In his book, Slavery, Terrorism and Islam, Dr. Peter Hammond illustrates what happens to a country as their Muslim population grows. He details the level of extremist behavior one can expect based on the percentage of Muslims within a society. One only has to compare the predicted behavior associated with these percentages against the behaviors exhibited by Muslim extremists in countries today to see that Hammond’s work has validity.
Hammond states that when the Muslim population is under 2% they remain ‘relatively peaceful.’ According to Pew Research from 2010, the Muslim population in the U.S. was .08%.
However, the problem here in the States is that a large part of our government is composed of Muslim Brotherhood members. Also, Obama has imported hundreds of thousands of Muslims since 2010 (300,000 in 2013 alone), and by other secretive means since he took office.
CONTINUE ON PAGE 2:
It is all part of his plan to Fundamentally transform America………..into a Muslim nation.
Eventually they will demand more & more & start trying to demand Halal foods & Sharia law!!!
Look at him I know it not much but he looks pathetic/makes me sick…
The Goal of Muslim Immigration According to Muhammad’s Teachings
The concept of Muslim immigration began with Islam’s prophet. Soon after Muhammad arrived to Yathrib (Medina) together with his close friend and father of his wife Aisha, Abu Bakr, they were joined by a ring of other friends and followers, known in Islamic history as “Companions.” They formed in Medina the first body of Muslim immigrants in history and very soon changed the face of Medina, making it the city of the victorious Islam. Immigration transformed Muslims from weak and scattered groups of individuals loyal to their religious leader, into a consolidated army, then a united community and finally, into a socio-religious political state. If Muhammad and his group had never immigrated to Yathrib in 622 AD, there would never have been any Islamic social, economic and political expansion. Muslims learned and remembered this lesson, and since then the concept of Hijrah- Immigration- as a means of supplanting the native population and reaching the position of power became a well-developed doctrine in Islam. Immigration in Islam is not a Western liberal romance about how the newcomers gratefully search for opportunities for a better life in liberty and offer their talents and loyalty to the benefit of their new homeland. Immigration as Islam sees it is an instrument of Islamic expansionism that employs religious and ethnic separatism in order to gain special status and privilege, then subvert, subdue, and subjugate non-Muslim societies and pave the way for their total Islamization and implementation of Shari’ah law.
The main principle for a Muslim community in a non-Muslim country is that it must be separate and distinct. Already in the Charter of Medina, Muhammad outlined the basic rule for Muslims who emigrate to non-Muslim land, i.e., they must form a separate body, keeping their own laws and making the host country comply with them: (3) The Quraysh emigrants according to their present custom shall pay the bloodwit within their number and shall redeem their prisoners with the kindness and justice common among believers. Muslims from the beginning made it clear that they were going to live by their own laws.
Muhammad’s teachings forbid Muslims to immigrate to a non-Muslim country if they pursue the goal of their own personal gain or pleasure. But if they immigrate with the ultimate goal of spreading Islam and making it victorious, or at least this is a part of the reason for their immigration, then they are allowed both pleasure and personal gain. A Muslim immigrant should not integrate with the host society, but if his stay depends on showing some kind of integration to the host non-Muslim society, then he is permitted to demonstrate a f**e integration, only in appearance and only temporarily, until the goal of subduing and the Islamization of this host society is achieved. That is why all those discussions so popular among Western liberals about which method is best for the integration of the religious Muslim immigrants into the host non-Muslim societies are not only futile; they are amusing, like disputes about the best way to make a tiger a vegetarian.
The next rule Muhammad made clear was that immigration for Muslims is a religious duty. The reason is simple and evident: the more Muslims come to a non-Muslim country, the more possibilities this will open for infiltration in all structures of this country with the final goal of securing victory for Islam, and more soldiers will stand up when the time of Jihad comes. Immigration is a preparatory stage to Jihad, and Muhammad made it very clear when he said: “I charge you with five of what Allah has charged me with: to $#%&!@*emble, to listen, to obey, to immigrate and to wage Jihad for the sake of Allah.”[1]
The religious duty of immigration was stated in numerous Koranic Surahs: 2:218, 8:72,74,75; 9:30,; 16:41; 16:110…They all start with the same words: “Those who believed and emigrated, and strove hard and fought in Allah’s Cause…” Immigration goes as a step stone for Jihad; where you cannot establish Islam by force is where Immigration enters. And in practice, it looks like that: Islam in Egypt, Palestine and Persia was spread by the sword; but many other countries- Indonesia, Malaysia, Central Asia, some parts of India- were gained through “immigration.”
Immigration in Islam is merely a disguised conquest. And if someone thinks that this disguised conquest ended, then they are fatally wrong: immigration ends only when Islam achieves its goal of conquering the world, and Muhammad, again, stated this very clearly: “Migration cannot be ended as long as there is kufr (unbelief) or as long as there is an enemy that resists” [2] Later Muhammad developed this idea, saying: “Migration will continue until the sun rises from the West. Hijrah would not be stopped until repentance is cut off, and repentance will not be cut off until the sun rises from the West”[3] So immigration can end only when a community or a country has been won over, and the conquest has been achieved. But Jihad does not end until all the world is Islamic, and Muslims should not stop until Islam dominates the world. As Muhammad formulated it, “There can be no Hijrah (migration) after the conquest but Jihad and a desire or an intention, and if you settle then spread out.”
From the start, Muhammad brushed aside the Christian postulate about separation of Church and State: in the Islamic community, Church is State, and State is Church. The most important result of Hijrah was the expansion of Islam outside its initial borders not only as a religion, but as a socio-religious and socio-political system. Muslim immigration is a transitional period of preparation for transforming the host society from an open society into an Islamic society of the “slaves of Allah” and of establishing a political system, a State, based on Islamic principles.
better wake up americans !! obama needs kicked out first or jailed !!
sounds like wendy and robert have already accepted their fate …no fight left in them so you two just curl up p**s your panties and be good little victims
Civil war, with Deportation of non American citizens. And all who killed American citizens the hanging rope.
Then after Jan 2017 we have to start shipping them back including the Muslim in Chief.There is going to be a civil war, not if but when, you can see it coming.
OBAMA LEGACY
By : Matt Patterson
(Newsweek Columnist – Opinion Writer)
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of m$#%&!@* hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer;” a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, less often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.
He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling $#%&!@*ociations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor;” a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president? There is no evidence that he ever attended or worked for any university or that he ever sat for the Illinois bar. We have no do$#%&!@*entation for any of his claims. He may well be the greatest hoax in history.
Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close $#%&!@*ociations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore en$#%&!@*led in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were ‘a bit’ extreme, he was given a p$#%&!@*. Let that Sink in: Obama was given a p$#%&!@* – held to a “lower standard” because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest? Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon – affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves. Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back.
Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin – that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is.
And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for ColumbiaUniversity despite his undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarr$#%&!@*ed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that’s when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever been issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years. (An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches) And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarr$#%&!@*ing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerless-ness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track). But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsiblynow?
In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such an impostor in the Oval Office.
Then you start shooting to protect your self and property.Because the government will try to over throw the people.