The Official Blog Of Edward Cline

Islam by a Thousand Cuts

Lingchi língchí; ling-ch’ih,
alternately transliterated ling chi or leng t’che), translated
variously as death by a thousand cuts,
(shā qiān dāo/qiāndāo wànguǎ), the slow process, the lingering
death
, or slow slicing,
was a form of torture and execution used in China from roughly AD 900
until it was banned in 1905. It was also used in Vietnam  In this form of execution; a knife was used to
methodically remove portions of the body over an extended period of time,
eventually resulting in death.
Death,
in the context of this column, means Islam. Islam is a death worshipping cult.
Death is the end of Islam for anyone who encounters it, Muslim or non-Muslim.
One exists and lives for the sole purpose of dying to meet Allah in Paradise.
Allah owns your life and it is your duty to obey his every command and whim,
even if it means….death.

Celebrating Death: Shia Muslims love self-flagelation


“Death
to America!” is the familiar chant of Muslim demonstrators, from New York City
to London to Berlin and Cologne, from Cairo to Gaza to Damascus, from Kuala
Lumpur to Sydney and Kabul. Death is what is intended by the Muslim
Brotherhood. It states that quite explicitly in the 1991 Explanatory
Memorandum
on the General Strategic Goal of the Brotherhood in North
America. Here is what it says:
·        
In order for Islam and its Movement to
become “a part of the homeland” in which it lives, “stable”
in its land, “rooted” in the spirits and minds of its people,
“enabled” in the live [sic] of its society and has firmly-established
“organizations” on which the Islamic structure is built and with
which the testimony of civilization is achieved, the Movement must plan and
struggle to obtain “the keys” and the tools of this process in carry
[sic] out this grand mission as a “Civilization Jihadist”
responsibility which lies on the shoulders of Muslims and – on top of them –
the Muslim Brotherhood in this country.
·        
The process of settlement is a
“Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan
must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in
eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and
“sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the
believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over
all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this
challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s
destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until
the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those
who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal.
So, how
is Islam “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within”? By
working every little gambit to dissolve Western institutions, principles,
traditions, and norms, and replace them with Islamic ones, first as “co-equals,”
and eventually as the dominant ones
By
applying a thousand little, barely noticed and hardly earth-shattering
concessions by the West to Islamic demands for “respect” or the enforcement of
Islamic religious observation or deference to Muslim sensibilities and
prejudices, the Brotherhood agenda is on schedule. There will always be the
spectacular, headline-grabbing massacres to remind us that Islam declared war
on the West long, long ago and that the bombings and beheadings and stabbings
are not forgotten as the end-all of life for infidels and those who do not
submit to Islam. Islam means, after
all, submission.
But it
isn’t those which are rotting the West “from within.” The West is definably “miserable”
because it will not stand up for itself, will not take the steps necessary to
preserve its existence as a life-loving as opposed to a death-worshipping political
system. Whose hapless “hands” are aiding and abetting the incremental assaults?
They are many and legion. CAIR simply advises the EEOC of a case rich in
conflict, presumably because it knows that CAIR in an unindicted co-conspirator
with terrorist organizations and refuses to condemn Hamas. Better these stupid Americans
give other Americans the hot foot.
We can
start with the Equal Employment and Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which works hand in glove with the
Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)
to ensure that employers conform to Muslim expectations and prejudices, and
also inures American employers to Islamic religious dress “codes.” The EEOC
will agree with CAIR that a Muslim has been “discriminated” against and
penalized (either fired or not hired) because of his “religion.” Case in point:
Abercrombie
& Fitch
vs. a Muslim woman who wanted to violate the store’s dress code
for employees by wearing her hijab.
The Muslim teen worker who scored a legal victory in
an anti-discrimination suit against Abercrombie & Fitch, which cited its
dress code in insisting she not wear a hijab to work, says the retailer’s policy
is “very unfair.”
A federal judge issued the ruling last week that Abercrombie & Fitch discriminated against Hani
Khan, 18, when she was fired from its Hollister store in San Mateo, Calif., in
2010 because she refused to remove her head scarf on the job…..
The U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit on Khan’s behalf in 2011. A trial on the
company’s liability and punitive damages is scheduled for Sept. 30.
Another
nijab case went to the Supreme Court. In June 2015, the High Bench ruled in
favor of the Muslim and against Abercrombie & Fitch. The Guardian
reported:
The US supreme court on
Monday ruled in favor of Samantha Elauf, a Muslim woman who was denied a job at
an Abercrombie & Fitch clothing store in Oklahoma because she wore a
headscarf for religious reasons.
The justices decided the case, which united Christian,
Muslim and Jewish and other religious organizations, with an 8-1 vote, ruling
in favor of the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which
sued the company on behalf of Elauf.
“The EEOC applauds the Supreme Court’s decision
affirming that employers may not make an applicant’s religious practice a
factor in employment decisions,” said EEOC chair Jenny Yang, in a statement.
“This ruling protects the rights of workers to equal
treatment in the workplace without having to sacrifice their religious beliefs
or practices.”
Next
comes the Islamic assault on The Citadel, a military school in South Carolina with
a strict dress code for its cadets, on and off school grounds. A Muslima
applied to the school and insisted that she be able to  wear her nijab with her uniform. On April 22,
the Washington
Post
reported:
When news spread that The
Citadel was considering the first-ever exception to its strict uniform
requirements to allow an admitted student to wear a hijab in keeping with her
Muslim faith, reaction was intense. Some welcomed the possibility as an
important symbol of religious freedom, but for many in the tight-knit community
of cadets and alumni, the very idea of an exception was anathema because the
ideals of loyalty, uniformity, and corps-before-self are so central to
the storied public military college’s mission and traditions….
On Friday, Brett Ashworth, a
Citadel spokesman, said the school is considering two specific requests from
the student: That she be allowed to wear a hijab and that she be allowed to
cover her arms and legs.
The
school is still mulling over whether or not  to grant the Muslima’s wishes (the hijab in
uniform, her own separate room, special clothing during physical exercises,
etc.; I wonder if she gets to break classes and drill to bow to Mecca and has
special meals prepared for her in the mess hall). The cadet who leaked the
story to the press, was punished.
Citadel Cadet Nick Pinelli, the cadet who leaked the
story of the school’s consideration of a Muslim student’s request to wear a
hijab, was reportedly punished
with 33 hours of marching according to a post on Jihad
Watch
….
According to an article in the
Post and Courier
The Citadel spokesman, Col. Brett Ashworth, declined to
confirm whether or not Cadet Pinelli was being punished over leaking the story
citing FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act).
Next up
is our court system. CAIR issued a press release about a Louisiana traffic court
judge who ordered a Muslima to leave the courtroom unless she removed her
nijab. The
Florida Family Association
reported in late April:
 CAIR issued the following press
release
: 

CAIR Asks Louisiana Judge to Ensure that Courtroom Hijab Ban Not Be Repeated

(WASHINGTON, D.C., 4/28/16)– The Council on
American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and
advocacy organization, today called on a Louisiana judge to ensure that the
recent removal of a Muslim woman from court because she wears an Islamic head
scarf, or hijab, not be repeated.

CAIR said the Muslim woman, who does not want to be
identified, says she removed from Jefferson Parish Traffic Court on Tuesday
after a bailiff asked her to remove her hijab and she refused. The woman
stated: “I started to cry because I felt so embarrassed and
humiliated.” Judge Raylyn  Beevers,
who admitted that she asked the Muslim woman to leave the courtroom, now says
she did not realize the head covering was worn for religious reasons.
It is
not known if Judge Beevers relented and allowed the Muslima into the courtroom
wearing the nijab. The CAIR letter to the judge implies that she regretted her
decision to ask the woman to leave, and hoped the “misunderstanding” was not
repeated.
Next
up, the Muslim truckers. On June 2nd, Daniel Greenfield reported in “Obama
Inc Sues Trucking Company
for Firing Muslim Drivers Who Refused to Deliver Alcohol”
from the DougRoss@Journal:
 Star Transport, Inc., a trucking company based in
Morton, Ill., violated federal law by failing to accommodate two employees
because of their religion, Islam, and discharging them, the U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged
in a lawsuit filed today.
The lawsuit alleged that Star Transport refused to
provide two employees with an accommodation of their religious beliefs when it
terminated their employment because they refused to deliver alcohol.
Greenfield
commented:
A trucking company may be obligated to accommodate religious
observance by providing time off for holidays or prayers. It is not obligated
to excuse employees from doing their actual job. And delivering alcohol is part
of what being a truck driver means. If it’s against your religion, find a job
that doesn’t involve delivering large quantities of foods and beverages.
In fact there is no actual prohibition that bars
Muslims from driving a truck full of alcohol. There are prohibitions on
drinking alcohol. Every Muslim corner store I have ever seen sells alcohol,
alongside smuggled cigarettes and lottery tickets. Many Muslim countries allow
the sale of alcohol.
And,
the Muslim truckers won the suit. The Washington
Post
reported on October 23rd:
One more data point on the “When
does your religion legally excuse you from doing part of your job?

question — like it or not, under American law, employers sometimes do have to
excuse employees from tasks that the employees find religiously objectionable.
Tuesday, two Muslim truck drivers who were fired for refusing to deliver
shipments containing alcohol were awarded $40,000 in compensatory damages and
$200,000 in punitive damages by the jury in their discrimination claim.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought suit on their
behalf (EEOC v. Star Transport Co., Inc. (N.D. Ill.)), arguing that the
employer had failed to provide “reasonable accommodations” to the employees —
i.e., accommodations (including an exemption from job duties) that could be
provided without “undue hardship” to the employer or others. The court noted
that Star Transport had indeed often “swap[ped]’ loads between drivers,” and
Star Transport conceded that it could have easily accommodated this request,
too, but argued (unsuccessfully) that it shouldn’t be liable for punitive
damages.
It’s
now doubtful if the Muslim non-truck-drivers will ever collect their award. The
Post article concludes:
But as the Peoria Journal
Star (Andy Kravetz)
notes, “Whether the men collect their money is another
story. Star Transport went out of business earlier this year and it’s unknown
who is now responsible for the judgment….
To underscore
the assertion that Islam is a death cult, Daniel Greenfield also writes about what
Muslim women who hanker for Paradise can expect upon expiration of their
worldly existence. They would be no contest with “90
Foot Islamic Virgins
” awaiting the male Jihadist “martyrs.”
The 90-foot-tall transparent
creature with visible bone marrow and none of the functions of life is a giant
skeleton. The love that Muslim terrorists have for it is a love for death.
 
ISIS is recreating the Islamic paradise on earth by capturing and handing out
girls of “tender age” to the Jihadists. It forces them to take contraceptives
and conducts forced abortions so that, like the 72 virgins, the captured girls
will never actually have children. It even conducts reconstruction surgery
after the rapes so that their victims will more closely resemble the eternal
virgins of Islamic paradise.

The Islamic State isn’t just Islamic. It’s a hellish attempt to create an
Islamic heaven on earth.
Finally,
there is this unkind cut from our House of Representatives, as first reported
on Gates
of Vienna
December 29, 2015 and reprinted in the Counter
Jihad Report
on the 30th, “HR 569:
CAIR’s Standard Operating Procedure” for applying the scalpel to America.
The
author of the Gates of Vienna piece argues that HR 569 will not pass; the
numbers are against it. After reprinting the pious language of the Resolution,
he remarks:
Once again, this will not
pass. However, the fact that 82 Democrats have co-sponsored it will be used to
validate the Muslim Brotherhood (CAIR, ISNA, MPAC, etc. etc.) claim that hate
crimes have increased (and of course they haven’t for Muslims, although they
may have increased against Jews in America, who are historically identified in
FBI statistics as victimized in hate crimes five to ten times more frequently
than Muslims in America)….
So it won’t pass, but it’s still useful to
the Muslim Brotherhood to validate their claims among their own constituency,
as well as to the media and the Low Information Voters, or those who just
respond to any kind of “virtue-signaling”. And it’s useful to the 82
co-sponsoring Democrats, and the Democratic National Committee as a whole, to
claim that all Republicans who did not co-sponsor are therefore, by definition:
  • racist;
  • Islamophobic;
  • bigoted;
  • engaged in
    hate speech, by the sin of omission of not cosponsoring; and
  • engaged in
    incitement to hate crimes, by the implied sin of hate speech resulting
    from the sin of omission of not co-sponsoring.

It’s also worth noting that there are 188
Democrats in the House of Representatives, and 246 Republicans. So unless this
gets a lot of new co-sponsors in 2016, a counter-argument against the DNC on
this Resolution would be that it has met with overwhelming bi-partisan
opposition from the majority of Democrats (106) and all Republicans in the
House.
But
yes, it is a
successful effort for the target audiences at which it is aimed, including the
foreign funders for CAIR, ISNA etc., all of whom will be tickled pink that this
bill has 82 co-sponsors. As will the OIC, who might have helped a bit in
drafting the Resolution.
There
are dozens of pages of the “cuts” that have been inflicted on this country,
many, if most, aided by the eager interference of a Federal agency, the EEOC. I
could go on for twenty more pages just to list them. The country is being bled
dry, and the wounds will not heal until the EEOC is defunded, Americans see Islam
as the death cult it really is, the ISNA, the ICNA, the MSA, and all its
terrorist-affiliated ilk are booted out of the country, and the current
principals of CAIR are finally indicted, tried, and sent to jail with bread and
water as their only solace. All Muslims currently living in this country –
legally or illegally – should be disenfranchised, so as to not provide our
native statists with an extra power base.
Until then,
the cuts will continue in furtherance of the pursuit of death.

Previous

Poisonous Peas in a Pod

Next

A Last Great Hope

1 Comment

  1. Olivia Pierson

    "But it isn’t those which are rotting the West “from within.” The West is definably “miserable” because it will not stand up for itself, will not take the steps necessary to preserve its existence as a life-loving as opposed to a death-worshipping political system."

    Hi Ed, this is so important. In fact I now think it is the most important issue facing the West. This is why it has come as such a great surprise to finally hear a Republican candidate, Trump, openly say that he is prepared to ban Islamic immigration into the US. Of course, this should have been said the day after 9.11 considering the open act of war that it was.

    Remember Reagan's great A Time for Choosing speech?: "We are at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it has been said if we lose that war, and in doing so lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening."

    And there stands Trump,a man with arguably a great deal more to lose than the average man, and he has had the guts to answer Reagan's call albeit in a new context. Yet we are told every five minutes that he doesn't talk enough about "The Constitution."

    I would like to remind these people that during the contentious 1860 election, resulting in the presidency of Lincoln, the men who made the most noise about The Constitution were the slaveholding Southern Democrats. Were they on the right side of history just because they laid claim to the purity of The Constitution?

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén