← Previous Post: | Next Post:


And he just did it again.

In a 27-page memorandum, [Laith] Alebbini’s lawyers called what he did a “thought crime.


His lawyers explain that he just didn’t understand what he was reading. Stuff like this.

The clear difference between Muslims and the corrupt and deviant Jews and Christians is that Muslims are not ashamed of abiding by the rules sent down from their Lord regarding war and enforcement of divine law. So if it were the Muslims, instead of the Crusaders, who had fought the Japanese and Vietnamese or invaded the lands of the Native Americans, there would have been no regrets in killing and enslaving those therein. And since those mujahidin would have done so bound by the Law, they would have been thorough and without some “politically correct’ need to apologize years later. The Japanese, for example, would have been forcefully converted to Islam from their pagan ways—and if they stubbornly declined, perhaps another nuke would change their mind. The Vietnamese would likewise be offered Islam or beds of napalm. As for the Native Americans—after the slaughter of their men, those who favor small-pox to surrendering to their Lord—then the Muslims would have taken their surviving women and children as slaves, raising the children as model Muslims and impregnating their women to produce a new generation of mujahidin. As for the treacherous Jews of Europe and elsewhere —those who would betray their covenant —then their post-pubescent males would face a slaughter that would make the Holocaust sound like a bedtime story, as their women would be made to serve their husbands’ and their fathers’ killers.

[Quoted here.]

Trackback URL for this post:

Comment on this Entry

Latest UD posts at IHE