James O’Keefe’s new bombshell video is out: He Nails Al Sharpton “He’s all about money.”

Eric Garner & Trayvon Martin Family, Michael Brown Lawyer Say Al Sharpton Exploited Their Tragedies

Here’s O’Keefe’s new video showing how the families and attorneys of Eric Garner, Trayvon Martin, and Michael Brown really feel about Rev. Al Sharpton. Additionally, local clergy and others express their opinions about how Sharpton exploits tragedy for personal gain.

Sharpton belongs in jail.

Press Updates

Press Updates

Feb. 23, 2015: Charlatan Sharpton Fires Back At NY Post Report Questioning Motives In Eric Garner Case

[…] “It is very interesting that they, when they reached the people in the video, the people contradicted what was in the video,” Sharpton told CBS News. “My response is it’s a headline of a story that they contradict in their own article.”

“Not only do I think the video was taken out of context, there is nobody in that video that said I did anything with money,” he added. “The New York Post has more explaining to do than I do in this case.”

Eric Garner’s mother, Gwen Carr, and widow, Esaw Snipes-Garner, later issued a statement calling the Post’s front page story “deeply misleading.”

“As the mother and head of the estate of Eric Garner, and the widow of Eric Garner, let us be clear: We reached out and asked for help and assistance from Rev. Al Sharpton and National Action Network in the wake of Eric’s death. National Action Network and Rev. Al Sharpton have honored all of our requests, including covering the expenses of Eric’s funeral,” the statement said. “We believe that their involvement is solely based on their commitment for justice for Eric and our family. It is National Action Network’s policy that they do not accept monies or even reimbursement from victim’s families.”

“Erica made it clear in this New York Post article that the way the interview was conducted was extremely deceptive and her comments were taken out of context,” they added. “We appreciate the work that National Action and Rev. Sharpton has done and continues to do for our family.” (Keep reading..).

Bill Whittle: Brass Tacks on Immigration

From a guaranteed right to hormone therapy for transgendered illegal aliens, to a prospective Attorney General saying that illegals have the same right to a job as US citizens or legal immigrants, the ongoing sham of the Obama administration’s under-the-radar policies get seen in the light of day in Bill Whittle’s latest FIREWALL.

Transcript, courtesy Truth Revolt:

Hi everybody. I’m Bill Whittle and this is the Firewall.

As you may recall, a few months ago, President Barack Obama accomplished something with the stroke of his pen that had been deemed well beyond what he himself said was beyond his authority as chief: grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens through executive order.

So let’s get above the pit of criminality of both the act of illegally coming into ANYONE’S country – not just ours – and also above selfish venality of those who not only sanction such actions but in fact approve of and encourage them for their own political and financial gain. Let’s just get down to the brass tacks here on illegal immigration.

To do that, let’s look at two recent statements – one on the part of an active immigration official in the US government, and a second from the candidate for the highest law enforcement position in the land.

We’ll start with Kevin Landy, assistant director of the office of detention policy and planning for ICE, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement branch of the Federal government, discussing treatment options for transgendered illegal aliens once in US detention facilities.

((LANDY CLIP 35 SECONDS))

There are two important words buried in that bland bureaucratic response. One of them is especially important. Let’s listen again.

The first word is GUARANTEES, in other words, makes a binding promise. The second word is RIGHT. A right is something that cannot be taken away from you. Calling it a “right” means that someone has to provide it for you if you cannot provide it for yourself.

This official of the US government, Kevin Landy, has just stated that if you break US law by illegally entering the country then the citizens of the country whose laws you have violated are legally obligated to provide you with the hormone therapy necessary to your choice of lifestyle.

And now from the ridiculous to the sublime. Here is Loretta Lynch, President Barack Obama’s nominee to replace disgraced Attorney General Eric Holder, being questioned by Republican Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama:

((LYNCH CLIP 32 SECONDS))

The candidate for the highest law enforcement official in the land has just stated that people who are here illegally have an equal right to the same job as people who are either US Citizens or legal immigrants here on work visas.

So now to the brass tacks.

First, if there are no such things as illegal aliens, as the advocates for open borders proclaim – then where does it stop? If seven million people can sneak across the border at night and be granted the same status, and the same benefits as US Citizens – social security, medicare, and the right to vote – then where do we stop? Why only seven million? Why not all seven billion people currently on planet Earth?

If three hundred and twenty million Americans are having money taken from them at gunpoint through taxation in order to GUARANTEE the RIGHT of one transgendered illegal alien to hormone therapy once they cross the border, then there is no line – none. None! – between that and them having to pay through their hard work and taxes the health care of any one of the seven billion people on planet earth who can manage to cross a two thousand mile long line on a map.

Second, if the candidate for the chief law enforcement position in the land says that someone entering the country by breaking the law is not only not going to be arrested and deported, but rather has the same right to take a job from US citizen or a legal immigrant on a work visa and condemning them to unemployment and dependency on the government, then what does that tell you about the person who nominated her to that office? And what does it say about his contempt for the people that elected him in the first place? And ultimately, what does it say about those people themselves?

This man, who says there comes a point where people have made enough money, who says that the people who pay the taxes for hormone therapy for illegal transgendered criminals didn’t build the businesses that write the checks that maintain his loving and generous reputation, is, as you may know by now, an avid golfer. The man who condemns rich fat cats with private jets flies in the biggest private jet in the world to the finest resorts in the world, and he does it all the time. Because he likes it. Who wouldn’t?

Does anyone actually think this individual is capable of that kind of lifestyle without spending one person’s money to buy the vote of another’s? And does anyone still doubt that any of these incompetents and losers are willing to not only destroy the laws of the nation, but the nation itself, in order to sate the lust for the money and power they are incapable of obtaining through their own efforts?

 

If you voted for Obama, hang your head in shame. Pentagon Scolds UAE, Egypt for attacking #ISIS in Libya!

21 Egyptian Coptic Christians beheaded by ISIS
21 Egyptian Coptic Christians beheaded by ISIS

Press Updates

Unbelievable! Mullah Obama tells Egypt and the UAE he doesn’t appreciate their attacks upon the Islamic State in Libya:

(CNSNews.com) – The United States does not support Egyptian and Emirati airstrikes against Islamist militias in Libya because the U.S. believes the crisis in Libya must be resolved politically and without outside interference, a Department of Defense spokesman said Tuesday.

Let me get this straight. Barack Obama and war hawk Hillary Clinton deliberately bombed the crap out of Libya in order to force regime change.

This is apparently what Democrats mean by “resolved politically without outside interference?”

Egypt and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) carrying out airstrikes in Libya was different from U.S. airstrikes against Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant forces in Iraq, Pentagon spokesman Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby told a briefing, because the U.S. was acting in Iraq, in a “very targeted” manner, at the request of its government.

“This wasn’t some unilateral decision by the United States to strike targets inside Iraq.”

“We discourage other nations from taking a part in Libya’s issues through violence,” Kirby said. “We want the issues solved in Libya to be done peacefully and through good governance and politics and not violence.” (Keep reading…)

So here we have a coward  (possibly a Muslim coward, but at this point what difference does it make?) deliberately destroying Libya for his own aggrandizement (and pleasure), telling real leaders not to defend their own people and take the battle directly to the terrorists.

If you voted for Barack Obama, hang your head in shame.

Press Updates

Feb. 19, 2015: Obama Regime Has Opposed Egypt’s Attempts to Fight Islamists in Libya (H/T Moonbattery)

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi once was a very bad guy, but before his demise he had long since been pacified by Ronald Reagan, had renounced weapons of mass destruction after W’s invasion of Iraq, and was cooperating in the War on Terror. So Obama illegally helped remove him from power, creating a power vacuum that was predictably filled by Islamic radicals. This resulted in the Benghazi fiasco, and in the recent beheading of 21 Egyptian Christians in Libya (whom the Obama Administration pointedly does not refer to as Christians). Meanwhile the current anti-jihadist government of Egypt is picking up some of the slack left by Obama’s lack of interest regarding the Islamic State. This government replaced an Islamic Muslim Brotherhood regime that was enthusiastically backed by Obama, who had helped overthrow our crucial ally Hosni Mubarak. When the Muslim Brotherhood lost power, Obama responded by cutting off military support.

A story from last August helps fill out this picture:

The United States does not support Egyptian and Emirati airstrikes against Islamist militias in Libya because the U.S. believes the crisis in Libya must be resolved politically and without outside interference, a Department of Defense spokesman said…

Libya’s slide into anarchy has alarmed neighboring Egypt and several Gulf states, who have voiced concern that chaos there will help to spread the jihadist threat in the region. An al-Qaeda-linked group, Ansar al-Shariah, controls most of Benghazi and another Islamist faction, Fajr (“Dawn”), seized the Tripoli airport at the weekend.

Qatar, whose backing for Islamists including the Muslim Brotherhood across the region has angered its Gulf neighbors, has funneled support to the Islamists in Libya.

Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia are believed to be supporting a former Gaddafi-regime chief of staff, Gen. Khalifa Hifter, who early this year declared war on the Islamist militias. The Islamists have accused him of being an “American agent,” although the State Department says the U.S. does not support him.

Of course not. Obama’s State Department is squarely on the side of the Islamists. (This article originally appeared on Moonbattery on February 19, 2015)

…and, as all Democrats know, the only way to solve this nagging problem is to find jobs for Islamic terrorists. Just ask Obama’s sock puppet, Marie Harf.

Feb. 19, 2015: Obama administration attacks Egypt & UAE for ISIS raids

Where does one begin to parse the inane and irrational thinking that went into the Obama administration’s public rebuke of Egypt and the United Arab Emirates for attacking the Islamists who beheaded 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians in Libya? Pentagon Spokesperson Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby condemned Egypt’s airstrikes on ISIS stating

We discourage other nations from taking a part in Libya’s issues through violence. We want the issues solved in Libya to be done peacefully and through good governance and politics and not violence.

So it’s okay for the U.S. to join forces with Iran (an enemy) to help fight ISIS in Iraq, a county that fell into chaos when the geniuses in the White House decided to lose a war that had been won – just for political expediency. But it’s not okay for Egypt (an ally) to defend itself and its citizens against the maniacal terrorists in Libya, a country that fell into chaos when the geniuses in the White House decided to lead from behind – just for political expediency.

The U.S. may discourage nations from using violence in Libya but the Libyan terrorists (perhaps the same ones who killed four Americans in Benghazi two years ago) could care a less what we want. Violence is all they know and while Obama may prefer to turn and run with his tail between his legs, it’s nice to see that the Egyptians, Jordanians, and Emiratis actually have some balls.

Does anyone even know what “good governance and politics” means in the context of Libya? Obama led from behind and now the country is a mess just like Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. Who exactly does he want to govern? And which political parties does he want to peacefully solve issues? The one allied with the Islamists or the one allied with Egypt? And were issues being peacefully solved when our embassy was attacked in Benghazi and four Americans were killed? Were issues being peacefully solved when 21 Coptic Christians were beheaded in Tripoli?

Perhaps this shouldn’t be surprising considering these are the same people who tried to position the Muslim Brotherhood in power in Egypt and who, as recently as two weeks ago, hosted MB members at State Department meetings. (It was no coincidence that following these meetings, the MB in Egypt announced that its supporters should prepare for “a long, uncompromising jihad.”)

Kirby stated that the crisis in Libya should be solved without outside interference but what exactly do they think caused the civil war that is taking place within its borders? We know they will never take responsibility for the disaster they created but they should at least remain silent when others attempt to fight the fight from which they shy away.

But the hypocrisy is astounding. Claiming that Egypt and the UAE’s airstrikes against ISIS in Libya are different from the U.S.’s airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq, Kirby contorted his reasoning with the haughty statement that ours are not “some unilateral decision” and are “very targeted” with the green light of the Iraqi government. Kirby went on to explain that more violence is not the answer. If only someone asked him why it’s okay to have Iran help add fuel to the fire in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

Furthermore, State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki, the thirty-something coed who masquerades as a foreign policy expert, pronounced that the political situation in Libya is “very complicated” (kind of like “very targeted” strikes?) and “democracy, these processes of reform, take some time.” Would that the administration have understood that point with Iraq and kept a residual force to help along that newly birthed democracy we would not even be discussing ISIS. Now, all of the sudden, these people are experts on the fragile nature of a democracy in a region that they previously chided George W. Bush for pursuing. And anyone watching this administration over the past six years understands that the “very complicated” nature of foreign policy generally is way over any of these people’s pay grades. (Keep reading…)

INCREDIBLE: 4-Star Admiral Slams Obama: Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrated All Of Our National Security Agencies

During a press conference on how to combat radical Islamic extremism, Admiral James A. “Ace” Lyons (U.S. Navy, Ret.), former Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Pacific Fleet, stated that under the leadership of Barack Obama the Muslim Brotherhood have infiltrated all of the National Security Agencies of the United States. Furthermore, Lyons said that Obama is deliberately unilaterally disarming the military and spoke to the need for the new GOP controlled congress and Military leaders to stand up to the administration and uphold their oaths.

Here are a few of his more salient points:

“The transformation of American has been in full swing ever since 2008. President Obama’s no-show in Paris was an embarrassment to all Americans, but it was also a signal to Islamic jihadists – one of many signals he’s sent over the years while he’s in office. Now, there’s no question, we’ve got a hell of a job ahead of us with the Muslim Brotherhood penetration in every one of our national security agencies including all our intelligence agencies, and has been reported by some of our lead intelligence agency led by a Muslim convert. This is not going to be an easy task…”

“Political correctness has neutralized all our military leadership…”

“Now we have a new Congress. They were elected to stop the transformation of America, not to see how they could work with the President. This is pure nonsense. “

“The threat is Islam. Let’s make no mistake. There’s no such thing as radical Islam. I’d like someone to give me a definition of moderate Islam – there ain’t any.”

“Islam is Islam, there are no modifiers.”

 

The Dilemma of Islamic Terrorism, by Ali Sina

The recent massacres in Paris of the staff of Charlie Hebdo and the Jews in a kosher supermarket, and the increasing incidences of butchering young people coming out of pubs have made more people concerned about the rise of terrorism. Tens of thousands have come out to demonstrate.

Since the 9/11 attack on New York and the Pentagon in 2001, there have been close to 25,000 terrorist attacks worldwide, all of which were perpetrated in the name of Islam. That is about 5 terrorist attacks every day. So far two million people have been killed and a similar number are maimed and injured. These attacks are becoming more frequent. Yet something is not changing.

  • Immediately after the attack, the president or the prime minister of the country in which the attack has taken place goes on TV and declares that this attack had nothing to do with Islam.
  • Right after that the chief of police announces that he has taken all the measures to protect Muslims from any imaginary backlash and nonexistent reprisal.
  • In the evening of the same day the mainstream media interviews an imam or a Muslim spokesperson who emphasizes that Islam does not condone violence.
  • We are then told that extremists exist in all religions and reminded that some thirty years ago a few Christians killed a few abortionist murderers of unborn babies.
  • Then the pundits are called to pontificate that the root cause of Islamic terrorism is not in what the terrorist themselves say, and nothing to do with the Quran (that in hundreds of verses calls on the believers to kill the unbelievers), but in the injustice done to Muslims in other parts of the world, such as in Abu Ghraib prison and particularly in Palestine where half a century ago Israelis defeated the Arab invaders who had vowed to drown them in the sea.
  • A few days after that the police and the politicians of the victim country hold meetings with the leaders of the Muslim community where they conclude that more money should be given to the “moderate Muslims” to persuade the “radicals” to not take their religion seriously.
  • The experts also conclude that emblems like Christmas and Christmas trees hurt the religious sentiment of Muslims and they should be removed from public institutions, shopping malls and schools, while at the same time Muslims should be given some concessions, like not requiring them to wash their hands before performing operation on patients, designating a room and Islamic toilets for them in public institutions, and allow them to apply for driving license without requiring them to show their face.
  • Also, in the spirit of integration and community cohesion, everyone should be forced to eat halal meat, which involves extra cruelty to the animals, without their knowledge, whether they want it or not.

This tune is replayed every time there is a terrorist attack. The narrative never changes, despite the unequivocal assertion of the terrorists themselves who make it clear they are motivated by the teachings and examples of their prophet and his promise of virgins. Methinks, the record of history is broken. How else can we explain that after a repetition of 25,000 times one would not question the validity of this narrative?

While politicians in western countries and the mainstream media are stuck in the above narrative, the truth is not hidden from the Muslims. Al Sisi, the president of Egypt, in his 2015 New Year’s speech in Al Azhar University, addressing top Sunni clerics said, “it is not possible that 1.6 billion people [reference to the world’s Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live.” Sisi did not blame Abu Ghraib, Israel, nor made other silly excuses for Islamic terrorism. He blamed the “ideology” of it. But the ideology—which says, kill the unbelievers so you go to paradise—comes straight from the Quran.

Sisi cannot go further than that. What he said is already too much and if he did not have the military behind him, he would have been thrown into jail. However, if a non-Muslim raises the same concerns raised by Sisi, they will be called racist and denounced as an Islamophobe.

We are told, “You can’t paint an entire group of people with the same wide brush.” But there is a war going on. People are being killed. We have to know our enemy. Who is the enemy?

Of course not everyone is the same. Although each individual is unique we can classify Muslims in three broad categories. In practice, an individual often belongs to more than one category. The proportion of the overlap varies, and just as 18 decillion colors are created by the combination of just three colors and their intensity, the degree to which Muslims belong to each category gives rise to infinite diversity among them. No Muslim exists out of these three categories.

The first category is that of good Muslims. By good I mean true believers—those who follow the teachings of their prophet, the Quran and the Sunnah to the letter, who try to emulate him in every way and are strict and pious Muslims. Since the teachings and the examples of Muhammad are full of violence and terror, the more one follows and emulates him the more radical one becomes. Muhammad raided and butchered people merely because they were not his followers. The good Muslims do the same. All the bombings and terrorism perpetrated by Muslims are replicas of Muhammad’s raids, or ghazwa, as he called them. Taking women as sex slaves, which the Islamic State and Boko Haram practice was also practiced by Muhammad and he sanctioned it in the Quran (33:50; 23: 1-6; 70:30; 4:24; 66:1-2). He ordered the assassination of his critics stoning the adulterers, chopping the hands of thieves and killing the apostates. So, the terrorists are actually good Muslims.

The second category is of bad Muslims. These are those who don’t practice their religion and are often ignorant of it. They may pray or chant the Quran, but have no clue of its content. They read it for thawab (reward) without understanding it. These Muslims are ordinary people we all know. Like everybody else, some are good and some are not so good. Some of them are friendly, but they see themselves as superior, by virtue of their faith, and of “higher morals.”

Morality in Islam has nothing to do with what others understand by this word. Morality for women is to cover their hair lest it arouse sexual feelings in men. For men, it is not to shake hands with Muslim women lest it arouse them sexually, or not to masturbate, etc. Morality in Islam is primarily about genitals and their use. For example, while having sex out of marriage is considered immoral, stoning people caught in such act is not immoral. While looking at bare arms and legs of Muslim women is considered immoral, raping non-Muslim women is not immoral. Homosexuality is immoral, but pedophilia is not.

These Muslims migrate to the west to better their lives, but they segregate themselves, form isolated communities and warn their children to not learn the ways of unbelievers or take them as friends unless they intent to convert them to Islam. They give huge amounts of money to charity. But Islamic charity has nothing to do with charity. All that money goes to build mosques, print Islamic materials and promote Islam. If any of that is spent for the needy, it is to enlist them for jihad or support the families of the suicide bombers. The bad Muslims are the lifeline of Islam and the breeding ground for good Muslims. All Muslim terrorists, unless they are converts, are born in and emerge from this group. Without the moral and financial support of the bad Muslims Islam will cease to exist.

Then we have the ugly Muslims. As we learned the good Muslims are not good at all, and the bad ones are not really bad people, the ugly Muslims actually look beautiful. Islam is a world down the rabbit hole. Nothing is what it is because everything is what it is not. The ugly Muslims are clean-shaven, handsome or attractive, eloquent, articulate, and highly intelligent, just the kind of people you want to hang around with. They are journalists, professors, regular guests and contributors to mainstream media. They know what to say to gain your approval and your applause. They are charming. Their words are reassuring and their faces are familiar. You like them and trust them. So why do I call them ugly? Because they lie! Their job is to deceive you and to make you believe that the “real Islam” poses no threat to you. These wolves in sheep clothing are the most dangerous group. Deception is deadlier than terror. Do you fear more a ferocious animal that you can see or a deadly virus that you can’t? The enemy within is a lot more dangerous.

Unlike the bad Muslims the ugly ones are not ignorant of their religion. They know of Muhammad’s raids, rapes, assassinations, genocides, tortures, beheadings, but they deny them, twist the facts and defend him. They accuse the good Muslims of having hijacked their religion of peace when they know they lie. They claim to be reformers when they know that Islam cannot be reformed. Islam is what it is. To reform Islam one has to change the Quran. Over 70% of it must be scrapped, and the other 30% is just sheer nonsense.

These self-styled reformers don’t want to change the Quran. They just want Muslims to practice it less. In theory it works. Even the deadliest poison in small doses is not lethal. But how can they convince all Muslims to not take their holy book seriously? This project is doomed from the start. This is either naiveté and wishful thinking, or a ruse to deceive the non-Muslims, to give them false hope so they can buy more time for Islam to take over the world, which is the goal of every Muslim, the good, the bad and the ugly.

Every Muslim falls within these three categories. Just as virtually all colors are combinations of the three primary colors, elements of the three categories of Muslims exist in all of them.

Not all Muslims are terrorists, but a substantial percentage of them are, and a greater percentage, condone terrorism. But does it really matter who is and who is not? If I give you 1,000 cups of good wine and tell you only one of them contains cyanide will you drink any of them? The terrorist are born, raised and protected by the “moderates.” They are indistinguishable from each other. It is delusional to think that the non-terrorist Muslims have nothing to do with terrorism. Where do the terrorists come from if not from the so-called moderate Muslims?

All Muslims support the ideology that wants to kill us. There are also good people (bad Muslims) among them, like al Sisi, who want to change this. They can’t, because the ideology against which they speak is Islam itself. They will likely be assassinated before they succeed. The belief that Islam can be reformed from within is wishful thinking. Other religions allow change and adapt with times. Islam is like a fossil. What is written in the Quran cannot be changed and the problem with Islam is the Quran.

Islam cannot be reformed, but it can be eradicated. It cannot be molded, but it can be smashed and pulverized. This cannot be done from within. Growth happens from within. But if you want to demolish a building you have to get out of it. You can’t cut a branch while sitting on it.

The question is how to stop Islam. There are three ways, incidentally, one is good, one is bad and the other is ugly.

The good way to stop Islam is to spread the truth about it. Like darkness that cannot stand the light, lies cannot stand the truth. If we tell the truth about Muhammad and reveal his crimes, Islam will fall in no time. We can actually destroy Islam in less than two decades. All we need to do is tell the truth. Yes, truth will set us free. It really does! I myself have left Islam and have helped thousands to leave it with nothing but truth.

There are countless books and websites that tell the truth. The problem is that Muslims don’t read. Also many non-Muslims don’t read. The majority of people get their facts from the media. The ugly Muslims’ jihad is to muddy the waters so no one can learn the truth about their religion. When we quote passages from the Quran to show how vile and evil they are, they say we quote them out of context. But they never tell us in what context the hundreds of verses that call for killing the unbelievers can mean something else. The fact is that they are the ones who quote their book out of context to make it look tolerant. For example, the Sura 109 that says, “To you your religion and to me mine,” or the verse 2:256 that says, “There is no compulsion in religion,” or the verse 5:32 that says, “Whoever kills one person is as if he has killed all mankind,” are taken out of context. They have nothing to do with tolerance.

But there is a way to overcome this hurdle and that is to make a biopic of Muhammad, something beautiful that everyone wants to see for its artistic value and is factual and truthful. Most people have never read the Bible, but they know about Jesus and Moses through movies. We need to do the same for Muhammad. This is our best option and my preferred choice.

The second option is bad. It is to deport all Muslims back to their country of origin. It does not matter if they are second or third generation immigrants. Muslims do not see themselves as citizens of any non-Muslim country and their allegiance is not and cannot be to a country that is not controlled by them. If they tell you otherwise they would be going against the Quran 9:23 that says Muslims should not accept the guardianship, i.e. the rule of the unbelievers. Muslims believe the Quran is the word of God and the Quran says, “We made you an exalted nation, that you may be guardians over the people” (2:143). The only status that is acceptable to Muslims is that they should rule over others while others are reduced into dhimmis, second class citizens who would labor and support their Muslim masters.

The third option is really ugly. It consists in doing to Muslims what they do to others, and give them a taste from their own holy book, i.e., “to cast terror in their hearts” (Q. 8:12; 3:151). Treat Muslims the way they treat non-Muslims. Make life unbearable for them, just as they make it unbearable for non-Muslims wherever they are in power. Muslims are still a minority in the west. Once they see their lives is in danger, they will leave on their own accord, just as millions of Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Bahais and Hindus have left their ancestral homelands because Muslims made life unbearable for them. When kept at bay in their own countries, Muslims pose no threat to the world. They will fight among each other and self-destruct. They are a problem only when they migrate to non-Muslims countries and strive to conquer them as their religion requires it from them.

As you see the last two options are really bad and really ugly. But there is one that is even worse. It is to do nothing. If we do nothing, in just a generation, Muslims will become powerful enough to do to us what they do to non-Muslims wherever they are powerful. If we do nothing our grandchildren will suffer the same fate that non-Muslims suffer in Islamic countries, with the difference that there will be nowhere left in the world as safe haven to accept them as refugees.

I am not in favor of mass deportation, and less in favor of casting terror in the hearts of Muslims. I hope to set them free with truth so they can be our friends, instead of our enemy. But the last thing I want is for the entire world to become Islamic State. I rather see Muslims expelled from Europe, America and Australia, even by force and coercion, than billions butchered by them a generation from now. I witnessed Shah’s cowardice when he failed to gun down a few hundred protesters in the Islamic uprising of 1979 and as the result over a million Iranians were killed by the Islamic regime and the country has become a giant prison. So I know a thing or two about pragmatism. If Islam is allowed to win it means the end of human civilization. If Islam wins, humanity will enter a dark age from which it can never emerge.

Let us hope we come to our senses and do the right thing. Let us hope we rescue Muslims from their faith of hate and bring them back to the fold of humanity. But if all fails. Let us pay attention to one of the most profound passages ever written.

“There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens: a time to be born and a time to die, a time to plant and a time to uproot, a time to kill and a time to heal, a time to tear down and a time to build, a time to weep and a time to laugh, a time to mourn and a time to dance, a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them, a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing, a time to search and a time to give up, a time to keep and a time to throw away, a time to tear and a time to mend, a time to be silent and a time to speak, a time to love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace” (Ecclesiastes 3).

This article may be reprinted and published without permission without alteration.

Ali Sina is the founder of faithfreedom.org an organization created by ex-Muslims to help Muslims leave Islam and the author of Understanding Muhammad.

Just another fun-loving, Bitter-clinging, gun loving right wing extremist…