Home

Islam and Terrorism

Testimonials
(Why we left Islam)

Islam
•Quran
•Hadith
•Mohammed

Meet the Apostates

Articles

Media

News

Links

Discussion board

FAQ

Contact Us

• If you are a Muslim and are hurt by seeing this page, please click here for the Alternate soft version
• If you are a New Apostate, click here
• If you think this site is offensive, click here
• I want to stop Terrorism

Video of Stoning to Death

“Merciful” or “have mercy”?

Click here to watch the Stoning-to-death video
If you are a Muslim, you MUST read this section and watch the video to increase your knowledge of Islam. Increasing one’s knowledge about Islam is farz (compulsory)!
Also, you must force yourself to like stoning, because Mohammed ordered it. If you are afraid to watch the video or have watched it and are disgusted by it, you will likely be punished in Hell for Kufr. So watch the video and do NOT be disgusted!

Introduction
Stoning to death is a cruel insane Islamic punishment given to people who are married but still voluntarily have sex outside marraige. This punishment was ordered by the “merciful” Prophet, who ofcourse was the messenger of the “merciful” Allah.

Many hadith, including Sahih Bukhari give proof that Stoning was ordered and practiced by Muhammed, for example:

Volume 2, Book 23, Number 413:
Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar :
The Jew brought to the Prophet a man and a woman from amongst them who have committed (adultery) illegal sexual intercourse. He ordered both of them to be stoned (to death), near the place of offering the funeral prayers beside the mosque.”

Click here for more hadith which verify that Mohammed ordered stoning

What happens in Stoning?
In stoning to death, the victims’s hands are tied behind their backs and their bodies are put in a cloth sack. Then, this human “package” is buried in a hole, with only the victims heads showing above the ground. If its a woman, she is buried upto her shoulders. This is to give her an seemingly equal (but nonetheless impossible) chance to escape recognizing her lesser physical strength.
After the hapless individual has been secured in the hole, people start chanting “Allah hu Akbar” (meaning, God is great), and throw palm sized stones at the head of the victim from a certain distance (a circle is drawn).
The stones are thrown until the person dies or until he/she escapes out of the hole and crosses the circle. Escaping is impossible, given that the individual’s hands are tied behind their backs and they are buried in a hole upto their necks or shoulders (in the case of males and females respectively).
Naturally, the procedure is extremely barbaric and bloody.

Warning! This is an extremely sick and disgusting punishment, and thus watching this video can make you weak or possibly give you nausea and shock for several days. Please do not watch if you are weak-hearted.

Watch at your own risk!
Video of Stoning to Death

Choose your connection:
DSL or Cable (100kbps) | Dial-up Modem

Mohammed ordered stoning to death.

Video Running time: 10:23(m:s)
Download size: 9.4MB (high speed)

Windows Media Player is needed to play the files

Stoning to death is still carried out in the current era, in Iran and was carried out in the previous Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.

Related: Also see The Stoning (movie)

Currently, there is a stoning-to-death sentence on Zhila and Bakhtiyar Izadi from Iran. There is a Campaign going on to save themon this website: http://www.zhilaa.com/

Note: The stoning videos on this page were copied by permission from the website of Iran-e-Azad, an organization which fights for Freedom and Human Rights in Iran. Their website link is here.

We want everone to watch this video and know the truth about this “peaceful” religion of Islam which is a danger to humanity and human rights. If you have a website or a blog, you are most welcome to link to the video: http://www.apostatesofislam.com/media/video/stoning_video_100kbps.wmv

Are people in this video extremists? No, they are true Muslims, following the exact orders of their leader Mohammed. This is real Islam in practice. If you are a Muslim and believe stoning is not a part of Islam: Congratulations! You have already partially apostated from Islam. Now you just need to complete your apostasy like we did, and stop believing that Mohammed was a prophet of God. Join our discussion forum to ask for help on how you can leave Islam. Being a humanist is a great alternative to being a Muslim:

Be liberated from the slavery of the imaginary Allah and the false Prophet Mohammed. Leave Islam today!

——————————————————————————-

Random Quran:

“(Here is) a Parable of the Garden which the righteous are promised: in it are rivers of water incorruptible; rivers of milk of which the taste never changes; rivers of wine, a joy to those who drink; and rivers of honey pure and clear. In it there are for them all kinds of fruits; and Grace from their Lord. (Can those in such Bliss) be compared to such as shall dwell for ever in the Fire, and be given, to drink, boiling water, so that it cuts up their bowels (to pieces)?” -Quran 47:15 [translation:Yusuf Ali]

CATEGORY:
Carrot and Stick

Suggest a Verse!

Random Hadith:

“Those who permit silk will be turned into an ape or pig?

Abu Dawud, Book 32, Number 4028:
Narrated AbuAmir or AbuMalik:
AbdurRahman ibn Ghanam al-Ash’ari said: AbuAmir or AbuMalik told me–I swear by Allah another oath that he did not believe me that he heard the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) say: THERE WILL BE AMONG MY COMMUNITY PEOPLE WHO WILL MAKE LAWFUL (THE USE OF) KHAZZ AND SILK. SOME OF THEM WILL BE TRANSFORMED INTO APES AND SWINE.”

CATEGORY:
Low Level of Nonsense

Suggest a Hadith!

© Apostates of Islam

” excerpts ” “God’s Stange Act” By Marie Jon’
In today’s current events, we see a particular faith that has captured everyone’s attention. It seems that those who embrace this religion do not understand that they themselves might be the recipients of God’s strange act if they do not change their barbarous ways. It is our duty to inform radical Islam with truth. There is no honey coating the word of God. If sin is not relinquished, eternal death is the unfortunate outcome.

Phillippians 2:12 “Workout your own salvation with fear and trembling.” http://bible.cc/philippians/2-12.htm

While Muslims protest in the streets wearing their terrifying garb of Jihad, Christians will invite souls to look at the cross that transforms lives to a higher calling without the use of force, threats, and beheadings.

There is no compromise with sin and it’s destroying effects. God eventually will step upon this earth’s history once again and take a commanding control. The Lord will vanquish evil once and for all at His Second Coming.

“The great controversy is ended. Sin and sinners are no more. The entire universe is clean. One pulse of harmony and gladness beats through the vast creation. From Him who created all, flow life and light and gladness, throughout the realms of illimitable space. From the minutest atom to the greatest world, all things, animate and inanimate, in their unshadowed beauty and perfect joy, declare that God is love.” The Great Controversy

There is much to be said about the teaching of Islam and virgins who await those who kill infidels as their reward. The only virgins worth mentioning are in the Bible. The ten foolish young women did not have their spiritual lamps lit. This is a good opportunity to point to those within the Muslim faith and appeal to them to use some eye salve. They need to grasp the folly everyone else is seeing.

The words of a dead saint are truly more prophetic than ever. “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached. ” 14th-century Byzantine Christian Emperor Manuel Paleologos II

The following are a few lines from an AP article: Al Qaeda in Iraq to Pope Benedict XVI: ‘You and the West Are Doomed’

“Protests broke out in South Asia and Indonesia, with angry Muslims saying Benedict’s statement of regret a day earlier did not go far enough. In southern Iraq, demonstrators carrying black flags burned an effigy of the pope.

“Islamic leaders around the world issued more condemnations of the pope’s comments, but some moderates in the Middle East appeared to be trying to put a damper on the outrage, fearing it.” http://www.foxnews.com/js/photoPop.html?0

God is love. He stands like a gentleman and he knocks at the door of man’s heart. He waits to be invited in. This everlasting gospel expounds with redeeming love, and calls to a sick, sin filled world: Isaiah 1:18 “come let us reason together.” The Lord of all beckons and invites His erring children. The Almighty came to save and to redeem the world. There certainly is a compelling difference between Islam and Christianity, the religion of peace. Our God is love, his name is Jesus Christ.

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/18539.html

“…”

Poor, poor Phred.

And stay away from Marie (Jon’) no matter how much she just oozes sex. It’s all a come on. Like she says, if you want the real Marie (Jon’) you’ve got to pay for it.

According to Noel Hillman, chief prosecutor for the Justice Department’s Public Integrity section, Sandy Berger only took copies of those documents and destroyed those. The only reason we don’t know what Berger took and destroyed from the archives is because they are still classified documents and we can’t see them anyway.

Quoth Mr.Hillman: ‘There is no evidence that he did destroy originals. We have objectively and affirmatively confirmed that the contents of all the five documents at issue exist today and were made available to the 9/11 Commission.’

http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006521

The fact is that the Democrats don’t want people to remember how they constantly failed in the days leading up to 9/11.

The Dems weren’t in power in the days leading up to 9/11.

Do you see the problem here? I have no idea which documents Berger was accessing, or what they prove. And neither do you, and neither does republican operative/talk show host Buzz Lightyear.

Now watch this drive.

Daring, the vast majority of Americans are fucktards…welcome to the dream.

by Bob Parks

http://abc.go.com/movies/thepathto911/index.html

As this commentary is being posted mere hours before the scheduled airing of “The Path To 9/11�, there are a few statements that must be made.

The miniseries will air. Given my experience working for Fox’s On-Air Promotion division, the kind of exposure the production has received is something that a television network could only dream of. Not one cent of promotion money has been necessary with talk radio and cable news pundits going off on the subject, as well as all the Clinton lawyers who are officially back on the clock.

Liberals are full of it and remember that every time they lecture all of us about their fraudulent self-celebration of free speech and freedom of expression. Conservatives have tolerated Michael Moore’s “documentaries� and haven’t come anywhere close to the protestations when it comes to the new film that dramatizes liberal wishful-thinking with the assassination of President Bush.

Yes, the right had a victory having Barbra Streisand’s production “The Reagans� banished to premium cable. The difference is that with this “Path to 9/11� controversy, all the Clinton’s men can whine, complain, and write threatening letters. Ronald Reagan may not have remembered how to even turn on his television set while in the final stages of Alzheimer’s, so he couldn’t rebut any of the questionable scenes that were written as fact.

We’ll never know if “The Path To 9/11� is fact or fiction because we’ll never know what former Clinton National Security Advisor Sandy Berger stuffed down his pants. As the movie’s script is based on the 9/11 Commission Report, and that report is based partly on documents classified and not, until we know what Berger stole and destroyed from the National Archives during his review of documents so he could prep Bill Clinton for his Commission appearance, we’ll never know if the script (and Commission report) is as accurate as it should be.

Democrats denounce allegations against Berger

Congress to investigate ex-Clinton official’s handling of documents

NBC News and news services

Updated: 8:02 p.m. ET July 21, 2004

WASHINGTON – Democrats assailed Republicans who suggested Wednesday that former White House national security adviser Sandy Berger sought to hide embarrassing materials when he removed classified documents related to the investigation of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The Justice Department is investigating whether Berger committed a crime by removing copies of documents about the government’s anti-terror efforts and notes that he took on those documents. Berger was reviewing the materials to help determine which Clinton administration documents to provide to the Sept. 11 commission.

“Last year, when I was in the Archives reviewing documents, I made an honest mistake. It’s one that I deeply regret,� Berger said. “I dealt with this issue in October 2003 fully and completely. Everything that I have done all along in this process has been for the purpose of aiding and supporting the work of the 9/11 commission, and any suggestion to the contrary is simply, absolutely wrong.�

When asked, Berger said he returned some classified documents that he found in his office and all of the handwritten notes he had taken from the secure room but could not find two or three copies of the highly classified millennium terror report.

“In the course of reviewing over several days thousands of pages of documents on behalf of the Clinton administration in connection with requests by the Sept. 11 commission, I inadvertently took a few documents from the Archives. When I was informed by the Archives that there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had except for a few documents that I apparently had accidentally discarded,� he said.

NBC’s David Gregory, Pete Williams, and The Associated Press

Before I get to the relevance of this in regards to the miniseries, let’s clear something up right now. Berger didn’t make an “honest mistake� or “inadvertently took a few documents�. He STOLE and DESTROYED classified documents and that is a crime.

TITLE 18–CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I–CRIMES

CHAPTER 93–PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES

Sec. 1924. Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material

(a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

So he should have known he was breaking the law, and he lied about his actions by saying in essence that it was an accident. But Sandy Berger’s honesty is a crucial element when it comes to whether the script of the miniseries is as close to accurate or not. He says some of the scenes in question never happened. Can, or should, he be believed?

Berger Will Plead Guilty To Taking Classified Paper

By John F. Harris and Allan Lingual

Washington Post Staff Writers

Friday, April 1, 2005

Samuel R. “Sandy” Berger, a former White House national security adviser, plans to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, and will acknowledge intentionally removing and destroying copies of a classified document about the Clinton administration’s record on terrorism.

The deal’s terms make clear that Berger spoke falsely last summer in public claims that in 2003 he twice inadvertently walked off with copies of a classified document during visits to the National Archives, then later lost them.

He described the episode last summer as “an honest mistake.â€? Yesterday, a Berger associate who declined to be identified by name but was speaking with Berger’s permission said: “He recognizes what he did was wrong…. It was not inadvertent.”

Berger said on CNN’s The Situation Room, “I have written to Mr. Iger and said that we believe that the scenes that we’re talking about are complete fabrications. They simply did not happen. They should be fixed. But quite honestly, at this point, I don’t think this is something you can fix. I think you just have to yank it.”

Berger wasn’t alone writing to Disney Boss Robert Iger. A bunch of Democrat senators gave a veiled threat in a letter to Iger, and ABC that read in part….

We write with serious concerns about the planned upcoming broadcast of The Path to 9/11 mini-series on September 10 and 11. Countless reports from experts on 9/11 who have viewed the program indicate numerous and serious inaccuracies that will undoubtedly serve to misinform the American people about the tragic events surrounding the terrible attacks of that day.

The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airwaves in serving the public interest. Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events.

That Disney would seek to broadcast an admittedly and proven false recounting of the events of 9/11 raises serious questions about the motivations of its creators and those who approved the deeply flawed program.

These concerns are made all the more pressing by the political leaning of and the public statements made by the writer/producer of this miniseries, Mr. Cyrus Nowrasteh, in promoting this miniseries across conservative blogs and talk shows.

Sincerely,

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid

Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin

Senator Debbie Stabenow

Senator Charles Schumer

Senator Byron Dorgan

In other words, if you run this program, they may relieve ABC of its broadcast license. No writer/producer in Hollywood should have any political leanings. How many complaints did these senators issue about “The West Wing� and their partisan portrayals? Let’s not forget “non-partisan� examples like “The American President� and almost every movie made in Hollywood where the word “Republican� is used as an off-the-cuff, irrelevant-to-the-plot insult.

So, in the end, it seems to come back to Sandy Berger, who seems to be the one holding the credibility of the Clinton Administration’s seriousness on the terror war in his hands.

According to the Hollywood Reporter’s Andrew Wallenstein,

“In recent days, a rising chorus of critics have assailed “Path to 9/11″ for offering an inaccurate depiction of pre-Sept. 11 behind-the-scenes politics. Former Clinton officials, including Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and National Security Adviser Samuel Berger have voiced their objections over scenes that cast their involvement in an unflattering light.

“Sources said ABC already has made minor edits to the miniseries, toning down one particular scene involving Berger that was interpreted by some as suggesting he at one point opted to not order the assassination of Osama bin Laden. The scene was edited to emphasize the culpability of no one particular individual, sources said, who also noted that not every scene that has been called into question will necessarily be changed.�

The way I understand it, there’s one sequence where the CIA and the Afghanistan Northern Alliance surround bin Laden’s house in Afghanistan. They need final approval from the Clinton administration in order to capture him.

They called Washington. They called the White House. Clinton and his senior staff refuse to give authorization for the capture of bin Laden because they’re afraid of political fallout should the mission go wrong. Sandy Burger reportedly tells the CIA team in Afghanistan if they want to capture bin Laden, they’re on their own. If they go in, the administration’s not sanctioning or approving the ” The team abandons the mission, and not long after that, that bin Laden and Al-Qaeda bomb the US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, killing over 225 men, women, and children and also wounded over 4,000.

Unfortunately, we’ll never know what really happened until we find out what documents were “inadvertentlyâ€? destroyed by Berger. Berger says it never happened. Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson disagrees….

“I was there with Clinton and Berger and watched the missed opportunities occur. Berger was very agitated, he couldn’t get a decision from the president.”

According to Art Moore of World Net Daily, “As a military aide to President Clinton from 1996 to 1998, Patterson was one of five men entrusted with carrying the “nuclear football,” which contains the codes for launching nuclear weapons.â€?

The scene in “The Path to 9/11,” as Patterson recalled from the preview version, unfolds with CIA operatives at the camp on the phone with Berger, who is expressing concern that an attack could result in innocent bystanders being killed. An agent says he sees swing sets and children’s toys in the area. The scene ends with Berger hanging up the phone.

Patterson says his recollection is that Clinton was involved directly in several similar incidents in which Berger was pressing the president for a decision.

Patterson noted he wasn’t sure what Berger wanted to do – whether the national security adviser wanted the answer to be yes or no – but the frustration, at the very least, was based on the president making himself unavailable to make a decision.

Clinton, according to Patterson, did not return phone calls from Berger for more than an hour then said he wanted more time to study the situation.

Patterson writes: “We ‘studied’ the issues until it was too late-the window of opportunity closed.”

Seeing how Lt. Col. Patterson has never stolen secret documents and destroyed some of them, his honesty is not in question. Sandy Berger’s honesty isn’t either. He has no credibility.

If “The Path To 9/11� is not an accurate depiction of events that led up to the World Trade Center and Pentagon attack, it’s because some of the documents used to produce the 9/11 Commission were purposefully removed, thus omitted, by Sandy Berger.

We have the word of Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Berger, and “Buzz� Patterson. Patterson said some of the scenes in question happened. If they hadn’t, Clinton’s lawyers would be suing instead of issuing threats.

History isn’t being rewritten. Thanks to the strong spines of those at ABC, it’s finally being exposed.

Ronald Reagan has a message straight out of hell for you all ;
http://www.godhatesamerica.com

Anyway, I think I cleaned them out on this thread and on the Commie thread.