Posts Tagged ‘Islam’

Islam’s Stealth Jihad In U.S. Government

February 5, 2015

Islam’s Stealth Jihad In U.S. Government .

The following video is of a recent panel discussion about America’s Transformation under the Obama Administration and our handling of the great and growing threat of Islamic Jihad against the World, as well as in America’s own government.

Four Star Naval Admiral James, “Ace”, Lions speaks about this danger that is completely overlooked by our media and also the average voting American.

Although Admiral Lions does not call it “Stealth Jihad”, he none the less clearly describes this successful Islamic strategy in plain language.

The Admiral presses the listener/observer to understand that significant portions of our government have been infiltrated through the diabolical methods of Stealth (i.e., covert) Jihad (i.e., the theological/political struggle impose Islam on the World).

This video is a short one.  It is essential that you see it and share it with everyone you know.

You will note the time restriction placed upon Admiral Lions. He clearly is not given enough time to document his position that our government has been infiltrated by Islamic Stealth Jihad. But I assure you he is correct and the evidence supporting his charges appears to me to be irrefutable.

I have come to that conclusion based upon my own research, which is broader than the article that I now present to you, and beg you to read. The is not a short presentation of the evidence supporting the Admiral’s brief stunning presentation, but it is a powerful and well documented supporting presentation that every patriot American should read.

I hope you will evaluate this article and its as well as its reverence section. If you wish to argue to the contrary of these assertions about Islam in America’s Government, I invite you to do so. However, I expect that you will present evidence in support of your position.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, 2/5/15

P.S., Thanks to Gordon Jones for forwarding an article to me that contained this clear, honest and commonsense video about Islam and its stealth Jihad against the America.


October 16, 2010


For an inside view of Islam, I strongly recommend that you read Infidel, by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, published by Free Press: New York (2007).

Ayaan describes growing up in a Muslim family, going to Muslim schools, and being beaten at home and at school for very minor cultural/religious infractions. In school, she was struck so hard on the head that it fractured her skull and she had to be hospitalized. She recounts being held down as a child and having her labia and clitrous cut off by a strange man with a pair of scissors. He then sewed her vagina shut, leaving just enough of a gap to allow her to urinate. All of this was done without an anesthetic. She noted that infections from these brutal mutilations were common and girls sometimes died of complications.

She explained that the showing of any part of a woman’s body was viewed as sexually arousing to men and therefore sinful. Therefore girls past a certain age had to be covered from head to toe when in the presence of anyone outside their family.

Ayann described how her father arranged for her marriage to a man she did not know. Her wedding night was a terrifying experience when her husband broke the scar of her stitched-closed vagina by simply forcing his penis into her. As a result she suffered indescribable pain and serious bleeding. The man left the following day and she never saw him again. Ayaan explained that in a Muslim marriage, a woman can never refuse sex to her husband. She said she was taught that she must give sex to her husband any time he wants it, even if they were on the back of a camel.

There is much more to Ayaan’s amazing story. She survived civil wars and eventually migrated to Holland. There she obtained a college degree, a graduate degree, and was elected to the Holland Parliament. In the parliament, she championed individual freedom and fought against Islam’s subjugation of women. She described the horror of “Honor Killings” in Islam, and told of her great fear that her own father would kill her for divorcing her assigned husband.

As part of her political efforts, she made an anti-Islam film with Theo Van Gogh, who is shot multiple times by an Islamic assassin who also slit his throat and stabbed a letter to his chest with a knife threatening Ayaan with death.

Ayaan survives to this day and offers stark testimony to the savagery of Islam.

The following are her words:

“Muslim schools reject the values of universal human rights. All humans are not equal in a Muslim school. Moreover, there can be no freedom of expression or conscience. These schools fail to develop creativity—art, drama, music—and they suppress critical faculties that can lead children to question their beliefs” (p. 280).

“Many well-meaning Dutch people have told me in all earnestness that nothing in Islamic culture incites abuse of women, that this is just a terrible misunderstanding. Men all over the world beat their women, I am constantly informed. In reality, these Westerners are the ones who misunderstand Islam. The Quran mandates these punishments. It gives a legitimate basis for abuse, so that the perpetrators feel no shame and are not hounded by their conscience or their community” (p. 307).

“My central, motivating concern is that women in Islam are oppressed. That oppression of women causes Muslim women and Muslim men, too, to lag behind the West. It creates a culture that generates more backwardness with every generation. It would be better for everyone—for the Muslims, above all—if this situation would change.

When people say that the values of Islam are compassion, tolerance, and freedom, I look at reality, at real cultures and governments, and I see that it simply isn’t so. People in the West swallow this sort of thing because they have learned not to examine the religions or culture of minorities too critically, for fear of being called a racist. It fascinates them that I am not afraid to do so” (pps. 348-349).

Regarding the film she made with Theo Van Gogh, Ayaan said:

“I am told that Submission is too aggressive a film. Its criticism of Islam is apparently too painful for Muslims to bear. Tell me, how much more painful is it to be these women , trapped in that cage?

End of quotations.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D. 10/16/10

The French Berka War

September 16, 2010

The French Berka War

Try fighting a war on two fronts, possibly a Third World War, coping with  monumental economic problems and then, also simultaneously dealing with the clash of  religious values that are incompatible with liberal democracies!

France is in for big trouble with Islam. It has recently outlawed the wearing of berkas. Recent bomb threats at major French landmarks may be related and may be  just the beginning.  All of these concerns are not simple paranoia or Islamophobia, anywhere in the world, including the U.S., insulting or in any way, disrespecting Islamic traditions leads to dire threats and even death for the offenders. Events in time will clarify these concerns.

Please take time to read the following article. You may ” bog down”  in the rightfulness or wrongfulness of France’s prohibition of the berka. But, in doing so, you will be missing the point.

French immigration policies have set up a great clash of powerfully incompatible cultures within its borders and it will now suffer the consequences.

Please read the following:

Wake-Up America!!!

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D.  9/15/10

Separation of Church and State vs. Shariah Law

September 14, 2010

Separation of Church and State vs. Shariah Law

Bruce commented on recent post about Shariah financing and Stealth Jihad.  His thoughts are informed by significant interactions with Middle-Eastern people and they are very well articulated.  In addition, they comport with my efforts to read-up on this subject focusing upon authoritative resources.

Thank you, Bruce, for the effort that you put into well-researched comments.

The following is a direct quote of Bruce’s comments:

On this, I could not agree with you more, although you have only touched on the subject. Now, granted, I am not a scholar of Sharia law, but I’ve heard enough from actual middle-easterners to know that there is merit to the following assertions-
The important thing about Sharia law is that it is believed by Muslims to be perfect and sacred. Law based upon democratic process is offensive to Islam because such law is believed to be from people, and not Allah. Sharia law is based upon the Koran and Mohammed, considered the only perfect guidance. Therefore, it is an offense to Islam for Muslims to have to live under democratic constitutional law. This is the reason that Muslims want to replace our banking laws with Sharia law and replace our family law with Sharia law.

Contrary to what you have posted, I believe a woman under Sharia law can divorce her husband, however, there are probably other implications which make that unlikely. Before anyone gets a warm fuzzy thinking that Sharia is then fair to both sexes, women should know that to make an accusation of rape, she must first have multiple men come forward as witnesses to the rape, else the woman has effectually admitted to adultery for which she will be brutally caned, stoned or even murdered for daring to allow herself to “give in” to the sexual perversion – and this at the hands of the woman/teen/little girl’s own family. Google Islam honor killing if you don’t believe me.

Some other aspects of Sharia law:
+ Women do not have the right to say no to their husbands demand for sex.
+ Provides for lawful beating of your wife for the transgression of showing signs of rebelliousness. IOW, if she disagrees with you about anything, beat her.
+ Provides for polygamy.
+ Provisions Jihad and “legalizes” the murdering of non-Muslims.
+ Provisions slavery.
+ Admonishes pictorial & statue art, as well as music.
+ Sets mandates for non-Muslims: Buildings can’t be higher than Muslim buildings; can’t recite non-Muslim scriptures; or have their own type of funerals; forbids the building of new churches;…others. IOW, pretty much non-Muslims are considered 2nd class citizens with no rights. This is why you hear about atrocities that occur to foreign national maids at the hands of Muslim home owners. Actually, you don’t hear much at all about it as it is not well publicized here, however, maids in Saudi Arabia have an exceptionally high rate of “suicide” and are often brutally beaten by their “employers”.

I also believe that once property is owned by a Muslim, it is never to be sold to a non-Muslim, else Islam is obligated to take the property back, using up to and including deadly force. Hence, the Park51 site is already a monument of Islam regardless of what building exists on that land.

With regard to forced marriage, Sharia law states that whenever the bride is a virgin, the father or the father’s father may marry her off without her permission, though it is “recommended to ask her permission if she has reached puberty”. This aspect of Sharia law suggests that a girl who has not reached the age of puberty can be married off to a man, who then, by the letter of the Sharia law, has the legal right to force himself on her, else she is beaten in to submission. A woman/teen/little girl has the right to say no to the marriage, but only if she is aware of the marriage, as a marriage can legally occur without her presence. A woman/teen/little girl’s silence regarding a marriage is the same as consent according to Sharia law. Of course, how can she say no to a marriage if it is performed without her knowledge or even in her presence? And yes, this is a practice found in many parts of the Islamic world as stories of such atrocities continue to emerge. Granted it may not be the norm, but it is not prosecuted as a crime, as Sharia law legitimizes it.

And yes, Sharia law also has provisions for cutting off the appendages of thieves, & provisions for what animals can be eaten and how animals for food are to be killed.

The USA and the various States already have laws in place. We do not need conflicting religious laws taking precedence over those laws. What part of separation of church and State do people not understand?

Now in fairness, Islam does point out that crime rates in Islamic countries are much lower than in other parts of the worlds. Of course, it is easier to have low instances of crime when even the most heinous acts of human brutality are legalized.

End Quote

Wake-Up America!!!

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D.    9/14/10

“Western Suicide–Liberalism”

August 30, 2010

Western Suicide–Liberalism”

Ok, it is not the easiest read. But then defending America has never been an easy job. Take the time and effort to read and understand the following article by  Pat Buchanan.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D.  8/30/10

Where are the Republican leaders who will reject pandering and prejudice?” wailed The Washington Post in its most recent editorial in support of Cordoba House mosque near Ground Zero.

Like the controversy over the mosque, the Post editorial reveals the two Americas we have become, uncomprehending of and hostile to each other, even as we drift apart.

To the Post, opposition boils down to three arguments, all of them “objectionable.” The first is a wrong-headed belief “that the terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center and killed almost 3,000 people there in 2001 really did represent Islam.”

The second is that, as many families of 9/11 victims associate the terrorists with Islam, to build a mosque near the scene of the massacre would be sacrilegious and wounding.

The third is cynical politics. As two-in-three Americans oppose the mosque, siding with them and savaging supporters of Cordoba House is to run unconscionably with the crowd.

None of these arguments is acceptable, says the Post, for they represent misunderstanding, prejudice or “repugnant” politics.

What the Post is saying is that opponents of the mosque are all either bigoted ignoramuses or political panderers.

Quite a statement, when a Time poll finds that 61 percent of Americans oppose the mosque and 70 percent believe that to build it near Ground Zero would defile hallowed ground.

“(T)he right response to misunderstanding and prejudice,” said the Post, “is education, not appeasement.”

In short, rather than yield to ignorance, bigotry and demagoguery, the Post will undertake to tutor us on how to think correctly.

This is a pure extract of liberal ideology. Few better examples of faculty-lounge obtuseness to the feelings of the people among whom they live are to be found. Yet, the editorial has a point.

For, in Webster’s, there are several definitions of “prejudice.”

The most pejorative one is “an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race.” Another definition, however, is simply a “preconceived judgment or opinion.”

It is this idea of prejudice that Edmund Burke endorsed:

“Many of our men of speculation, instead of exploding general prejudices, employ their sagacity to discover the latent wisdom which prevails in them. If they find what they seek, and they seldom fail, they think it most wise to continue the prejudice, with the reason involved, than to cast away the coat of prejudice, and to leave nothing but the naked reason.”

“Naked reason,” pure rationalism, permeates the Post editorial, which ignores that vast realm of sentiments, such as patriotism and love, that reside in the terrain between thought and feeling.

“The heart has reasons that the mind knows not,” said Pascal.

True conservatives are people of the heart who use the weapons of the mind to defend the things of the heart.

Why would Americans be reflexively skeptical and wary of Islam?

We were born a Christian nation, an extension of Christendom. For most of us, it is part of our DNA. And for a thousand years, our ancestors fought a war of civilizations with Islam.

In the name of Islam, Muslim fanatics massacred 3,000 of us. In our media, the names commonly associated with Islam are al-Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah, Moqtada al-Sadr, Ahmadinejad, Ayatollah Khomeini, Osama bin Laden and the Taliban.

What are sins in Christianity — adultery and homosexuality — are capital crimes in Islamic countries. From the Copts in Egypt to the Chaldeans of Iraq, Christians are persecuted and purged in the Middle East. Few remain in the old Christian towns of Jerusalem, Nazareth and Bethlehem. Christian missionaries in Islamic countries risk stonings and beheading. Muslims are attacking Christians in Nigeria, Sudan, the Caucasus, Palestine, Iraq, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines.

Are there scores of thousands of patriotic American Muslims, hundreds of millions of decent, peace-loving Muslims around the world?

Undeniably true.

Yet one would have to be obtuse not to understand that a Western nation that opens its doors to mass migration from the Islamic world is taking a grave risk with its unity and identity.

An apprehension about that is what Burke called the “latent wisdom” of a people.

This is not an argument for war with Islam, but for recognition that “East is East and West is West” and America cannot absorb and assimilate all the creeds of mankind without ceasing to be who we are.

Prejudice is prejudgment. And if prejudgment is rooted in the history and traditions of a people, and what life has taught us, it is a shield that protects. Only a fool would reject the inherited wisdom of his kind because it fails to comport with the ideology of the moment.

“Prejudice,” wrote Burke, “is of ready application in the emergency; it previously engages the mind in a steady course of wisdom and virtue, and does not leave the man hesitating in the moment of decision, skeptical, puzzled and unresolved.”

Without prejudice, we are tabula rasa, blank slates, upon which any ideology may be written, including what James Burnham called the ideology of Western suicide — liberalism.


Pat Buchanan

Pat Buchanan

Pat Buchanan is a founding editor of The American Conservative magazine, and the author of many books including State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America .
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Pat Buchanan’s column.
Sign up today and receive daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Islam Is Incompatable With Liberal Democracies

June 4, 2010

Islam Is Incompatable With Liberal Democracies

In nations that have allowed the immigration of largest numbers of Muslims, it is observed that the muslims tend not to integrate into their populations. Rather, they move together into enclaves and resist acculturation into their new socioculture. Also, they pressure the receiving socioculture to allow them to use Sharia Law (based on the Koran) to regulate their personal affairs within their own enclaves. Once this has been acccomplished, they then lobby for the extention of Sharia Law into the laws of the socioculture at large.

All of this is not by accident: it is by strategy, as explained in Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs, by Robert Spencer and in The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America, by Andy McCarthy. These books are a must read for those citizens of a free society who wish to remain free. Voting citizens of liberal democracies that remain ignorant of this inexorable enslaving force will find their culture transformed while they remain “blind-sided and bewildered. Another must read book is Islam Unveiled: Distrubing Questions About The World’s Fastest-Growing Faith, by Robert Spencer, in which he documents the following:

“In 1985, Sa’id Raja’i-Khorassani, the permanent delegate to the United Nations from the Islamic Republic of Iran, declared, according to the Amir Taheri, that the very concept of human rights was ‘a Judeo-Christian invention’ and inadmissible in Islam….According to the Ayatollah Khomeini, one of the Shah’s ‘most despicable sins’ was the fact that Iran was one of the original group of nations that drafted and approved the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

For Islam, the Crusades have never ended.

Wake-Up America!

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D. 6/4/10

Churchill On Islam

May 23, 2010

Churchill On Islam

I want to thank Ed for the following Winston Churchill quote. It is much shorter than my last quote on Islamic Stealth Jihad….so it is an improvement! Also, it goes to the center of it all. The specter of an Islamic world is appalling for all who look objectively. For the politically correct, open border, one-world government bunch Churchill’s quote is profane heresy. In my view, it is good to stand “guilty as charged” with the likes of Winston Churchill.

Ed, I hope you will check into my blog from time to time and sound off whenever you wish. Agreement with me, and further discussion or amplification of my positions is happily accepted. On the other hand, differing points of view are happily provoked and enjoyed. Bring em’ on!

Ed wrote:

Thanks for that !! Too bad more people weren’t aware of Robert Spencer … and Churchill. Hope you don’t mind, but another quote of Churchill fits here very well;

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities — but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

– Winston Churchill – The River War, volume II pp.


Consider visiting Ed’s blog. Author Comment In Response To

It is an interesting place.

V. Thomas Mawhinney Ph.D. 5/23/10

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: