Usama Dakdok led a series on Islam and slavery that has grave importance. Kristie Johnson and myself were present to assist. Sadly, there are many who wish to hide these important facts in order to push their own personal agenda, which requires "obfuscation of facts." Obfuscation is a deliberate act of hiding something. This is purposeful jump over information, or misdirection away from that information.
Slavery in Islam is found throughout the Quran. Muhammad himself was both a slave owner and a slave trader. Yet, the lovers of Shariah, known as Muslims insist that Muhammad was a perfect man.
One of the things Imams, Islamic scholars, and other leaders of Islam fear is that those who worship Allah, will read the Quran asking Critical Thinking questions. What happens when people actually try to obtain knowledge from the Quran? Is this possible or do people become more confused? Does the Quran have answers or confusion? Do people leave Islam if they actually read the Quran in their own language?
I have been working with Usama Dakdok and learning from him along with Kristie Johnson of The Straightway of Grace Ministry. He has been presenting a truthful look at Islamic teachings on Embryology. Any medical professional choosing to accept these beliefs would have to be lying to themselves or laughing at "Muhammad's Marvelous Mistakes," on this issue.
What would happen if these mistakes of Muhammad were taught when students learn about Islam in high school settings or basic Biology?
Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, a Democrat from Minnesota's 5th District proposed a bill that will require the United States of America to "COMBAT INTERNATIONAL ISLAMOPHOBIA." This bill passed the House without one Republican vote in favor the vote was 219 to 212.
Received; read
twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations
AN ACT
To establish in the Department
of State the Office to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and
House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION
1.SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “Combating International
Islamophobia Act”.
SEC.
2. AUTHORIZATION FOR
ESTABLISHMENT OF OFFICE TO MONITOR AND COMBAT ISLAMOPHOBIA.
Title I of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2651a et seq.) is amended by adding at the
end the following new section:
“SEC.
64. MONITORING AND COMBATING
ISLAMOPHOBIA.
“(a) Office To Monitor And Combat Islamophobia.—
This bill that passed by a 100% Democratic Party vote establishes an office without a purpose since Islamophobia is not defined! The question remains then what definition will they use? Since this possible legislation was lauded by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR, this June 2022. What is their actual definition of Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is close-minded prejudice against or hatred of Islam and Muslims.
Islamophobic acts are directed at Islam or Muslims in general. Anti-Muslim discrimination is directed at a specific individual, institution or group of individuals.
An Islamophobe is an individual who holds a closed-minded view of Islam and promotes prejudice against or hatred of Muslims.
Interestingly CAIR goes and clarifies that they are not trying to implement Shariah in this respect by stating on the same site that:
It is not appropriate to label all, or even the majority of those, who question Islam and Muslims as Islamophobes. Equally, it is not Islamophobic to denounce crimes committed by individual Muslims or those claiming Islam as a motivation for their actions.
“A critical study of Islam or Muslims is not Islamphobic,” former CAIR Research Director Mohamed Nimer wrote in 2007. “Likewise, a disapproving analysis of American history and government is not anti-American… One can disagree with Islam or with what some Muslims do without having to be hateful.”
“I would be careful to remind my Muslim friends not to characterize anyone who is opposed to the Ground Zero center as a racist or bigot,” said a conservative political activist during an interview for this report. “My argument is there [are a few Islamophobes] … but the vast majority of Americans are people who’ve been misinformed, who don’t know the truth and don’t know the real facts.”
If this type of definition is what would define Islamophobia, almost no one accept actors of violence against Islam would be declared "Islamophobic." Usama Dakdok asked if there was a definition that would declare reading the Quran Islamophobic. I had to say yes. I discovered this particular definition because CAIR on their own site declared that "A critical study of Islam or Muslims is not Islamophobic." CAIR has a history of stating one thing when they speak to those they know who are not Islamic, and the opposite to those who follow Islam. This caused me to do a simple websearch using the parameters, +"Council on American Islamic Relations" Islamophobia.
As a result I discovered Islamophobia.org which is sponsored by CAIR. On their Islamophobia 101 they have definition of Islam that could actually outlaw reading the Quran, and the Sunnah,
Institutionalized Islamophobia: “Institutionalized Islamophobia is a phenomenon meant to articulate contrived hate and fear of Muslims that is built into structures of the state and society for the pursuit of power and the justification of war and repression. Islamophobia is based on the social construction of Islam as violent, barbaric, uncivilized, and opposed to normative democratic values. ...
If this definition is accepted it would be considered Islamophobic to read the last things said of Muhammad in the Quran, the Hadiths, Islamic histories such as Al-Tabari's histories published by the State University on New York and the Sirats which are the biographies of Muhammad. Why? Because these documents declare Islam to be violent by themselves.
For example, Surah 9:29 states:
Engage in war with those who do not believe in Allah nor in the last day.
Nor forbid what Allah and his messenger forbid, nor believe in the religion of
the truth among those who have been given the book until they pay the
jizya out of hand and they are subdued." Under CAIR's last definition the Quran would be declared Islamophobic.
There are close to 200 verses proclaiming violence against non-Muslims in the Quran. The Hadiths, Sirats, and Islamic histories constantly portray Islam as violent. Migrants in Europe get arrested for sexually assaulting non-Muslim women and act confused as a defense to proclaim it is lawful in their country, should they also be proclaimed Islamophobic.
Every Muslim is required when paying Zakat to donate 12.5% of their gift to Jihad. Should all Muslim following Shariah now be declared Islamophobic? According to the last definition, Muslims will suffer far more than Muslims.
But let's get back into the proposed law.
(b) Purpose Of Office.—Upon establishment, the Office shall assume primary responsibility for the following:
“(1) Monitoring and combating acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement that occur in foreign countries.
“(2) Coordinating and assisting in the preparation of that portion of the reports required by paragraph (9) of section 116(d) and subsection (k) of section 502B of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151n(d) and 2304) relating to an assessment and description of the nature and extent of acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement.
“(3) Coordinating and assisting in the preparation of that portion of the report required by clause (viii) of section 102(b)(1)(A) of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 6412(b)(1)(A)) relating to an assessment and description of the nature and extent of acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement.
“(c) Consultations.—The Special Envoy shall consult with domestic and international nongovernmental organizations and multilateral organizations and institutions, as the Special Envoy considers appropriate, to carry out this section.”
This legislation would require military application since the word combat is used. Only the US military is used in combat. Think about this. It would be free reign by the State Department to enforce ISLAM!
Worse still are the "consultations." Domestic entities that exist have been exposed as issuing reports on Islamophobia with proven false narratives as actual counted acts of Islamophobia, CAIR, Bridges, and SJP's work on this is continually being exposed. All of these stated organizations are part of the Muslim Brotherhood. The federal courts received testimony and evidence as to their connections to the Muslim Brotherhood in this in 2007.
What makes this worse is the consultations with Multilateral organizations. This is required consultations with the UN, the Organization of Islamic States, and more. This would force the USA to enforce Shariah if the OIC declares Islamophobia as a resistance to shariah.
THIS IS DANGEROUS! It gives Islam special privileges that no other faith in the USA has at present.
As a retired Special Education Teacher who taught Social Studies in High School in NYS for 20 years, I just finished taking part in a 20 part series led by Usama Dakdok and Kristie Johnson of Straightway of Grace Ministry , on the Lies in the Textbooks. As Usama, Kristie and I talk about these lies, we shared the dangers these lies pose to your children. Think about the importance of that statement.
I have personally shown one school district 25 errors in a World History textbook related to this topic and they did nothing. I wrote to a publisher about an Advanced World History textbook sharing a paper I wrote Saied Shoabbi, a Meccan Muslim on this topic and again no changes were made. PARENTS, some people are OK with your children being lied to. WE ARE NOT!
Most of the pillars copy previous beliefs and practices.Zakat started with Muhammad taking 20% of the
spoil (booty) after raiding a caravan. This amount had to set apart, including
20% of the slaves taken before the raiders/robbers could divide their
“earnings.”
Today, Muslims give zakat is of what they owned for 1 year.
While you may have earned $100,000 this year, if you spent all of that, not one
penny would go to zakat. (Reliance of
the Traveller, h1.9-10). The actual percentage they pay is 2.5% of what has
been owned. This is one reason Islam is not seen as a “generous” faith
structure. It literally provides a way for a person to not give anything
towards zakat by spending what they have. However, if the items purchased are
clothes, cars, or anything physical, then they are required to make a 2.5%
payment of the estimated value. This could be somewhat problematic if you
consider home ownership. If your house is valued at $100,000 you must pay
$2,500 a year zakat.
Now it must be asked, where they get this number of 2.5%
since it is not found in the Quran, specifically. Yet, this requirement is
stated in shariah, with no Quranic scripture as it’s basis. However, there are
Hadiths that come up with 2.5% if you do the math. Note here that Zakat is also required of a physical property owned such as livestock.
Hadiths also show that Muhammad wanted more than 2.5% at
times. For example he took as zakat 10% of all honey.
This hadith is graded as Hasan (weak), but…
Where does Zakat (Charity) go?
The Quran states in 9:60:
Surely alms are only to the poor and the needy and those who collect them and to those whose hearts are inclined and for the necks [ransom for slaves] and for debtors and for the sake of Allah and the son of the way, an ordinance from Allah. And Allah is knowing, wise.
This verse poses problems, starting with how does Allah receive his portion? In addition, it is important to understand that Muslim scholars differentiate between the poor and needy. Something no other culture does.
The next big problem is the passage “to those whose hearts are inclined.” This speaks to paying people to convert and become followers of Islam. What do we call paying people to become followers of Islam? Bribery! But in Islam, it is lawful to practice bribery to create new converts.
Muhammad had no problem taking from those who had received zakat in the form of charity. One example of this was a slave girl set free by Aisha, his wife who had been given some meat due to her impoverished condition. It was taken from her given to Muhmad and he considered it his “gift.” Yet, the stated purpose of charity (zakat) was to give to the poor.
1/8th of Zakat MUST Finance Jihad
One of the big secrets about the second pillar of zakat is
that it requires financing of jihad, the war against non-Muslims. This can be
found in the English translation of Um Dat Al-Salik
H8.7 The Eight Categories
of Recipients [of Zakat]
It is
obligatory to distribute one’s Zakat among eight categories of recipients (O:
meaning that Zakat goes to none beside them), one-eighth of the zakat to each
share…
One eighth is the equivalent of 12.5.% of all zakat donated by
a person each year that must go to paying for people who wage jihad. Some
Muslims will claim this is a lie. But it is recorded in Shariah for all to see.
H8.17
the seventh category is those fighting for Allah, meaning those engaged
in Islamic military for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster (O:
but who are volunteers for jihad without renumeration). They are given enough
to suffice them for the operation, even if affluent; of weapons, mounts, clothing, and expenses.
Please support my work by giving through PayPal or by purchasing my books on Amazon.
Ali Velshi is a TV news show host for MSNBC, who is a
believer in Islam, who has no problem repeating false narratives about Israel.Velshi worked for Al Jazeera from 2013 to
2016 when Al Jazeera closed in the United States.
John Rossomando of The Investigative Project on
Terrorism described Al Jazeera as “The
Terrorist Propaganda Network” with good reason in 2017. Even the New
York Times covered the concerns of Arab nations about Al Jazeera being a
mouth piece for terrorism. In Rossomando’s article he pointed out that “Muslim
Brotherhood ideologue Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi” had a show that encouraged the
“Arab Spring” which was an uprising of violence by Muslim Brotherhood
membersand other followers of Islam
against their governments. Velshi’s network, Al Jazeera did not censoror prevent
Qaradawi’s repeated endorsements of “martyrdom operations” aka “suicide
bombers.” Because many of Qaradawi’s actions on Al Jazeera were prior to Velshi
entering employment with Al Jazeera in the USA, it must be posited that Velshi
agreed with the positions of Al Jazeera before entering employment with them.
This information had been on major news networks and it was very exposed to the
public.
John Rossomando wrote in
his article that “Al Jazeera America (AJAM), aired pro-Palestinian propaganda. During the 2014 Gaza crisis, AJAM host
Wajahat Ali pushed Hamas' talking points about the territory's population
density without a single reference to how the terrorist group used mosques and
civilian buildings to launch rockets.”
Remember that Ali Velshi
was working for Al Jazeera during this time. How could MSNBC who hired Al Jazeera people expect them to not be Antisemitic or to not be supportive of Islamic terror groups after years of working with that mindset?
This year Ali Velshi has continued the work of Al
Jazeera by writing highly inflammatory ANTISEMITIC articles. But he is now being “covered for” by his other
Islamic colleagues at MSNBC, Medhi Hasan wrote an Opinion
piece for MSNBC on May 27, 2021, doing just that. Mehdi Hasan, wrote protectively of Velshi stating:
Is my award-winning MSNBC colleague Ali Velshi, who recently said —
and wrote — that
“the idea that it’s even remotely controversial to call what Israel has imposed
on Palestinians a form of apartheid is laughable,” an antisemite as well? (Ali,
incidentally, is the child of brown South African parents who left that country because of, wait for it,
apartheid.)
What Ali Velshi subtitled his
article for May 17th 2021 was: “We have to be able to say that
Israel's treatment of Palestinians is apartheid. Period.” Mehdi Hasan goes so
far as to incorrectly quote his colleague in order to protect him. What Velshi
actually said was:
That calling the status imposed on Palestinians a form of
apartheid is even
remotely controversial is laughable. One look at a current map of Israel, Gaza,
and the occupied territories conjures up only one other example: apartheid-era
South Africa, and the “Bantustans” or
“homelands” into
which Black Africans were forced. Palestinians cannot freely
travel to see
relatives or do business in other Palestinian cities without passing through
highly intrusive — and often humiliating — Israeli
checkpoints.
MSNBC had also hired Ayman Moyeldin who had worked for Al Jazeera. Moyeldin used an interview with Naftali Bennet to accuse Israeli politicians of being at fault for these the continual danger presented by Hamas shooting over 3,000 rockets. Naftali had to turn around and ask him why he is not asking why he is not concerned that Hamas wants to kill Israelis? Moyeldin appeared to brush off these concerns. How could MSNBC not expect that Moyeldin, as a former Al Jazeera reporter, would not take the side of Hamas which proclaims in its Charter that it is a chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood?
One MSNBC host, Joe Scarborough said on May 25, 2021, “the
truth is that Antisemites do not need a conflict between Israel and Hamas, to
preach this sort of hatred.” Joe is right. So why is there an increase in this
correlation? Could it be that there has been an increase in immigration from
those whose beliefs agree with Hamas and other terror groups that are willing
to kill Jews? MSNBC never looks into this.
Under President Obama a massive increase in those who
follow Islam were allowed to immigrate to the United States, many of them
claiming refugee status. The number
of Mosques in the USA has exploded since 1994 when there were only 962 in
the entire country to 2,769 in 2020 and that number is still rising. That is a 332%
increase! If Islamic teachings inherently espouse antisemitism, and in turn
express sympathy towards groups like Hamas that are identified by the government
of the United States as terrorist entities, would that not be reason for seeing
a dramatic increase in Antisemitism?
On The Sutliffian Report on March 14th 2022, we explored the INHERENT
Antisemitism within Islam. The video is below.
On Sunday, January 9, 2022 Islam Defender Yahya, was given an opportunity to prove Islam is true. For two hours he never once gave us anything that did that. At one point he claimed Allah made created equality for everyone. But in saying this he denied shariah, the Quran, the Hadiths, and every Islamic scholar.
Please support my work by giving to my patreon account.
