TRUE GENESIS OF ISLAM WHICH ALL HINDUS AND THEIR CHILDREN MUST KNOW
From: "Pushp
I request all of you to read sri. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri's "History of South India" to know about Islam and how from the time the Muslim invaders came to India they have been mercilessly conducting Jihad against innocent Hindu men, women and children. The count is 80 million and the counter still ticking. But we are asked to apologize for one Dadri. Who is intolerant. In Bengali they would say, Salah, Ghoda deem.
Often you will come across Islam being called a 'religion of Peace'. Following article explains it all, why and how of Islam, Koran etc. worth reading and forwarding.
Are we at war & with Whom?
by Y.K. Cherson
A day after the terrorist attack in Paris, French President Francois Hollande solemnly declared: We Are At War. It sounds great and inspiring, but - a war against WHOM? Or against WHAT?
The laws of war are simple, and the first among them is Know Your Enemy. Until we define an enemy, we cannot fight him- and of course, we cannot win him. So, who or what is our enemy? Slogans like "we are at war against international terrorism" do not convince; terrorism is not a goal, terrorism is an instrument to reach a goal.
Terrorists do not kill because they are bloodthirsty maniacs; they kill for the sake of some Idea they consider so important and sublime that they´ re ready not only to take other people´s lives, but also
sacrifice their own, to reach it.
Mantras about "terrorism has not any nationality or religion" our politicians chant after every terrorist attack are plain stupid; after all, it´s not Aliens who blow up our schools, buses, theaters and who shoot us in the streets of our cities. We could agree with this politically correct declaration, if the adepts of different religions perpetrated terrorists attacks by some schedule: on Mondays, Jews blast a school, on Tuesdays, Muslims blow up a bus , then Christians, Buddhists… But the reality is different: almost 95% of all terrorist attacks in the world are perpetrated by Muslims.
They do not interpret Koran correctly, our liberal media and politically correct politicians tell us. Ok, but that does not cancel the fact that they consider their Holy Book of Divine Revelation the KORAN, not The Lord of the Rings; they without any doubt believe in Afterlife; they say their Prophet is Muhammad, not Justin Bieber; and the names of their terrorist groups very clearly say that they are ready to die and kill for Islam, not for Manchester United.
Call them bad Muslims, Fundamentalist Muslim …But they are Muslims.
And those who stand at the source of this "wrong interpretation" are not ignorant peasants from some Yemen village - but the most prominent Islamic theologians. If Saudi Arabia in just one month, in May of 2003, fired 1710 Islamic clerics from their positions for preaching terrorism, then it´s not just some individual clerics who "do not interpret Koran correctly"; there are evidently dozens of thousands of Muslim clerics all over the world who support terrorism and call their flock "to die for Allah". Again: they call to die and to kill "for Allah", not for Quetzalcóatl, Krishna or Jesus Christ. And after a terrorist attack perpetrated by such Muslims who "do not interpret Koran correctly", Police immediately find links to a mosque or madrasa; not to St.Peter´s Basilica in the Vatican or to Shotokan Monastery school.
Koran is difficult for understanding, and can be easily interpreted erroneously? Yes, it´s true; Koran is VERY difficult for understanding, it´s vague and unclear.. But if millions of people after reading the Koran have turned to terrorism or become its supporters, then there is something in the Koran itself which leaves broad margin for such "erroneous interpretations". If a scientist invented a medication that cures AIDS but provokes cancer, and millions of people died after using this medication, such a scientist will be sued and put to jail. Of course, he can say that stupid patients did not interpret correctly his instructions, but Ihave serious doubts that the sentence will be "not guilty"; he had to write the instructions in such a way which would not leave a margin for "erroneous interpretations".
And of course, nobody would call such scientist "A Saviour of a Mankind", or "a Prophet", and nobody would call to proclaim his method "Holy" and closed to any criticism. But - why, exactly, do we say terrorists do not understand Islam and interpret Koran in some erroneous way?
Islam stands on the Koran. And Koran consists of two blocks: one "revealed" in Mecca, and another "revealed" in Medina. In Mecca, Muhammad still hoped his religion could be spread by preaching peace and love, and Suras of the Koran of that period are really peaceful. Suras like "to you my religion and to me mine", or like " By killing a man you kill all the Mankind" which Muslim clerics love to quote to mystified Europeans and Americans as a proof of Islam being " a religion of peace" are from Mecca. However, twenty five years of preaching peace to Pagan Arabs in Mecca brought to Muhammad just some 50 followers - and Muhammad understood that at this speed of conversion, he would most probably see a triumph of his religion only in the Afterlife. So, he and his followers moved to Medina; that was a first documented Muslim immigration, and its goal was to subdue the native residents and make Islam dominant .
http://chersonandmolschky.com/2013/10/02/goalofmuslimimmigration/
There he sharply changed his "revelations", converting Islam in the religion whose aim was a world domination. The instrument to achieve this goal should be Jihad, Holy War, one of whose components
is Terrorism. In Medina, a second block of Suras, was "revealed" , and .these Suras had nothing of peace and tolerance; they called to "kill infidels wherever you find them", "fight them until mischief is no
more, and religion is for Allah".
What if one Sura contradicts another? The solution was found by Muhammad, who informed his followers that Allah sent him a revelation to change any revelation revealed earlier.
2:106
Nothing of our revelation (even a single verse) do we abrogate or cause be forgotten, but we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof.
16:101
And when We put a revelation in place of (another) revelation, - and Allah knoweth best what He revealeth Later, Muslim theologians developed this brilliant idea and agreed that all Suras of the Koran are " a Word of Allah", but if one Sura contradicts another, the one written later is more "Word of Allah", like in the Army: in case of two contradictory orders, a soldier has to fulfill the one given last. This trick is called Nasj, or abrogation.
And which Suras of the Koran were written later?
Calling to violence Suras of Medina.
So, is Islam "a religion of peace"? Yes, when Muslims want it, and it will be a True Islam. But as soon as they decide it´s time to attack, they use a second block of Suras of Medina- and that will be also a True Islam.
Peaceful Suras of Mecca are used by Muslims when they are weak, to gain time and to lull the enemy with nice words about Islam being a religion of peace. Violent Suras of Medina are used when Muslims decide that the enemy is weak, that his spirit is broken and that they have good chances to win.
But the goal remains the same: ISLAM MUST RULE THE WORLD.
Until we understand that our enemy is Islam - we shall go on seeing corpses in the streets of our cities.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Townsend's New Revelation AboutThe Prophet
http://indiafacts.org/peter-townsends-new-revelation-about-the-prophet/
Muslims everywhere in the world take the Quran and the Hadiths very seriously. They attempt to live according to the prescriptions of these texts.
Kalavai Venkat
Commentary | 18-01-2016
The Islamic scriptures inform us that the Prophet Muhammad altered the text of the Quran that had been allegedly revealed to him by Allah and as a consequence Allah killed him. This is the startling finding of Peter Townsend in Questioning Islam: Tough Questions & Honest Answers About the Muslim Religion (Kindle location 1,840-2,000).
Townsend arrives at this inference after a careful and critical examination of the primary scriptures of Islam, namely the Quran and the Hadiths. Here, I present Townsend's compelling findings in a paraphrase as good as verbatim along with my analysis.
Abdullah Ibn Sa'd Ibn Abi Sarh was an early and enthusiastic follower of Muhammad. He had been recruited as a scribe to record the revelations Muhammad received from Allah. Those revelations would constitute the Quran.
After an initial period of enthusiasm, Ibn Abi Sarh became disillusioned. The reason was that he would suggest changes to and rewording of the revelations from Allah as transmitted by Muhammad. The prophet readily accepted those suggestions. Even though the Quran (6:115, 18:27) emphatically announces that the revelations cannot be altered, the ease with which Ibn Abi Sarh's alterations were accepted eventually disillusioned him. Therefore, he apostatized from Islam.
Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad's earliest biographer, informs us that Muhammad wasn't pleased with this daring act of apostasy. The Quran (e.g., 4:88-89) prescribes the death sentence for apostasy. Therefore, Muhammad ordered Ibn Abi Sarh to be killed.
Ibn Abi Sarh had earned Muhammad's ire for yet another reason as well. After apostatizing, he produced verses that mimicked the quranic revelations. The Quran (2:23) claims that its perfectly formed verses were revelations from Allah and that no human being could ever produce anything like those.
In the Quran, Allah even challenges any human to produce verses like those. This claim bestowed legitimacy upon the Quran as divine revelation. So, predictably, Muhammad was irate that Ibn Abi Sarh could produce verses like that. If the people of Arabia couldn't distinguish between the verses that Allah had revealed and the ones that Ibn Abi Sarh produced then naturally Muhammad's prophetic career was in jeopardy.
Ibn Abi Sarh's death sentence was later commuted under the strangest of circumstances. Ibn Ishaq informs us that Ibn Abi Sarh had been condemned to death but he went into hiding. The person who had hidden him appealed to Muhammad to commute the death sentence. After a long silence, Muhammad agreed and Ibn Abi Sarh went away.
After he left, the associates of Muhammad asked him why he remained silent for a long time when the appeal was made to commute Ibn Abi Sarh's death sentence. Muhammad replied, "I kept silent because I hoped one of you might get up and strike off his head!" (Guillaume, A.: The Life of Muhammad – A Translation of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, p. 550).
In any case, it was imperative that Muhammad initiated a damage control exercise to allay suspicion that he had altered the verses that Allah had revealed. So, Allah sent a new revelation (Quran 69:44-46): "And if the messenger were to invent any sayings in our name, we should certainly seize him by his right hand, and we should certainly then cut off the artery of his heart (aorta)."
The implication of this quranic verse is clear. If Muhammad were to die through the cutting of his aorta then he is guilty of modifying the quranic revelations. How did Muhammad die?
Muhammad had earlier waged a brutal war against the Jewish tribe at the Battle of Khaybar. There was a widespread massacre of Jewish men after which Muhammad ordered the female survivors to cook the victorious Muslim jihadis a sumptuous meal.
A Jewish woman named Zainab avenged the slaughter of her people by serving Muhammad poisoned meat. Muhammad had ingested some of the meat before he realized that it had been poisoned. Even though he recovered, the effects of poisoning lingered on until he died.
Two important and authentic hadiths shed light on the deathbed utterances of Muhammad. Sahih Bukhari (5:59:713) reports the following as among the last words of Muhammad: "O Aisha! I still feel the pain caused by the food I ate at Khaybar, and at this time, I feel as if my aorta is being cut from that poison."
Sunan Abu Dawud (4498) reports the following as among the last words of Muhammad: "I continue to feel the pain from the morsel which I had eaten at Khaybar. This is the time when it has cut off my aorta."
Allah had warned in the Quran that if Muhammad were to alter the quranic verses revealed to him he would die by having his aorta cut off. The hadiths inform that is exactly how Muhammad died. Therefore, one must inevitably conclude that Muhammad had altered what Allah had revealed to him.
Related Reading
Revisiting a Classic—The Calcutta Quran Petition: Book Review
Madrassa Move is a Step to End Appeasement
Jesus Christ and the impending genocide
Saba Naqvi's Intentional Ignorance on Raza Academy
Muslims everywhere in the world take the Quran and the Hadiths very seriously. They attempt to live according to the prescriptions of these texts. I am not sure that the compilers of the Hadiths, Sahih Bukhari and Sunan Abu Dawud, who lived closer to the time of Muhammad, were serious believers.
Did they see through the charade that Muhammad had enacted and hence left telltale evidence that would later on discredit him? Did they manufacture these hadiths after coming across the quranic verse with the intent of discrediting Muhammad and Islam? Were they closet pagans who didn't want to risk their lives by resisting Islam openly? Were they secretly enjoying the practical joke they were playing on the nascent but fanatical Islamic umma at the expense of the prophet of Allah secure in the belief that the blind followers of Islam wouldn't discover it in the lifetime of the compilers of the hadiths? These interesting questions would be pursued at a later date.
An embarrassed Islamic apologist may be tempted to argue that the Hadiths are untrustworthy. It is true that some hadiths have been considered spurious in the Islamic tradition whereas the rest have been accepted as authentic. However, as Townsend points out, many of the core teachings of Islam would be unintelligible but for the Hadiths.
The Quran, for example, contains no reference to the shahada, which is central to Islamic belief. It is only the Hadiths that illustrate such core beliefs and practices. Therefore, the Hadiths have always been the core scriptures of Islam. They cannot be expediently discounted. Even more pertinently, the episode narrated here comes from two of the Hadith collections that the Muslims venerate as authentic.
Ironically, Muhammad incriminated himself, perhaps with the unsolicited help of the compilers of the hadiths, like no other prophet before and after him ever had.
Kalavai Venkat
Kalavai Venkat is a Silicon Valley-based writer, an atheist, a practicing orthodox Hindu, and author of the book "What Every Hindu should know about Christianity."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
WHEN SHALL INDIA LEARN FROM SUCH A SMALL MUSLIM MAJORITY COUNTRY
1.(especially of change or action) relating to or affecting the fundamental nature of something; far-reaching or thorough.
2.characterized by departure from tradition; innovative or progressive.
"the city is known for its radical approach to transport policy"
How radical can one get? Roots of beards have to be tackled, will mere shaving remove growth or even progress?
Tajikistan shaves 13,000 beards in 'radicalism' battle
Police says more than 160 shops selling headscarves are also closed as part of a fight against "foreign" influences.
21 Jan 2016 08:11 GMT | Tajikistan, Asia, Religion
Police in Tajikistan have shaved nearly 13,000 people's beards and closed more than 160 shops selling traditional Muslim clothing last year as part of the country's fight against what it calls "foreign" influences.
Bahrom Sharifzoda, the head of the south-west Khathlon region's police, said at a press conference on Wednesday that the law enforcement services convinced more than 1,700 women and girls to stop wearing headscarves in the Muslim-majority Central Asian country.
The move is seen as part of efforts to battle what authorities deem "radicalism".
Tajikistan's secular leadership has long sought to prevent a spillover of what it sees as unwelcome traditions from neighbouring Afghanistan.
Last week, the country's parliament voted to ban Arabic-sounding "foreign" names as well as marriages between first cousins.
The legislation is expected to be approved by President Emomali Rahmon, who has taken steps to promote secularism and discourage beliefs and practices that he sees as foreign or a threat to stability of Tajikistan, Radio Liberty said.
RELATED: Tajikistan poised to slide back towards war
In September, Tajikistan's Supreme Court banned the country's only registered Islamic political party, the Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan.
Rahmon has ruled Tajikistan since 1994 and his current presidential term is expected to end in 2020.
In December, the parliament granted the president and his family life-long immunity from prosecution, giving Rahmon the title "Leader of the nation" and officially designating him "the founder of peace and national unity of Tajikistan".
The country of 7.1 million people has struggled with poverty and instability since independence from the Soviet Union more than two decades ago. It remains heavily dependent on Russia where majority of Tajik people go for work.
According to unofficial estimates, there are more than 2,000 Tajiks fighting in Syria.
Source: Al Jazeera And DPA
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/01/tajikistan-shaves-13000-men-beards-radicalism-160120133352747.html
-------------------------------------
China Makes Major Moves To Ban Islam
If there's one thing that can be said about the Chinese government, it's this: They don't care one whit about being politically correct.
And apparently, they're willing to address something that the West will not:
the fact that Islam is inherently dangerous.
Isn't it ironic that an oppressive, communist country sees what free nations don't: that, ultimately, Islam always turns nasty?
It's presence in a society always ends badly for everyone - except for its radical adherents.
This is what "tolerance" will get you.
Every where Islam has been welcomed by a free people, it has grown from a quiet snake in the grass into an uncontrollable dragon.
Islamist are patient; they believe Allah is on their side, and they will wait.
They bide their time, infiltrating a culture, until they have gained all of the strength they need to strike at the heart of the people who have accepted them into their midst.
There is a very simple reason for this; Islam is not just a religion, it is a political ideology and a cult of death, and no behaviour is tolerated outside of its murderous directives.
So what is China doing?
It's declaring an all-out war to make sure Islam doesn't take over, and never gains the strength to attack them.
Here are China's directives:
– Female head-coverings banned.
– Men are discouraged from growing long beards.
– Islamic restaurants must sell cigarettes and drinks AND they must display them prominently.
-- Sell no Halal meat,
-- Display notice "Pork Available" even if not available..
Any business owner who does not follow this order…will lose their business registration.
China sees what's happening to the West.
It sees what happened in France, throughout the European Union, in Boston, in California, and even in Texas.
So they have taken a stand. Islam will not be tolerated in China.
The country has decided to eradicate the plague before it can gain a foot-hold and turn into the dragon.
Unlike our inept USA government, with it's Muslim sympathizers - the foremost being our President and his administration -
China understands the reality behind Islam.
Communism is a horrible form of government, but it also unshackles China from tolerating
the idiotic delusions of those who continue to preach that Islam is a "religion of Peace."
It is no such thing. Britain/Canada/Australia should take heed.
BBC DOCUMENTARY ON CHINA
From: tuli yashvir-colonelyt@outlook.com
January 26, 2016
It was both fascinating and informative to watch BBC's television documentary on China this evening (9 p.m., 21 January 2016). It should be of great interest to the Indians (especially the Hindus) to see how China has gained immensely from her internal strength and being united. She has a high state of political awareness enjoyed by people and their government. The Muslim minority in the West, never mentioned even once in the documentary, is taught to be seen but NOT heard!
At the end of this impressive documentary there was only ONE question in my mind, "WHAT IS THE REASON OF CHINESE GREATNESS?" The answer struck me straightaway, "Because there are NO fanatics & Jehadis of Mohammed and NO restless zealots and relentless missionaries of Pope present in this PROUD Buddhist country!" (Hindus, please NOTE!)
I felt very sorry for my own Bharat where both the foreign based predators have not only literally killed tens of millions of Hindus, not only souls!, but one of them even committed High Treason in broad daylight by capturing one third of our sacred territory on ONE day, meeting with NO resistance or opposition- not even by the MERCENARY Indian army who could only fight brave battles for the British or attack the Sikhs and the Tamils at home!
Unlike the Chinese who have inherited no inhibition or psychological terror from their past, we Hindus constantly live under the dark shadow of Islam since we have allowed them to chase us out of Kashmir and also allowed them to "rape" our venerated Shankracharya by replacing the name by "TAKHT-I-SULEIMAN", and earlier, rejecting Guru Tegh Bahadur for the brutal Hindu killer Aurangzeb but call it "Jenab Dr. Abdul Kalam Road" (Muslim to Muslim, for APPEASEMENT!), seeking the ENEMY'S approval even to breathe on our own territory! (Cowards only beget Contempt!)
Please note the word "Takht" in "Takht-i-Suleiman". It means THRONE. It has strong political and imperial connotations for the servile slavish Hindu nation who are expected to REACT.
Another rival to the "throne" of Delhi? Perhaps India's rulers already anticipate Isil's rule over Srinagar and Delhi in the very near future? The PERSIAN-ARABIC name is also a SLAP in the face of Hindu nation, yearning, in vain, to see acceptance of Hindi or Sanskrit- in our own country!" Donald Trump would have spoken, "WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?"
We ask the silent and mute observer of Hindusthan's downfall, the RASHTRAPATI (President of Partitioned INDIA), "Jenab-i-Aali Moorakh Ji, Why are YOU silent when the Kashmiri Hindus are protesting? Which name will please and delight your much "battered and massacred" MAJORITY community in Bharat? "SHANKARACHARYA" OR "SULEIMAN"? Go on, speak up Mr Mukherjee, Sir! And if you are not a "mongrel" secular Indian but the SUPREME COMMANDER, then rehabilitate all the soldiers of Netaji's AZAD HINDU FAUJ who were disbanded in disgrace by "Bandit" NEHRU for the "crime" of trying to LIBERATE the coolie colony India from the British slave masters!
(Making a FOOL of all the Hindus, Nehru called Subhash Chandra Bose and his Azad Hind Fauj "traitors"! Watch this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQXNNdeL4q0)
And, O yes, Mr. Rashtrapati, do dump Nehru's name and call it "GURU TEGH BAHADUR UNIVERSITY, New Delhi" (before someone suggests the name of another immaculate secular Musalmaan for this University!), if you do not wish to see your BHAWAN resemble the RUINS in Ayodhya!
I was really thrilled to see Modiji visit China, something the Evil Dynasty never did, but hoped that our new PM will delight the Chinese hearts by announcing Rs. ONE CRORE donation (same amount as sanctioned by Lok Sabha of Midgets to establish BOFORS CHOR's "Rajiv Gandhi Foundation" in May 1991, to improve and expand the birth place of Gautama Buddha in Bharat, and INVITE the Chinese to visit their own "Prophet's" Janmasthan in Hindusthan! I also expected the 28 States in Bharat to celebrate the "discovery" of Shri Modi and send at least 100 students to attend universities in China, instead of going to the rotten one in New Delhi named after traitor NERHU who hated Hindus and Hindusthan.
Indeed, more and more Indians should head for China, Vietnam and Thailand instead of Spain or Switzerland and come back to tell fellow citizens about the traffic discipline on Chinese roads and the cleanliness of their streets & homes.
JAI HIND! ("Hind" with Khyber and Chittagong in it!)
-rajput, 21/01/2016.
-----------------
The Story of China.
BBC Two, 9.00pm
Thursday, January 21, 2016.
Having given a similar treatment to India in 2007 with fascinating results, Michael Wood heads north-east for a new six-part documentary series about the oldest continuous civilisation in the world. The first instalment provides an hour of remarkable landmarks in human history, whether philosophical (Confucius), funerary art (the Terracotta Army) or cultural (the Oracle Bones, the first examples of Chinese writing), Wood filters his findings through the realities of contemporary China rather than doggedly pursue a blow-by-blow account of rulers, battles and borders.
-Gabriel Tate
Muslim Demographics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAf8-oq37yg
------------------------
Anwer Jamal Khan जिस जाति का धनी वर्ग उसकी रक्षा, उसके विकास और उसकी वृद्धि में कोई सहयोग नहीं देगा तो उस जाति का भविष्य अंधकारमय नहीं तो क्या होगा?. shubhkamnayen.
Vivek Arya Anwer Jamal Khan इस्लाम का भूतकाल, वर्तमान और भविष्य तीनों ही अंधकारमय हैं। चार में से तीन खलीफाओं को मुसलमानों ने ही मारा। हज़रत साहिब की प्रिय बेगम आएशा को मुसलमानों ने ही जमींदोज भी मुसलमानों ने किया।ईमाम हुसैन को भी मुसलमानों ने प्यासा रेगिस्तान में मार दिया। लाखों निरपराधों को मारा। भारत पर हमला कर लाखों को मारा। आपके पूर्वज डर या प्रलोभन से मुसलमान बन गए। तालिबान, अल-क़ायदा, बोको हराम, ISIS सब इस्लाम के उसी चेहरे के अनेक नाम हैं जो विश्व को अन्धकार में लेकर जाना चाहता हैं। विश्व के सभी मुस्लिम देशों में हत्या, बम-विस्फोट, आत्मघाती हमला आदि इस्लाम का जीता जगता स्वरुप है। जन्नत के ख़्वाब में इस धरती को मुसलमानों ने दोज़ख बना दिया। सब कुछ जानते हुए भी मुस्लिम समाज आतंकवादियों का हर प्रकार से समर्थन करता है। इसीलिए उसका भविष्य भी अंधकारमय ही होगा।
Posted by: vivek arya <drvivekarya@yahoo.com>
India has most number of mosques in the world.
It has around 400,000 mosques, exceeding the number of mosques in Muslim countries as well.
=============================
