Happy Thanksgiving!

big_bird_thanksgiving

Every Columbus Day and Thanksgiving I see this nonsense that’s supposed to make Americans feel guilty because some of our ancestors, hundreds of years ago, conquered the American Indians. Idiotic cartoons insinuate that we should abandon our immigration laws and quit celebrating holidays that celebrate our nationhood.

Granted, the American Indians were wronged in many instances, such as the trail of tears and Wounded Knee massacre. Forcing them onto reservations wasn’t cool either. None of that can be changed. Thankfully, many of them are still here and from what I can see with all these casinos, they’re doing better than they were in 1850. I hope they continue to thrive.

I don’t feel the slightest sorry for them in losing their land (a good deal of which they sold anyway). Why, because I’m mean? No, because that’s the way the world has always been. People have conquered (and bought) the land of others throughout world history. Maps from the Roman Empire days bear little resemblance to modern maps. Archaeologists say the American Indians immigrated from Asia. Us white guys came from the Caucasus mountains of what is now southern Russia. Before all that, everyone (supposedly) started out in Africa.

To summarize: My ancestors came, they saw, they kicked ass. Some people lost. Oh well. The year is 2016. Eat, drink, and be merry!

Build the wall and save Mexico

trump_wall

A wall on the southern border (along with patrols, of course) could be the best thing to ever happen to Mexico. By us taking in millions of their impoverished, they never have to change their ways.

What we’re doing now is called enabling. Just like the alcoholic’s spouse who’s constantly cleaning up the other’s messes.

Imagine a Mexico where the people get fed up and demand change. Imagine a Mexico that actually had to fix it’s own corruption. Now that’s a Mexico that can thrive, with real hope for a future besides being a third-world nation for a change.

But no, Democrats and Mexican politicians like things just the way they are. Democrats get new voters, some Americans get cheap labor, and Mexican politicians keep the peasants from forming an uprising. To say otherwise gets people like me labeled a “racist”, though race has nothing whatsoever to do with it. If we were being invaded by millions of Swedes, I’d demand their deportation as well.

The American people have spoken. We’ve had enough and we’re building the fucking wall whether brainwashed college students like it or not. Mexico will hate it. Their press will scream bloody murder. Ignore their propaganda. In the end, the Mexican people will win and the American people won’t have to put up with being a doormat to Mexico. It’s time to DRAIN THE MEXICAN SWAMP.

Who’s watching the watchers?

facebook_news
This article
today on bbc.com is most troubling. Since you and I are apparently too dumb to check sources and make up our own minds, the partisans at Facebook and Google have anointed themselves judges of what’s “real news” and what’s “fake”.

If they just leave shit alone, it will work itself out in time as people realize when they’re being hoodwinked and stop visiting bullshit news sites. In my opinion, the Huffington Post publishes all kinds of nonsense, even outright lies. A few others immediately come to mind like Media Matters, factcheck.org, The Sierra Club. Somehow I doubt they’ll be included on that list of “fake” news sites. I saw just such a proposes list published today in the Los Angeles Times, written by a college professor. As > 90% of college professors are liberals, it wasn’t terribly surprising to find conservative news sites like Breitbart and RedState listed among the “fake”.

Who the hell are Google and Facebook to make these decisions? Their websites are, after all, private property so they can do whatever the hell they want. But when the majority of people search for answers to important questions on Google, I’m not at all comfortable with Google censoring out the answers they don’t like. Do we really want Facebook, another hyper-partisan company that has a poor reputation for honesty and transparency to be deciding what news is real and what’s nonsense?

It’s common knowledge that Google is, by far, the world’s leading search engine. As such, it has probably achieved that legal level we can call a monopoly. In the strict sense of the word, they are not a real monopoly because there are other search engines like Yahoo!, Bing, and DuckDuckGo. The problem with the others is that they don’t work as well. Google, for the most part, holds a virtual monopoly on information. And THAT is dangerous.

Back in ancient times, before the internet, if you wanted to get a message out, you had to either pay a publisher to run an ad or convince them to print your book. The internet gave everyone the ability to publish. It’s an information revolution the likes we haven’t seen since Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press. Now EVERYONE can have a printing press.

But when a small handful of companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter decide what most people see when they go online, they need to think long and hard before they go injecting their own political biases into content that people trust to be non-partisan. There’s a reason most people don’t trust news media outlets in the first place. Unfortunately, most everyone seems to blindly trust these companies. If they, especially Google, are on the verge of violating the public’s trust. That usually follows with regulations and/or litigation. Do we need to split up Google like we did with AT&T in the 80s?

Democracy in historical context

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage..”
–(attributed to Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, 1887)

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”
–(John Adams, 2nd President of the USA)

“Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotisms.”
— Aristotle

 

Voting machines behaving badly

When I voted yesterday, the machine REMOVED my selection for president. I voted a straight Republican ticket. On the next screen, the selection for the Republican candidate in every race was selected EXCEPT for Trump/Pence!

The poll worker was insistent that it was user error. Bullshit. I know how to use computers and that was no “user error”. I filed a complaint with the county, my local Republican Party office, and the Trump campaign. I also reported it to a local Fox TV affiliate, in case they cared.

A local representative from the Republican Party called me. He explained that unless I had followed a certain procedure (which I’m sure few people know about) he would have nothing to go to court with. What I should have done is stopped before I made the correction and shown a poll worker what happened. They would ask me to repeat the process. If it works, great. Problem solved. Otherwise, I have to get 2 poll workers to sign a sworn affidavit stating what happened. I’m sure the lawyers among us are nodding their heads in agreement. The rest of us learn a lesson in civics.

Before correcting my vote, I considered showing the poll worker but how could I prove what happened? They could claim that I must have unselected the president (user error). If I repeated it in front of them and the machine behaves itself, they win again. Only if the machine repeats the error would it be caught. I figured that if that was the case, then others would notice and the poll workers would then shut down the machine. However, if you really want to cheat an election with software, would you make it so obvious? Call me paranoid, but I do some computer programming and the code would be very simple to do it randomly. Removing the presidential selection every time is going to raise flags. But do it about 10-15% of the time and you can have a big impact with minimum risk – if people aren’t paying attention.

Mine is not the only such report of voting machine problems. This is happening all over the state and probably the country. If people don’t check their ballots, we’re doomed.

Enough with the temperature “feels like” nonsense

The National Weather Service, one of our government’s biggest purveyors of the man-made global warming myth, has been pushing this “feels like” temperature for at least a couple of years now. I’m also hearing radio stations mention the Accuweather “RealFeel” temperature.

After giving the actual outdoor temperature, they throw in this extra nonsense about what the temperature “really feels like”. So if it’s 95 degrees (F) outside, they’ll say something like, “It’s 95 degrees out there but it FEELS like 104”.

This is bullshit and it needs to stop. There’s no such thing as a “feels like” temperature. When it’s 95 degrees out, it feels like just that – 95 degrees. It’s scientifically impossible for it to “feel like” the temperature is anything but 95. The justification they use is humidity. They figure that since high humidity adds to the discomfort caused by a high temperature, then they can claim that it “feels hotter” than it really is. For example, 100 degrees in the desert (like Las Vegas) is more tolerable than 100 degrees in humid climates (like Miami). When the mercury reads 100 F, it’s no hotter in Miami than in Vegas but it feels more uncomfortable and this is often interpreted as feeling hotter. But HOW MUCH hotter? Two degrees? Five? Who decides? It’s just like the “wind chill index”. All nonsense. When it’s 10 degrees outside, it may feel colder with the wind blowing but it’s not colder and no one can tell you how cold you “feel”.

So what’s the point? Why do NOAA and others think they need to tell us this “feels like” temperature? If you pay any attention to politics, the answer should be obvious. NOAA, along with every leftist group you can think of (like the “news media”), has been pushing this myth that human activity is causing the Earth’s temperature to rise. The truth is, global temperatures are not rising like they originally claimed (notice how they call it “climate change” now instead of “global warming”) and even if it were, there isn’t a damned thing anyone can about it. But for the sake of their political objectives, they have to perpetuate the myth and if they can’t get away with lying about the daily temperature, at least they can make something up to make you THINK it’s hotter than it was “back in the day”.

Living life better by looking forward to death

If I am to go to Heaven when I die, and if Heaven is the incredibly wonderful place as described in the Bible, shouldn’t I be looking forward to it? Should I therefore not look forward to my own death? I am not depressed or even sad. However, it seems that the ultimate exercise in faith is to not fear death. From what I’ve read about near-death experiences, most of them say they wanted to stay where they were. And they hadn’t even seen their new crib yet! Again I note, I do not in any way intend to hasten my own day of reckoning, but from a philosophical point of view, perhaps I would do well to follow the old saying, “live each day as if it were your last”.

Thankfully, there seems to be something at work in us that prevents us from killing ourselves upon making this realization. Is it doubt? That implies a lack of faith, which I’m trying to increase here. Maybe it’s just survival instinct, God made us this way.

Would I not do everything in my power to defend and preserve the lives of my own children, grandchildren, parents, siblings, relatives, etc? If I were to come upon a man having a heart attack, would I not do anything I can to save him? I would certainly take a bullet for my kid and I sure as hell wouldn’t just walk past a heart-attack victim and wish him all the best in the afterlife.

Having such an instinct to survive is necessary to preserve and perpetuate the human race. It would be very abnormal for any animal to not attempt to preserve it’s own life and the lives of its offspring. It’s all about being fruitful and multiplying.

Still, knowing that I have something to look forward to when I die allows me to fear growing old a little less.

While death will hopefully not come today, it WILL EVENTUALLY come. If I’m lucky enough to get advance warning (something like cancer vs. a car accident), I hope I can take comfort in knowing that the Lord has my name written in the Book of Life and I haven’t a thing to worry about whether I’m cured or not. In fact, taking on such an attitude now while I’m healthy might even help me live longer as such an attitude is surely to lead to a reduction in stress. Why worry about anything here when I’m only here temporarily?

I have never had a life-threatening illness or accident but when I do, this philosophy will most surely be tested. I hope to pass that test when it comes. Meanwhile, I’m going to continue trying to learn more about God and the afterlife so I can look forward to meeting Him face-to-face all the more.

Black Lives Matter hypocricy on display

 

DPD_July_2016“To assign the actions of one person to an entire movement is dangerous and irresponsible.” – Black Lives Matter

Well isn’t that just rich? It seems to me that if Black Lives Matter would take their own advice instead of inciting violence and mass murder, maybe those cops would be alive today.

Thus is the fruit of “Black Lives Matter”, the leftist terrorist group funded by billionaire instigator George Soros. That was their official statement the day after a racist sniper murdered 5 and injured 8 other Dallas and DART police officers who were busy trying to keep protesters safe during a Black Lives Matter protest on July 7, 2016. No offerings of sympathy for those who lost loved ones.

This also happened in a city that has a large per-capita black population that is reflected among the police department’s own ranks and whose own chief is black, the very well-respected David Brown. The Dallas Police Department had absolutely nothing to do with the incidents in cities over 500 miles away for which these people were protesting. Yet they and their families paid the price. “Black Lives Matter” has blood on their hands.

As a reminder, these are the same people who got people chanting phrases like, “What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!” and “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon!” But nah, we’re supposed to just ignore all that when their organizers get invited to the White House by our so-called leader, Barack Obama.

The late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. must be turning over in his grave.

If you listen to the liberals who support them, the rest of us are supposed to believe that they’re just a benign “civil rights movement” with a beef against bad cops. Such cops are rare and always have been. But in a day when everyone has a video camera the ability to communicate with hundreds of other people within seconds, the court of public opinion (aka anarchy) takes over. History has repeatedly proven that mob rule is dangerous.

As is on full display, “Black Lives Matter”, once again, is responsible for the loss of more lives than any of the police officers on display in their false narrative. As the reader may recall, the whole “movement” was spawned as a result of a LIE that has been disproven time and again regarding what happened in Ferguson, MO to one thug Michael Brown.

How many more people need to die to promote this lie?

Annoying radio commercials that backfire

I’ve been a news and talk radio junkie since about 1999. I’ve enjoyed listening to many shows, going all the way back to TalkNet days. Today, I alternate between two stations in Texas, one of which has been my favorite since I moved to Dallas in 2004: WBAP, along with a few stations I stream from elsewhere across the fruited plain. Unfortunately, my favorite station WBAP is losing me as a listener and they can blame their own short-sighted advertising staff.

Perhaps I’m a little more sensitive to this than other talk radio listeners because I listen almost all day, from about 9:30 am until 6:30 pm, Monday through Friday. I catch some shows on live radio and others via internet audio streams. You are wise to note that whatever broadcast to which I am listening occurs in the background of my workday. Therefore, I catch only bits and pieces here and there as most of my attention is focused on my work. Nevertheless, I do hear the most important bits.

The problem? Certain commercial formats drive me up the wall and in most cases, make me tune you out not just for that 30-second spot, but for the next 2-10 minutes.

Yes, commercials always suck but most people recognize that they pay the bills for the broadcasters. However, some commercials suck way more than others and that’s when I tune out. I have a little speaker mute button on my keyboard that gets used a LOT.

Overplay:    For as long as I can remember, one of WBAP’s biggest advertisers is a car dealership called Classic Chevrolet. These guys are an advertising salesman’s dream (I should know, I used to sell newspaper ads). They’ve been using the same voice talent for years, some monotone guy who never takes a breath. About once a month, he records one or two spots that WBAP dutifully plays over and over and over and over again throughout the day. Almost every commercial break – there’s Mr. Annoying. Yes, I know you’re the biggest Chevy dealer in America, you’ve told me 10,000+ times. Yes, I know it’s TRUCK MONTH! It’s always TRUCK MONTH! Nowadays, I just mute the radio every time they start talking about traffic conditions because I know what’s coming next. I haven’t listened beyond his first two words in years.

“But look!” Their ad reps will say, “We reached you!” Yes, you did, and I promise you this: if I were ever inclined to buy a Chevy, I wouldn’t buy it from Classic if it were the last Chevy store on Earth. [ Truth be told, I swore off Government Motors forever when they took a taxpayer-funded bailout but that’s beside the point. ]

Fast Fine Print:    Here’s another type of ad that I can’t silence fast enough. You’ve heard them. For some reason, certain companies think they need to have someone read a paragraph of fine print as fast as possible. Audio compression techniques make these ads REALLY annoying. It seems to be mostly sweepstakes and home mortgage commercials. I really don’t care what your address is and no one is even trying to understand what you’re saying but you ARE irritating listeners. Some commercials are fine with saying “terms and conditions apply” or “see blah-blah.com for official rules”. I’m cool with that. But the minute you get annoying, I’m tuning out.

Crank It UP!     Nothing says you love your audience like cranking up the volume when they don’t expect it. Years ago when televisions were more primitive, people bought devices that plugged into the TV to stop this nonsense. Thirty years later and believe it or not, advertisers still do this shit. Maybe it helps them get the attention of drunk people at 3 am. I can see no other practical rationale.

Are there any radio commercials I DO like? Not really, but I don’t turn off the radio or mute the stream when they come on. The golden rule that’s lost on advertising MBAs with no experience in the real world is this: Respect me as a listener and I’ll respect you enough to at least not completely tune out your ad. But the minute you get on my nerves by trying to get my attention, I’ll blacklist your ads like I blacklist certain other businesses who treat their customers badly (Target, Walgreens, CVS).

At its root, this is a lesson in psychology. Think about it this way. A pretty lady is sitting alone in a bar. Two guys try to strike up a conversation with her. One is kind, respectful, and takes a real interest in her. The other is more aggressive and dying for her attention. He seems mostly interested in a purely physical encounter. Which guy do you think has a better chance at getting her phone number? The only difference in advertising is the size of the audience.

Does the Quran promote violence?

Read some of this, especially the verses, and tell me again how Islam is a “peaceful religion” and worships the same God as us Christians and Jews. Except… their’s is the world’s only religion that teaches to kill all non-believers. It’s no wonder the “moderate muslims” are complacent and allow the cancer to grow and spread.

From thereligionofpeace.com

Question:

Does the Quran really contain dozens of verses promoting violence?

Summary Answer:

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called ‘hypocrites’ and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.

The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God, however this can work both ways. Most of today’s Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book’s call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Apologists cater to their preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.

Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad’s own martial legacy – and that of his companions – along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.

The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) – “And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing…

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)” (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word “persecution” by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution – “idtihad” – and oppression – a variation of “z-l-m” – do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from “fitna” which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until “religion is for Allah” – ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

Quran (2:244) – “Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things.”

Quran (2:216) – “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.” Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

Quran (3:56) – “As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help.”

Quran (3:151) – “Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority”. This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be ‘joining companions to Allah’).

Quran (4:74) – “Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.” The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today’s suicide bombers.

Quran (4:76) – “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”

Quran (4:89) – “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”

Quran (4:95) – “Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-” This passage criticizes “peaceful” Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah’s eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that “Jihad” doesn’t mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man’s protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).

Quran (4:104) – “And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain…” Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

Quran (5:33) – “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement”

Quran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them” No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

Quran (8:15) – “O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey’s end.”

Quran (8:39) – “And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah” Some translations interpret “fitna” as “persecution”, but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there – just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad’s intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until “religion is only for Allah”, meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that “Allah must have no rivals.”

Quran (8:57) – “If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember.”

Quran (8:67) – “It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land…”

Quran (8:59-60) – “And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah’s Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy.”

Quran (8:65) – “O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight…”

Quran (9:5) – “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them.” According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion’s Five Pillars). This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had the power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.

Quran (9:14) – “Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people.” Humiliating and hurting non-believers not only has the blessing of Allah, but it is ordered as a means of carrying out his punishment and even “healing” the hearts of Muslims.

Quran (9:20) – “Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah’s way are of much greater worth in Allah’s sight. These are they who are triumphant.” The Arabic word interpreted as “striving” in this verse is the same root as “Jihad”. The context is obviously holy war.

Quran (9:29) – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” “People of the Book” refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. This was one of the final “revelations” from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad’s companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.

Quran (9:30) – “And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!”

Quran (9:38-39) – “O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place.” This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.

Quran (9:41) – “Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew.” See also the verse that follows (9:42) – “If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them” This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).

Quran (9:73) – “O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.” Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today’s devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.

Quran (9:88) – “But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper.”

Quran (9:111) – “Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.” How does the Quran define a true believer?

Quran (9:123) – “O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness.”

Quran (17:16) – “And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction.” Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is “utter destruction.” (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).

Quran (18:65-81) – This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with “special knowledge” who does things which don’t seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would “grieve” his parents by “disobedience and ingratitude.” He was killed so that Allah could provide them a ‘better’ son. (Note: This is one reason why honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.1-2).)

Quran (21:44) – “We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?”

Quran (25:52) – “Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness…” “Strive against” is Jihad – obviously not in the personal context. It’s also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.

Quran (33:60-62) – “If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter.” This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered “merciless” and “horrible murder” in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to “fight in the way of Allah” (3:167) and hence don’t act as Muslims should), those with “diseased hearts” (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and “alarmists” or “agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad’s biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today’s terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah’s eternal word to Muslim generations.

Quran (47:3-4) – “Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord… So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah’s Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)… If it had been Allah’s Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost.” Those who reject Allah are to be killed in Jihad. The wounded are to be held captive for ransom. The only reason Allah doesn’t do the dirty work himself is to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test.

Quran (47:35) – “Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: “have the upper hand”) for Allah is with you,”

Quran (48:17) – “There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom.” Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means ‘spiritual struggle.’ Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.

Quran (48:29) – “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves” Islam is not about treating everyone equally. There are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for ‘hard’ or ‘ruthless’ in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as ‘painful’ or severe’ in verse 16.

Quran (61:4) – “Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way” Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to “battle array” meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9): “He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist.” (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.

Quran (61:10-12) – “O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of ‘Adn – Eternity [‘Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success.” This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above). It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.

Quran (66:9) – “O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey’s end.” The root word of “Jihad” is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include “hypocrites” – those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.

From the Hadith:

Bukhari (52:177) – Allah’s Apostle said, “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.”

Bukhari (52:256) – The Prophet… was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, “They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans).” In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.

Bukhari (52:65) – The Prophet said, ‘He who fights that Allah’s Word, Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah’s Cause. Muhammad’s words are the basis for offensive Jihad – spreading Islam by force. This is how it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today.

Bukhari (52:220) – Allah’s Apostle said… ‘I have been made victorious with terror’

Abu Dawud (14:2526) – The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, “There is no god but Allah” and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist)

Abu Dawud (14:2527) – The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious

Muslim (1:33) – the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah

Bukhari (8:387) – Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally.”

Muslim (1:30) – “The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah.”

Bukhari (52:73) – “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords’.”

Bukhari (11:626) – [Muhammad said:] “I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes.”

Muslim (1:149) – “Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause…”

Muslim (20:4645) – “…He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa’id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!”

Muslim (20:4696) – “the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: ‘One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'”

Muslim (19:4321-4323) – Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers. His response: “They are of them (meaning the enemy).”

Muslim (19:4294) – “When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him… He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war… When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them… If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them.”

Bukhari 1:35 “The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty ( if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise ( if he is killed).”

Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, “Kill any Jew who falls under your power.” Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad’s men because he insulted Islam. Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill. An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.

Tabari 9:69 “Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us” The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam.

Tabari 17:187 “‘By God, our religion (din) from which we have departed is better and more correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.’ And they returned to their former religion.” The words of a group of Christians who had converted to Islam, but realized their error after being shocked by the violence and looting committed in the name of Allah. The price of their decision to return to a religion of peace was that the men were beheaded and the woman and children enslaved by the caliph Ali.

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 484: – “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 990: – Lest anyone think that cutting off someone’s head while screaming ‘Allah Akbar!’ is a modern creation, here is an account of that very practice under Muhammad, who seems to approve.

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: – “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah.” Muhammad’s instructions to his men prior to a military raid.

Saifur Rahman, The Sealed Nectar p.227-228 – “Embrace Islam… If you two accept Islam, you will remain in command of your country; but if your refuse my Call, you’ve got to remember that all of your possessions are perishable. My horsemen will appropriate your land, and my Prophethood will assume preponderance over your kingship.” One of several letters from Muhammad to rulers of other countries. The significance is that the recipients were not making war or threatening Muslims. Their subsequent defeat and subjugation by Muhammad’s armies was justified merely on the basis of their unbelief.