Muslims—and their Western appeasers—would be aggrieved by the fact that millions of Christians are currently being displaced by Muslim invaders.

Needless to say, they are not.

So the next time you hear that Muslim rage and terrorism are products of grievance—from cartoons to territorial disputes and everything in between—remember that this is absolutely true.  But these “grievances” are not predicated on any human standards of equality or justice, only a supremacist worldview.
Stacks Image 203486
Stacks Image 203480
Stacks Image 203474
‘One perspective only’ - That is the American Perspective!
Stacks Image 203427