Amil Imani on the Terrorist's Bill of Rights

The following post is from Larwyn as sent to me in an e-mail. This is a must-read so that we will continue to know what we are facing or rather the enemy who is fighting us - can you say "Twin Towers?" This enemy is self-declared and relentless. With the help of Democrats and the immigration bill of 2007, terrorists who have entered from Mexico, trained in Venezuela, will be laughing all the way to set up their bank accounts. This is serious. As Larwyn says, we cannot give up. The Immigration Bill of 2007 [see excerpt - Where's the fence] would move us one step closer to the loss of our nation, its culture, its freedoms, and its respect for the individual. Please read - from Larwyn: ~~~~~~~~~ I [Larwyn] don't want to dilute the warning in this article by Imani. Only add that the Immigration Bill will certainly speed up the processes he's outlined. Why we cannot give up. Terrorists' Bill of Rights by Amil Imani Amil Imani The Constitution of the United States here is one of the most glorious documents promoting individual liberty ever written. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is also the first section of the Bill of Rights. It is arguably the most important part of the U.S. Constitution. It reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." The framers of the Constitution were acutely aware of the danger of religious infringement in the affairs of the State or the State's sponsorship of a particular faith. Recalling the tragic clashes of the two in Europe, the founding fathers aimed to guard against either religion or the State transgressing in the purview of the other. In the interest of impartiality, the authors of the Constitution did not define what constitutes a religion. Presently, a plethora of sects, cults, orders-all claiming to be religion-cover the length and the breadth of the land. So long as these "religions" minister to the legitimate spiritual needs of their congregation without threatening the rights of others, there is no reason for concern. However, when one or more of these claimants strive to undermine the very Constitution that protects them in order to impose their belief and way of life, serious problems arise. One such religion is Islam in all its forms. Islam is more than a religion. It is an ideological superstructure encompassing all institutions, social, economic, political, military, civil, legal, educational, and even private affairs. It is of relatively recent arrival in the continent of and is rapidly burgeoning in number and influence. Therefore, it is imprudent to ignore the threat it poses to the larger religious and secular communities. Can a religion or a cult become so powerful and so uncivilized that it can hide behind the Constitution to preach an ideology of hatred and advocate a plan to destroy our society and subvert our government? We need to consider whether our Constitution enables and protects "religions" that are being used to put our very society and our freedoms in jeopardy. Islam seeks nothing less than a total global domination. The word Islam literally means "submission" or "surrender", the kind that comes by force or fraud. Its scripture must be taken literally; its provisions are intended to dominate every waking moment in the life of a believer. There is no room for being a half-hearted Muslim and no toleration of watering down its invocations. The true nature and the threat of Islam is evident in the Quran -a document of exclusion, hatred and violence that shapes the Muslims' thinking and behavior. The Quran was perhaps appropriate for a different people of a bygone era-a people of stunted development, a people who preferred to blindly follow someone than to think for themselves, to hate than love, and to seek and inflict death than to nurture and celebrate life. Freedom is very fragile. Anything that protects freedom can also become an Achilles heel for those blessed with freedom. This is because freedom always entails the unfortunate ability to use one's rights to destroy the freedoms and rights of others. People can use the protections afforded them by the Constitution to inflict great harm to those who live within the law. We know this is the main argument against the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment institution protects private firearms ownership, yet we are endlessly reminded by some politicians that gun ownership can be dangerous, and like any freedom the right to own and use firearms can be misused. This is why an unfettered right to own a gun has been subject to a multitude of regulations and restrictions. Given that the formerly vast and largely segregated planet has shrunk into a "global village," the disparate peoples isolated from one another for millennia are now a village community. These thrown-together diverse people are in urgent need of a set of common rules that would allow individuals as well as groups maximum latitude of faith, coupled with responsibility, and free of any practices that infringe on the rights of others or demonizes them. Islam with its rule of Sharia presents an imminent threat to subvert and replace the Constitution that governs our lives. Unlike Muslims who practice Taqiyya -lying or dissimulation-I proudly speak the truth. Truth should never be sacrificed at the altar of any goal. I firmly believe that truthfulness is indeed the foundation of all virtues. Faithful Muslims believe that sovereignty belongs to Allah. They believe the only important "constitution" is the Quran, and before allegiance to a nation comes fidelity to Allah. Islam of all sects demands obedience to Islamic law, not the laws of men or political institutions. A Muslim will never abide by an oath of office when Islamic principles are at stake. When they swear an oath on the Quran, it is to show Islamic supremacy, not to prove they are telling the truth. Please understand that Islamic principles cover every conceivable action and interaction of people living under Islamic law. "It is not fitting for a Muslim man or woman to have any choice in their affairs when a matter has been decided for them by Allah and His Messenger. They have no option." Qur'an 33:36 So our Constitution and even State and local laws are essentially meaningless to a Muslim, and the Bill of Rights, once its usefulness as a means to perpetuate Islam in America is no longer necessary, will certainly be disparaged and ignored. In fact, Islam is incompatible with democracy and subversive of the way of life that blesses this nation. It is fascist and evil by its very definition. Thus, it is imperative that we fight Islamofascisim with the same determination that we fought other enemies of freedom such as Nazism, Fascism, and Communism. And that imperative starts with our lawmakers constitutionally reevaluating the definition of religion. Islam must be curbed or it will curb us. How are Islamists taking control? They do it first by establishing Mosques in every town and city. These meeting places are perfect warehouses of not only indoctrination, but future terrorists, who are made to read and understand the principles of Jihad, martyrdom and Dar ul Harb ("land of war"-anyplace not Islamacized.) Mosques cost money, and the money for these warehouses of hate is coming straight from Saudi Arabia. These mosques are being infused with an activist strain of Islam, Wahabism. If you have to ask where the Saudi's are getting their money, you are not paying attention...its coming from you. According to a National Portrait, a survey released in April 2001, there are at least 1,209 of mosques in the US here and numbers are increasing. Mosque elders tend to be sent to the US with one clear mission: Make Islamic religion, laws, and life supreme within the United States, using any and all tactics necessary. Next, from within the safety of their local mosques, they begin to use their revolting practices, riotous youth, and wild sermonizing to force the genteel Americans to relocate to safer, less threatening neighborhoods and cities. Of course, not all Americans will move or can afford to do so. And to take control of a town, Muslims will not need to evict everyone. They probably need about 25% in order to make life very unpleasant for those who do not go along with their demands. They will elect Muslims to all positions of local influence, who will create and enforce policy according to the Quran. Once they have control over a town, they will begin to establish informal Sharia, and there's nothing the government can (or will want to) do about it. Sharia is the brutal means by which Islam controls its populations by force, intimidation, and punishments for offenses to Allah. Already in many European countries, national governments have out of fear, given Islamic fascists the right to establish their own shadow governments within the borders of countries like Sweden and England, where they can control their own populations without accountability. Proposals for Sharia are being taken seriously by Canada. This is an admission that Islam is not just a religion. It is a cult. It seeks total control over a person's mind and body. And, as such, our Constitution is totally incompatible with it. They will push politicians for local control and self-determination of their own laws. In this way, America will become two nations; a weakened traditional one, and a growing, menacing Islamacized one. At the same time, Muslims will ally with Leftist politicians who will gladly cede some of their power to this group of enforcers, so conservative politicians and Christians who advocate self defense and sane social policies are kept out of office. Money that was once used to build mosques will now be used to buy politicians. On university campuses, Islam will be portrayed as righteous and peaceful, while Christianity will be associated with evil Western and American values. The rebellious American youth will eat it up. There will be increasing local and regional incidents of crimes and threats against Christians, Jews, and anybody who speaks out against the religion of hate. Terrorism is a completely legitimate tool of Islam, and was widely practiced and advocated by Muhammad. Remember, all words in the Quran are perfect, immutable laws defining an eternal ethic: "Against them (the unbelievers) make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly." Quran 8.06. Leftist politicians will continue to hold the Bill of Rights over anyone who dares to accuse this religion of wrongdoing. While crime and threats skyrocket, Islamacized citizens will ignore the wrongdoing, just like in Iraq. They will look the other way for fear of retribution, honor killings, and punishments from those who uphold the Islamic requirement to seek revenge on anyone who dishonors or disagrees with Islam. Eventually, America will become weakened and politicians will allow the Muslims to do whatever they want, as long as the infidels are allowed to be free of terrorist threats. As Christianity wanes, people will reject it as an anachronism that is irrelevant to modern trends. Islamic ethics will prevail and Muslim sects will gain members, money, and influence. As government policies lean toward Islamic ideals, the Bill of Rights will be seen as archaic and out of touch with contemporary values and the new direction of the country. It will be just a piece of parchment in a museum, lacking anyone who would so bold and revolutionary as to fight against a religion, even a religion of hate. The first problem is that we don't have centuries to wait for reform. But more to the point, Islam does not tolerate revisionism in its beliefs or practices over time. Reform is not at play, because one cannot point to Jihadists or terrorists and say Muhammad did not advocate it. He most certainly did, and he delighted in his evil thoughts. Islam is a literal religion, taking unabrogated scripture as eternal and absolute. There are specific prescriptions for "an eye for an eye", eternal warfare, religious hegemony, slavery, killing Jews, taxing nonbelievers, stoning, promulgating terror, establishing a caste social system, and the perpetuating discrimination against women. The only way to reform it is to censor vast sections of the Quran and Hadith, which would be absurd. This is why there is truly no such thing as a "moderate" Muslim. Moderate Muslims or in other words "non-practicing Muslims", like millions of Iranians, are Muslims by default, who were born into a faith they did not choose, a faith that was "inflicted" upon them by invaders of a foreign culture, a faith that forbids them to leave or revert to their pre-Islamic heritage and religions. Therefore, vast majority of Iranians remain Muslims in name only. The other type of moderate Muslim is the "ignorant" Muslim who does not understand the Qur'anic "requirement" to wage war and submit to the Sharia , thereby "unknowingly" violating Qur'anic law. This latter type of Muslim is found in the rest of the Muslim countries. Hence, there is no such thing as "radical Islam", since by its true definition Islam is nothing but radical. Those who espouse a "liberal" view of Islam should be forced to back up their nouveau interpretation with unabrogated scriptural facts. Unless such would-be "reformists" can categorically denounce Islamofascisim based on sound evidence from the Qur'an, they prove to be the true radicals, which is why we never see the Islamic apologists point to scriptural arguments against jihad. They simply cannot, because there is none, and they simply disguise and distort the truth. The terrorists are not radicals from their interpretation of their doctrine ...they are only doing exactly what Muhammad demanded of them, and his demands were not suggestions and they where not ephemeral. They were "perfect", eternal ultimata. The terrorist are faithful and true to what is written in the holy Qur'an. A Muslim is forbidden to think critically about the Qur'an. He must blindly obey it and accept it passively and should memorize all of it. Being thus filled with the spirit of Islam (literally meaning "submission"), he instinctively walks in accordance with Allah's law in his daily life in a state of disempowered stupor. It would be wonderful to believe that if only a quiet reform could mend the hearts of Muslims, and that much of their sacred writings could be overlooked and forgotten, or perhaps just re-interpreted, then all of the Islamic world could join the community of modern, civilized humankind. Unfortunately, this plan can never work. It might work for a while, but then some Muslims might take to reading, and the whole jihad, terror, coercion, Sharia trend would start over. You cannot reform that which is central to a religion. Regrettably, a vast ignorance prevails in this sphere. Academic pundits, leftist journalists, and hired Islamic apologists, useful idiots, proclaim that Islam is a religion of peace and that the great majority of Muslims are not party to any plans and actions of the radicals. So how do we stop this sequence of events? How can our government, which has so effectively protected the rights of peaceful religions, protect us from an aggressive one? America, with a long history of protecting religious freedom, still clings to the "hands off" practice of leaving alone any doctrine or practice billed as a religion. Deciding what constitutes a religion and who is to make that call is a thorny problem. The dictionary supplies a sociologically useless definition of religion: "The expression of man's belief in and reverence for a superhuman power recognized as the creator and governor of the universe." Just about anyone or any group under this definition can start a religion, and they indeed do-and some do so at a significant cost to others. Perhaps it is time to realize that not all religions are the same. If a religion is does not recognize constitutional rights for others, does it lose its rights under First Amendment protections? If it seeks to control all aspects of your life by force and fraud; if it seeks exemption from national laws protecting constitutional rights, then it must not be considered a religion. It must be called something else, and it cannot be recognized as a protected ideology under the First Amendment. "O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guides not a people unjust." Quran 5:51 "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you." Bible (Matthew 5:44) Any religion that seeks to create its own governance and its own legal system and seeks to mobilize its own militia is itself not interested in separation of church and State, and has no right to use that separation to create hegemony. In fact, such a doctrine is not even a religion at all. It is a totalitarian regime, and must be considered the enemy of everything Americans believe in. I'd welcome an inspection of other religions to determine if they are truly peaceful, and I am confident all other doctrines will remain protected and unaffected, because religions are by definition peaceful. There is only one faith which seeks global hegemony for a seamless church-state government and imposition of its law everywhere. Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. He maintains a website at Amil Imani. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you doubt Mr. Imani, I urge you to read, Twenty-Year Plan: Islam Targets America and/or see the source, Sullivan County. I was going to blog on Mr. Imani's article but I believe his words speak more clearly than I could on the information he presents. I have posted on many of the issues he raises and so, he is quoted in-full. I firmly believe that Islam is not a religion as we view "religion" and is rather a political ideology whose leaders are working mightily to use our freedoms against us. According to some, Mr. Imani's post would be deemed "hate speech" just because he voiced an opinion about the tactics and methodologies we all know are being implemented - aided and abetted by our "useful idiots" in the "hate America first" crowd. Ever vigilant! Ever free! We'd better use our freedom of speech while we have it.