Image

Pamela Geller and the hijacking of America

User avatar
[img]/images/Hijacking_of_America.jpg[/img]

By Larissa Scott | First published in the American Thinker

[PROG OFF]

On the morning of September 11, 2001, I couldn't help thinking, I could have been a passenger on one of those planes that crashed into the World Trade Center. Today the feeling is back, as if we are all passengers on a hijacked plane the size of America, heading towards an imminent crash. The question is, knowing what we know now, what are we going to do about it?

Shortly before American Airlines Flight 11 hit the North Tower, an Egyptian-born jihadi, Mohammed Atta, addressed the passengers over the intercom:

"Just stay quiet, and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport... Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any move, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet... Nobody move, please... Don't try to make any stupid moves."
Twenty minutes later they died a horrible death, accompanied by hundreds of people inside the North Tower. Had the passengers known the real plan, they might have attempted to take matters into their own hands and possibly avert a bigger disaster. But they likely believed Mohammed Atta, especially since no hijacker had deliberately crashed a plane before. Many were probably thinking, Let the government sort it out, that's whom the terrorists always blackmail. We just need to stay quiet and make no stupid moves. Of course we'll be okay.

Tactical deception, especially when lying to non-Muslims, is legally sanctioned under Sharia, which is a mainstream, universal Islamic law. In Sunni Islam, such practice is referred to as mudarat, or taquiyya.

Fast-forward fourteen years to Garland, TX. Jihadists drove a thousand miles to enforce Sharia blasphemy laws. The cop who shot them to death likely prevented a gruesome massacre. We are now being told that this would not have happened and everything would have been okay if Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer had stayed quiet and didn't make any stupid moves, such as, organizing the exhibition of Mohammed cartoons.

This is exactly the behavior of passengers on a hijacked plane. We hope that everything will be okay as long as we remain quiet and make no stupid moves. We willingly trust the voices on TV and hope the government will sort it out. We want to believe that every act of Islamic terrorism is an isolated incident, that they only target the government, and that the 58% of Muslim-Americans in a 2012 survey who think that that critics of Islam in the U.S. should face criminal charges, with 12% of them favoring the death penalty for blasphemy, are not part of a bigger phenomenon. Just stay quiet and nothing bad will happen. After all, no terrorist has ever hijacked and crashed an entire nation before.

Alas, nations have been consistently hijacked and crashed throughout history. This has always been executed according to the same blueprint, which originated in the 7th century Islamic conquests and is known to Islamic jurists as the Pact of Umar.

While the Pact of Umar's precise origins are a matter of legend, its conditions, based on Muhammad's treatment of conquered people, have gained a canonical status in Islamic jurisprudence with regard to relations between Muslims and non-Muslims, otherwise known as dhimmis, and as such became a subset of Sharia law.

Given that Sharia by definition cannot be altered any more than one can alter the Koran or the Sunna, and even talking about reforming Sharia is considered blasphemous, its medieval rulings about what dhimmis are allowed or not allowed to do, are still in effect today. According to a recent Pew survey, the majority of Muslims worldwide want Sharia to be the law of the land everywhere; that includes the Conditions of Umar, even if those who practice them may not necessarily refer to them by that name.

Settling in non-Muslim countries, Muslim minorities traditionally bring with them Sharia law, which prescribes them to punish dhimmis who overstep certain boundaries regardless of what the local law says, because the "God-given" Sharia law will always be superior to the "man-made law" of the dhimmis.

Mohammed_Cartoon_Fawstin.jpg
Under the many Conditions of Omar, dhimmis aren't allowed to criticize anything that has to do with Islam, including the very conditions of subjugation under which they live.

Dhimmis
are supposed to remain ignorant about Islamic teachings and can only refer to Islam in positive terms.

Mocking, insulting, cursing, or even upsetting Muslims in any way, testifying against a Muslim in court, or raising a hand against a Muslim, even in self-defense, is forbidden.

Criticism of a Muslim person by a dhimmi -- even if it's based on undeniable facts, constitutes "slander" and is punishable by death.

In contrast with the Western definition of slander -- false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation -- Sharia defines slander as any statement a Muslim would dislike, regardless if its degree of accuracy. This works in conjunction with another Sharia ruling, which gives all Muslims an open license to murder the offender wherever they find him. That doesn't mean all Muslims will do it, but if someone volunteers to do the killing, he will not be punished under Sharia. In modern times, this means an open season of vigilante street justice on any critic of Islam anywhere on the planet.

Suddenly, the medieval choices jihadis place before their victims are all over today's news coverage, just as they were originally set out in the Koran: convert to Islam, submit to the Muslim rule and pay a non-Muslim religious tax called jizya, or die by the sword. Those who submit, as we've seen in the territories conquered by ISIS in Iraq and Syria, are doomed to a life of humiliation, subjugation, discrimination, and confiscatory taxation.

Dhimmi translates as "protected person," which is similar in meaning to protection racket: what a nice dhimmi community you have here, shame if anything were to happen to it. You are protected from violence as long as you obey the conditions and pay the protection money. But if any of the dhimmis act up or "made a stupid move," his or her action puts the entire dhimmi community in jeopardy of jihadi retaliation, where anyone is fair game for collective punishment.

Western nations with a significant share of Muslim immigrants are now learning to live in a state of permanent vulnerability and fear that one of them might upset a Muslim and thus provoke rioting or jihad slaughter. As a result, Western dhimmis are learning to police each other and make sure no one in their community makes any "stupid moves."

Pamela Geller just did that. Her exhibition of Mohammed cartoons has crossed the line of permissible dhimmi behavior, and for that she has become a target of criticism by the American media, including some conservative commentators. Among the many stated reasons why Pamela should have "just stayed quiet," the main argument remains unstated: she made a stupid move and now we're all in danger of retaliation.

The real questions the media should be asking is, if we aren't already living under the Conditions of Umar, what would we do differently if we did?

User avatar
Image
I agree with your statements fully. It is those that have an understanding that can make decisions and see the changes that are happening. As we all teach ourselves, because the American Pravda will not, how and what is happening, we can prepare ourselves against it.
As we learn, we find that it is accepted by those that intend harm to occupy an area in the community and never to assimilate, but to impose and force sharia.

So, you wonder, why this terrorism is being allowed. You think about all the surveillance and time that is being put into following know criminals and those they recruit and corrupt other to do evil and nothing appears to be done to stop it. You contemplate the danger that is being allowed to fester and grow.

What we need is those good Muslims to stand up and oppose the evil of those that intend harm. We also need the "black robe brigade" just as we had at the founding of our nation where the clergy lead the fight for freedom.

As you have said, we need to not "just be quiet" and not do any "stupid moves". We need to expose the jihadists and the criminal behavior of our government, local and federal, and the complacency of the media.

User avatar
Well as any patriotic liberal in good standing knows that the clear cut lines between evil and good must never be pointed out! Comrades, it is simply unhealthy for developing progressive minds. It is important that our allies in the media, flatulent politicians and self appointed community leaders must instill in our citizens the acute ability to blur these lines for the sake of people who are vastly inferior as well as their emotional well being. I encourage other progressives who feel the same way as I do, to join me with their groveling voices and demand that given enough love, capitulation, appeasement as well as the complete abandonment of Israel, nobody but nobody should ever cast aspersions or mention the nationality or religious beliefs that puts the dhimmi community in jeopardy. The question should be: Does a society that would sanction the mocking, insulting, cursing or casting aspersions, even on an innocent terrorist deserve to exist? Fellow travelers, the good news is, that under Sharia Law one can only be stoned, beheaded, disemboweled or trampled one time and only one time!

User avatar
Image

Pam Geller should be referred to with Humphrey Bogart's line to Katherine Hepburn in "The African Queen" (Note: "The African Queen" is not a documentary about Rue Paul):

"a genuine heroine..."

Not only has she exposed the Islamofascist/Jihadist whack-jobs in our midst but she has also exposed the Oval Office Urkel for allowing such miscreants into our country...

User avatar
We used Bosh Fawstin's picture of Mohammed but we missed his even more suitable drawing - used by Mark Steyn in his article Stay Quiet and You'll Be Okay.

Mohammed_Stay_Quiet_Bosch_Fawstin.jpg

User avatar
[img]/images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]

I am Pamela Geller!

Just like I was Geert Wilders!

Go, Pammie!

Dear Leader to the American public: "I am not a Muslim. I am a Christian you guys!!! Born in the good old USA." Image
Image Dear Leader to his audience in Cairo: "When I was a young Muslim, back in the day, in Indonesia we would behead infidels and listen to the beautiful call of the azzan when we prayed 5 times a day. Allahu Ackbar!!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY



Image


Image

User avatar
《OFF》Excellent article Comradette Mrs. Red Square.

Unfortunately we will only see more of this until we take proactive measures to stop it. And just who is going to do that? It is seen as political suicide even to entertain such notions publicly.The most obvious first step would be to curtail the importation of practitioners of the Religion of Peace. Beyond that, securing our borders and prosecuting those who foment terrorism from within sounds logical, but I'm not gonna hold my breath while I wait for any of them to take place.

Some may view it as extreme, but the only way to truly prevent this otherwise inevitable fate is to treat Islamists exactly as the Native Americans were. That flies in the face of everything we believe in as free people, but the ones who strictly adhere to the tenets of that faith are bent on our destruction.

Until the American populace begin to grasp the gravity of the situation, it is highly unlikely that they will elect representatives with the political will to take the necessary steps to protect Americans and our precious Liberty. Not to sound pessimistic, but by the time they wake up and come to realize who the enemy is, it will be too late, if it is not already.

User avatar
Image Mrs. Red Square

Your fine article put me mind of a thought experiment that is out there on the interwebs.

It is clear to many that we are heading towards WWIII and you have ask:
Why aren't people recognizing the danger?
Why aren't people remembering history so they don't have to repeat it? (And have Millions DIE in the process)
Why aren't people waking up to the organized evil that is surrounding them?

Consider this thought experiment [Leftists are exempt from it since it requires thought]:

Imagine if you will that you could go back in time to circa 1930 with the attendant turmoil leading up to WWII.
Were the people back then cognizant of what was to befall them?
Hindsight is always 20/20 and from our perspective in history it should be bloody obvious what is to take place. But if you found yourself back then you wouldn't be able to inform people of this on rushing calamity. [Not because of time paradoxes – more like they would lock you up as crazy person]

So how would you try to explain what is taking place and how it would lead to the second world war?
Would you point to current events and characters such as Hitler and Stalin as the ‘Casus belli' in the coming conflict?


So let's turn that around and suppose you're a time traveler from 40 –50 years from now – wouldn't you have the same problem?

The questions become:
How would you try to explain what is taking place and how it would lead to the Second Third world war?

Would you point to current events and characters such as Hitler Islam and Stalin Red China as the ‘Casus belli' in the coming conflict?

History is always bloody obvious AFTER the fact.

Your piece reminded me that it should be obvious that there is a growing conflict with Islam – and pretending that it'll just go away and if you "Just stay quiet, and you'll be okay.” Is a fools errand.

Just something to ponder over.


 
POST REPLY