Vatican's New Document on "Human Fraternity" Co-signed by Imam Who Believes in Death For Christian Converts

Tweet

Francis and Sheik Ahmed Al-Tayyeb

The Vatican just issued a "Document" to mark the current "Apostolic Journey of His Holiness Pope Francis to the United Arab Emirates".

It's called "A Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together" and it's jointly signed by "His Holiness Pope Francis" and "The Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, Ahmed Al-Tayyeb."

As the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Sheik Al-Tayyeb is arguably the world's pre-eminent Muslim scholar.

He also is clearly on record (see below) as endorsing the punishment of death for apostates from Islam.

Notably, the current Document includes these lines:

Freedom is a right of every person: each individual enjoys the freedom of belief, thought, expression and action. The pluralism and the diversity of religions, colour, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings. This divine wisdom is the source from which the right to freedom of belief and the freedom to be different derives. Therefore, the fact that people are forced to adhere to a certain religion or culture must be rejected, as too the imposition of a cultural way of life that others do not accept;

Has Al-Tayyeb changed his mind? Does he now not believe in death to apostates, though he publicly reaffirmed that at least as recently as three years ago?

Are flying pigs halal?

Mahound's Paradise wrote on this issue in 2016, during some of the Vatican's initial dalliances with the wily Al-Tayyeb. We reprint that post in full, here:

Top Muslim Ally of Pope Francis Reaffirms that Muslim Converts to Christianity Should be Killed

Cheek to Sheik

Two months ago, Pope Francis welcomed Sheik Ahmed el-Tayeb, - the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, and the highest scholarly authority in Sunni Islam - to the Vatican.

And a week ago, the Pope sent a representative to Al-Azhar as a follow-up and to "relaunch dialogue."

The original meeting, which included discussions between larger delegations from Al-Azhar and the Vatican, was characterized as extremely friendly - a sort of "re-set" of Catholic-Muslim relations after the iciness allegedly set off by Pope Benedict's Regensburg remarks in 2006.

According to Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi, in their conversation

they had focused mainly on the theme of the common commitment of the authorities and faithful of the great religions for peace in the world, the rejection of violence and terrorism, the situation of Christians in the context of the conflicts and the tensions in the Middle East and their protection.

The Pope gave Sheik el-Tayeb a number of gifts including a copy of Laudato si.

Then they spontaneously embraced.

Sheik el-Tayeb is often described as a "moderate." He looks rational and reasonable, without the crazy smile of the fanatic. He supported el-Sisi against the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt and has made a number of public statements against violent extremism and in favor of human rights in general.

A few months before meeting the Pope he declared in front of the German Parliament that the Koran guaranteed religious freedom.

However, as the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies recently pointed out (as highlighted by Raymond Ibrahim in a recent essay), el-Tayeb has a history of saying one thing to Western audiences and another to Arabic or Muslim ones.

For example, during this past Ramadan, el-Tayeb reaffirmed on his television show that Islam mandates death for apostates:

Contemporary apostasy presents itself in the guise of crimes, assaults, and grand treason, so we deal with it now as a crime that must be opposed and punished…. Those learned in Islam [al-fuqaha] and the imams of the four schools of jurisprudence consider apostasy a crime and agree that the apostate must either renounce his apostasy or else be killed.

The plucky Institute made a public statement calling on him to renounce this position, also making the general observation that

Al Azhar adopts two contradictory speeches: one is open and directed externally, while the other supports violent extremism, and is directed internally.

Interestingly, it appears that the statement was not released in English or referenced on the English version of the site.

What are we to make of this?

Is Pope Francis aware that his new Muslim friend appears to believe that apostates from Islam should be killed? How does this comport with the "protection" of Christians in the region? Or perhaps the Pope, in his rejection of "proselytism," does not believe that Christian converts are worthy of protection, or should not be placed in the category of "Christians." Maybe it's more of an ethnic category.

Also, converts do tend to be a bit conservative, after all.

Actually, I suspect the Pope has no idea what el-Tayeb really believes or more to the point, doesn't really care. But he does seem to care very much about publicizing how dialogue with his quasi-peer distinguishes him from his predecessor:

In fairness to el-Tayeb, as the highest Sunni Muslim scholarly authority in the world it would be difficult if not impossible for him to declare to a Muslim audience that apostates shouldn't be put to death, as this is clearly stated in the Koran, the Hadith and Islamic history and tradition. In that context, advocating the death penalty for apostates is not an unusual or extreme position at all. Indeed, polls show that most Muslims in Egypt support it. Though, again, there is a tradition of not, as it were, making a big deal of this to Western audiences.

It may even be that el-Tayeb himself doesn't himself particularly want to execute apostates.

The problem with Islam is not that all Muslims are evil. It's that all Muslims are to one degree or another beholden to an evil ideology. Many Muslims (including most women) are enslaved to it.

So, why don't they just leave?

See above.

Who speaks for them?

Not Pope Francis, obviously.

Shareef Didn't Like It: Amazon Pulls Sexy Burka Costume

Tweet

Happy Halloween!

Amazon UK just pulled the "Sexy Saudi Burka" costume from its online store, due to Muslim pressure and threats.

Here are some points, somewhat at random:

1. I don't know whether the sexy burka was available in the US. If it was, it was also pulled.

2. You can still buy the not very sexy male costume that the burka was paired with.

3. You have to laugh at the first item under "Customers Who Bought This Item (the Arab male costume) Also Bought":

4. You can of course still buy 101 different sexy nun costumes, as well as sexy priests (yes the costume exists), sexy angels and devils (obviously), multiple Jesus costumes with or without the "Thorn Crown Accessory" and all sorts of Biblical costumes, some sexy, some not, for everyone from irreverent atheists to Christian Fundies who want to have a holy Halloween.

5. Sorry, no Muhammad costumes, but you can buy a Muhammad Ali mask.

6. You can of course buy 101 non-sexy burkas from Amazon UK (many with velcro).

7. You CAN still buy an Israeli soldier costume for your child. Walmart pulled it last year after Muslim pressure and threats, but it's still available from Amazon US and UK. Note, though, the 117 one-star reviews out of 122. Obviously, a few Muslim and non-Muslim Brits did a bit of computer typing as a break from singing kill-the-jew songs.

8. You CAN still buy (in the US but not the UK) a bikini made out of the Saudi flag. It's part of the "Kim Lennon Country Series," which features bikinis made from many different flags. Act now, though. It's already acquired a few negative reviews from the usual suspects (in broken English, of course). As you know, the Saudi flag contains the Muslim statement of faith: "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet." And sure enough, there it is.

California Muslima Will Wear Full Body Covering for Olympic Marathon (in Order to Empower Women)

Tweet

Sarah Attar

Sarah Attar's PR for the marathon is 3:11 - 26 minutes over the Olympic qualifying requirement.

I've beaten that mark three times, quite frankly with little training, each time in my 40's.

And believe me, I've never been Olympic material.

So what's Sarah Attar doing in the Olympics?

The short answer is this: Though she was born and raised in California, Attar has dual U.S.-Saudi Arabian citizenship. The Saudi Arabia Olympic Committee previously did not allow women on their team. In 2012, the International Olympic Committee threatened to ban Saudi Arabia from the Games unless they did so.  So, Attar and one other woman were drafted as tokens to let Saudi Arabia compete.  She was assigned a distance she had never competed in before - the 800 meters - and came in dead last in a qualifying heat.

This year she's representing Saudi Arabia again, and once again the qualification requirement has been waived for her - in order to let Saudi Arabia conform to the rule.

Attar ran cross-country in high-school and college in California. I have no idea whether she was a "devout" or "practicing" Muslim. But she ran in typical shorts and a singlet. Apparently she still trains that way. However, most photos of her running in non-Muslim garb have been scrubbed from the internet. Publicity photos now show her running in Muslim attire. And she will of course be wearing a full Muslim body suit when running the Marathon in Rio.

I cannot imagine what it would be like to run a marathon wearing a full body suit, especially on a hot day.

This mediocre athlete who lent her name and "talent" to covering for (literally) one of the most misogynistic countries in the world has, as one might expect, become another sharia-feminist icon, snaring a sponsorship opportunity with Oiselle, a women's sports clothing company, among other things. She claims to be fighting for her Saudi Arabian sisters:

Attar sees her American freedoms as a unique opportunity, almost a responsibility, to show the world, and specifically Saudi girls, that sports are a possibility for them. “I feel my story speaks to the value of the Olympic creed of the importance of participation over winning, of global connectivity,” she told RunnersWorld.

The Fittish article that the above quotation comes from reminds us of Nawal El Moutawakel - the first woman from a majority Muslim country to win an Olympic Gold medal. She won the Gold for Morocco in the 400-meter hurdles at the 1984 games in Los Angeles. Ms. Moutawakel is currently Vice-President of the IOC.

As far as I can tell, she never wears a hijab.

Nawal El Moutawakel is a heroine. Sarah Attar is a shill.

Nawal El Moutawakel

Clash of Civilizations (in Women's Beach Volleyball)

Tweet

The one on the left looks hot.

The picture above features Doaa Elghobashy of Egypt facing off against Kira Walkenhorst of Germany in the first round of the Women's Beach Volleyball competition in Rio.

How fitting that the non-Muslim is a German.

Beach Volleyball may be the only sport in the Olympics where the women show more skin than the men. Competitive attire is taken directly from contemporary beach fashion where women often wear bikinis and men often wear "board shorts" (a long bathing suit extending almost to the knees).

It has never been a requirement for female competitors to wear a bikini. You could also wear a one-piece, although few did. Athletes know that the less weight and feeling of restriction you have, the better.

As in virtually all Olympic events, Beach Volleyball also had restrictions on wearing too many clothes - to prevent cheating and so on.

The International Olympic Committee "loosened" those restrictions in 2012. The ostensible justification was to make the clothing rules fairer for competitors from different cultures. But as usual, the only competitors to take advantage of the change were Muslims. And of course no one else pushed for them except Muslims and their allies.

There are no Nepalese Beach Volleyball players wearing traditional Nepalese tunics.

It would be an exaggeration to say that the changes enforced sharia law on beach volleyball. But it is true to say that they made beach volleyball safe for sharia.

As a Catholic, I accept the traditional standards of modesty for men and women. But I believe that those standards are based on context. Among other things, what might be fine to wear to the beach would (almost certainly) not be fine to wear in Church. And the purpose of the clothing is part of the context. If you're wearing a two piece in conformity with an accepted fashion standard partly in order to not draw attention to yourself, that's a bit different from, say, wearing a two piece in order to arouse lascivious thoughts in the minds of others.  

Thus, I have no problem with Beach Volleyball attire. If you do, that's okay. I hope it's also okay to agree to disagree.

One of the many issues I have with "moderate" Muslim standards of modesty for women is that they seem arbitrary. (By "moderate" here I mean hijabs and arm/leg coverings, as opposed to, say, a full burka). The supposed purpose of them is modesty, but I can't tell you the number of times I've seen hijab wearing Muslim women "sexified" up in many other ways. I'm not even being critical of that per se, only pointing a sort of discrepancy. The goal doesn't seem to be modesty so much as conformity for the sake of it, as well as of course showing off one's religious identity.

And what's wrong with that - the religious identity part - one might ask? Christians wear crosses and Jews wear kippahs, at least in part to bear witness to the fact that they're Christians or Jews. Why can't Muslims do the same thing? 

The answer is of course partly based on the nature of Islam. Islam is an aggressive ideology that seeks not to convert the world (as, say, Christianity does) but to subjugate it. The hijab is a sign of aggression. You're not wearing it merely to, as it were, show your Muslim pride, but to tell others "we're coming."

Or you're wearing it because if you don't, your father or brother will throw acid in your face.

Those Westerners who defend Islamic clothing as "a choice" are deluding themselves. It's just as much of a choice as, say, wearing a pin featuring the mug of the Great Revolutionary Leader after he's just declared your country a "People's Republic." Indeed, I would argue there was less social pressure to conform under communism than there currently is in Islam.

And that says a a lot.

Wherever one draw the line on modesty, if freedom isn't at least partly about a woman being able to wear comfortable clothing on a beach or on a volleyball court, whatever anyone else might think about it, then I don't know what.

By the way, the fully-covered Egyptians got crushed by the Germans in one of the most lopsided scores of any match so far.      

Top Muslim Ally of Pope Francis Reaffirms that Muslim Converts to Christianity Should be Killed

Tweet

Cheek to Sheik

Two months ago, Pope Francis welcomed Sheik Ahmed el-Tayeb, - the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, and the highest scholarly authority in Sunni Islam - to the Vatican.

And a week ago, the Pope sent a representative to Al-Azhar as a follow-up and to "relaunch dialogue."

The original meeting, which included discussions between larger delegations from Al-Azhar and the Vatican, was characterized as extremely friendly - a sort of "re-set" of Catholic-Muslim relations after the iciness allegedly set off by Pope Benedict's Regensburg remarks in 2006.

According to Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi, in their conversation 

they had focused mainly on the theme of the common commitment of the authorities and faithful of the great religions for peace in the world, the rejection of violence and terrorism, the situation of Christians in the context of the conflicts and the tensions in the Middle East and their protection.

The Pope gave Sheik el-Tayeb a number of gifts including a copy of Laudato si.

Then they spontaneously embraced.

Sheik el-Tayeb is often described as a "moderate." He looks rational and reasonable, without the crazy smile of the fanatic. He supported el-Sisi against the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt and has made a number of public statements against violent extremism and in favor of human rights in general.

A few months before meeting the Pope he declared in front of the German Parliament that the Koran guaranteed religious freedom.

However, as the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies recently pointed out (as highlighted by Raymond Ibrahim in a recent essay), el-Tayeb has a history of saying one thing to Western audiences and another to Arabic or Muslim ones.

For example, during this past Ramadan, el-Tayeb reaffirmed on his television show that Islam mandates death for apostates:

Contemporary apostasy presents itself in the guise of crimes, assaults, and grand treason, so we deal with it now as a crime that must be opposed and punished…. Those learned in Islam [al-fuqaha] and the imams of the four schools of jurisprudence consider apostasy a crime and agree that the apostate must either renounce his apostasy or else be killed.

The plucky Institute made a public statement calling on him to renounce this position, also making the general observation that 

Al Azhar adopts two contradictory speeches: one is open and directed externally, while the other supports violent extremism, and is directed internally.

Interestingly, it appears that the statement was not released in English or referenced on the English version of the site.

What are we to make of this?

Is Pope Francis aware that his new Muslim friend appears to believe that apostates from Islam should be killed? How does this comport with the "protection" of Christians in the region? Or perhaps the Pope, in his rejection of "proselytism," does not believe that Christian converts are worthy of protection, or should not be placed in the category of "Christians." Maybe it's more of an ethnic category.

Also, converts do tend to be a bit conservative, after all.

Actually, I suspect the Pope has no idea what el-Tayeb really believes or more to the point, doesn't really care. But he does seem to care very much about publicizing how dialogue with his quasi-peer distinguishes him from his predecessor:

In fairness to el-Tayeb, as the highest Sunni Muslim scholarly authority in the world it would be difficult if not impossible for him to declare to a Muslim audience that apostates shouldn't be put to death, as this is clearly stated in the Koran, the Hadith and Islamic history and tradition. In that context, advocating the death penalty for apostates is not an unusual or extreme position at all. Indeed, polls show that most Muslims in Egypt support it. Though, again, there is a tradition of not, as it were, making a big deal of this to Western audiences.

It may even be that el-Tayeb himself doesn't himself particularly want to execute apostates.

The problem with Islam is not that all Muslims are evil. It's that all Muslims are to one degree or another beholden to an evil ideology. Many Muslims (including most women) are enslaved to it.

So, why don't they just leave?

See above.

Who speaks for them?

Not Pope Francis, obviously.    

Dhaka Terrorist Was Inspired by Zakir Naik - Creator of the Chicago Based "Peace Phone"

Tweet

Dr. Zakir Naik

Five weeks ago I reported that the "first Islamic phone" or "Peace Phone," created by Dubai-based Dr. Zakir Naik (also spelled Nayak) was being shipped from Chicago. Naik is an internationally known Muslim writer and speaker. He is also a straight down the line death-to-apostates-and-gays, dhimmi-status-for-all-non-Muslims-and-it's-okay-to-have-sex-with-your-female-slaves sharia supporter who has also made many statements supportive of terrorism. He is banned from the UK, Canada and Malaysia.

Now The Daily Star, Bangladesh's main English paper, lists him as one of three figures that inspired the five Dhaka terrorists. One of the five, Rohan Imtiaz--the well-to-do son of a Bangladeshi politician--posted on Facebook that Naik's words and writings had urged him to become a terrorist.

Two of the five young militants who have slaughtered 20 innocent people Friday night at Holey Artisan Bakery used to follow three controversial Islamists -- Anjem Choudary, Shami Witness and Zakir Nayek. 

Militant killer Nibras Islam, 22, used to follow two alleged suspected recruiters of Islamic State -- Anjem Choudary and Shami Witness -- on Twitter in 2014. 

Another killer Rohan Imtiaz, son of an Awami League leader, propagated on Facebook last year quoting Peace TV’s controversial preacher Zakir Nayek “urging all Muslims to be terrorists”. 

A Pakistan-origin British citizen, 49-year-old Anjem is now facing trial in England for breaking the British anti-terrorism law. Shami Witness is the Twitter name of 24-year-old Mehdi Biswas of Bangalore in India, who is also facing trial for running propaganda for the IS. 

Shami was arrested in December 2014 following an investigation into his Twitter account which was last active in August 2014. Anjem’s twitter account became inactive from August 2015 after terror charges were brought against him. 

Dr Nayek is banned in UK, Canada and Malaysia and is a controversial figure in his home country India. He is wildly popular in Bangladesh through his Peace TV although his preaching often demeans other religions and even other Muslim sects. 

This means at least in the case Nibras and Rohan, they did not become radicalised overnight. They have been consuming radical materials for one to two years before finally disappearing in February-March and reappearing as “IS killers” Friday night at the Holey Artisan Bakery in Gulshan.

A spokesman for Naik's Islamic Research Foundation responded that Dr. Naik has many followers and he cannot be responsible for the actions of all of them.

But where did the young killer get the idea that Naik was "urging all Muslims to be terrorists"?

Three days ago, a Muslim death squad hacked to death twenty innocents at a restaurant in Dhaka. If you want a "Peace Phone" created by the man who inspired at least one of them, you can go to 2140 W. Fulton street in Chicago and buy one. 

New Muslim Mayor of London Bans Bikini Ads on Public Transport

Tweet

The Masjid students didn't like her

I understand that many Catholics are also against near-nude "sexy" ads in public places. But the background context makes it clear that Khan was not spontaneously deciding to strike a blow for common-sense modesty or decency. Rather, it comes in the wake of Muslims engaging in organized vandalism campaigns in London and Birmingham to deface "western" bikini advertisements.

It's the slow-motion imposition of Sharia law backed up by the threat of mob violence against property. The trick, of course, is to also make it acceptable to feminists and other leftists by talking about "body shaming" issues and the like--which of course most Muslims couldn't give a damn about.

This is how it's happening, people.

From The Daily Caller: 

London’s Muslim Mayor Bans Sexy Women In Advertisements

Sadiq Khan, London’s first Muslim mayor, announced Monday that “body shaming” advertisements will no longer be allowed in London’s public transport. 

“As the father of two teenage girls, I am extremely concerned about this kind of advertising which can demean people, particularly women, and make them ashamed of their bodies. It is high time it came to an end,” Khan said. 

Khan was not clear in what would determine which ads would be banned, as it doesn’t include all images of people in underwear or swimming clothes. Most underwear and bikini models though can be assumed to have non-average bodies. 

There was a petition with over 70,000 on Change.org opposing an advertisement with women in a bikini that asked “are you beach body ready?” 

The petition said, “Protein World is directly targeting individuals, aiming to make them feel physically inferior to the unrealistic* body image of the bronzed model, in order to sell their product.” 

Recently, advertisements featuring bikini-clad models in the British city of Birmingham were spray painted over. Birmingham has a high Muslim population.

From the Daily Mail:

Censored! Bikini advert blacked out with spray paint by 'Muslim extremists who object to women in swimsuits'

She is supposed to be advertising a sexy bikini. 

But instead the model on this poster, in Birmingham, has been defaced in an act of vandalism blamed on militant Muslims who were offended by her flesh. 

Similar acts of vandalism have been carried out in the London borough of Tower Hamlets. Police there also believe extremists are responsible. 

The advert, which promotes a £3.99 bikini top from high-street fashion retailer H&M, a scantily-dressed model stands on a sun-kissed, white sand beach. 

The freestanding advertising unit, stands in the Balsall Heath area of Birmingham, which has a large Muslim population. 

Across the road from 'Muslim Students House Masjeed', an education centre, the poster is next to a busy main road. 

The fact that almost all of the model's flesh has been covered has led local residents to speculate that the vandalism was not random, but a religiously-motivated targetted attack. 

Delivery driver Robert Tonkins, 45, said: "You see a lot of women wearing the hijab around here, and what's been done to that poster looks very similar to it. 

'I don't think it's just kids messing around - they've spray-painted specific areas and covered up anything that might be offensive to very religious people. 

'It's a bit worrying, I don't think it's up to other people to decide what can and can't be displayed on our streets, especially because we're a Christian country.'

"First Islamic Smartphone," Created by Notorious Sharia Law and Terrorist Supporter Zakir Naik, is Shipping From 2140 W. Fulton Street in Chicago

Tweet

India and Dubai-based preacher Zakir Naik is launching the world's "first Islamic smartphone." It's called "Peace Mobile 2" and according to to its website, it is currently shipping from an office in Chicago's West Loop. This what the building looks like, according to Google.

Naik is fairly well-known in India, the middle-east and the world Islamic community in general and has been the recipient of various honors and awards. He is the founder and President of the Islamic Research Foundation and the founder of Peace TV.

While cultivating a friendly and "modern" persona, Zakir Naik is a supporter of straight down-the-line Sharia. Here are some of his publicly stated views:

• Apostates from Islam should be put to death (or more precisely, they should be put to death if they start publicly peaching against Islam or for another religion).
• Homosexuals should be put to death.
• Dhimmi status for non-Muslims in Muslim countries. No preaching of other faiths. No new churches or temples, etc.
• Having sex with one's female slaves is Halal.
• Etc.

He has also made supportive claims about Osama Bin Laden and terrorism in general (although he is always ready with the usual denials about what he really meant, etc.), thinks Bush brought down the Twin Towers (when he's not praising Bin Laden for doing so), thinks Jews are the enemy of the world and so on and so forth.

In other words, your basic Muslim preacher.

Or not. Maybe most Muslims are moderates and he's an extremist.

Regardless, Zakir Naik himself is clearly an Islamo-fascist demagogue who wants your Christian convert classmate to be stoned to death or enslaved. Ditto for your lesbian classmate.

And his latest project is based in Chicago.

Where are the protesters?

Oh, right. They're forcibly shutting down Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking at DePaul.

19-Year Old Amjad Ben Sasi, Before Being Shot in the Head by Sharia Police: "Do what you like, I am not apologizing."

Tweet

Remember his name

This occurred last December in the ISIS occupied Libyan town of Sirte. I believe it was first reported yesterday in the Sunday Times and was then picked up by the Daily Mail and Italian media. The Times claims that the above photo was taken seconds before the teenager's death.

In a sense, this is a minor story. Thousands of human beings have met the same fate in the last few years. And no doubt many were just as defiant.

Nevertheless, this speaks to us if for no other reason than we appear to have some of the details, including the victim's last words.

A 19-year-old boy has been publicly executed in Libya after he refused four times to repent for swearing. 

Amjad Mohammed Ben Sasi had allegedly blasphemed during a dispute with a neighbour in the coastal city of Sirte. 

He was consequently hauled before an Islamic State Sharia court three times and on each occasion the youth stood his ground. 

'Amjad was a proud and angry young man,' Salah Salem Ben Sasi, the teenager's uncle told The Times. 

'He was fed up with Islamic State rule in Sirte. His attitude was "Do what you like, I am not apologising".' 

But he paid the price for his defiance and on the fourth day was brought into the main square where the blasphemy charge was read aloud to the public. 

Amjad Ben Sasi remained resolute to the end, and when he was asked if he had any final words he turned to the man who was about to kill him and said 'My name will live longer than yours', the uncle recalled. 

'The executioner replied, "We shall see", and shot him twice in the back of the head.' 

Read the rest at the Daily Mail.

10,000 Canadians Vote in Halloween Masks To Protest Pro-Sharia Voting Law

Tweet

Catholic

Scroll to the end for more pictures.

The grassroots Canadian political movement Voting With Covered Faces was formed to oppose, seriously but with a bit of humor, the Canadian's government's recent accommodation with aggressive Islam.

Muslims have claimed that the requirement to show one's face when voting violates their religious rights, and the craven authorities have gone along with it. So now you can wear a niqab or a burka when you vote and not be required to take it off or peel it back, if even for a moment.

Voting With Covered Faces insists that opposition to this is not anti-Muslim per se, which I think gets it right. It's not anti-Muslim to believe that no group, religious or otherwise, should be allowed special rights, exemptions or favors within the democratic process.

This story is (one again) via Bare Naked Islam.

From the Facebook site:

It is totally legal and permissible to vote with your face covered. You can wear a niqab, a burqa, a Halloween mask, or any other face covering at your leisure, even a bag from potatoes. All you need is two pieces of ID, and a solemn declaration as to your identity. 

We consider it an aberration that people can vote in Canada without having to reveal their faces at any point in time, so we are encouraging everyone to go out and vote with their faces covered, in protest, because this law really must be changed... 

NO MORE FACE VEILS! 

WHEREAS we believe the exercise of democracy should be carried out in line with secular values. 

WHEREAS we believe religious symbols (encompassing all faiths) representative of inequality must not be tolerated within a society of equality such as ours. 

WHEREAS we are asking our elected officials to implement laws and set limits that reflect the common values we share and that built up our country. 

WE are asking for electors to be required to vote with their face uncovered. We are asking for the citizenship oath to be sworn with the face uncovered.To this end, we are inviting you to show up in your riding next October 19 and vote with your face covered with a veil of the niqab or burqa type or other face covering to draw attention to the fact that being allowed to vote with a face covering is ludicrous. 

The objective is to raise collective awareness for all, including our elected officials who are the people’s representatives. 

We are inviting you to take part in this peaceful and legal movement, calmly and respectfully... 

This event does not approve of, nor condemns, any religion or group. We are in favor of the democratic exercice in accordance with secular values; we denounce any religious symbol (encompassing all faiths) that represents inequality. 

Any racist speech/images/ videos that incite hate, propaganda, vulgar language, insults, discourse whether repetitive and/or considered offensive or degrading, will not be tolerated and will be promptly deleted by the administrators of this event...

Beekeeper

Cowboy

Darth Vader

Evil Clown (for Mudabor)

Ghost

Anarchist

Patheos blogger

Mossad agent 

Scary monster

Polish

Cute