Saturday, February 18, 2006

The Investigation Continues: Jamaat ul Fuqra: The Founder

The investigation into terror group Jamaat ul Fuqra is continuing by The Canadian Sentinel as well as by CP and the Northeast Intelligence Network.
Today I happened to be just browsing casually amongst some links I had discovered via Google yesterday. I thought I'd share a little bit right now.
I must confess that, although a Christian (Catholic) myself, I really don't know the content of the Holy Bible as do some, like Jack Van Impe (for whom I have great respect, as he also understands the nature and magnitude of the threat to the free world posed by terrorism and isn't afraid to express his opinion thereof). I'm not exactly a "practicing" type myself, but I'm nevertheless proud of my Christian heritage, as I have great respect for the religion and can see how Christianity has greatly contributed positively to human civilization over the centuries and has even provided the basis for the Constitution of the United States, which itself is something to be admired. Christianity also is the true original foundation of modern society in terms of its fundamental values. Some will certainly disagree with this statement; let them, for freedom of expression stems from the values of Christianity itself as far as I'm concerned.
But I came upon this and then became suspicious. I'm no expert on the Bible, but the claims made by Imam Mubarik Ali Shah Gilani, the founder of JuF, with respect to Christianity sounded strange and I wonder if they're false; if he is purporting, as a Muslim and not a Christian, to declare what is and isn't true about Jesus and others of the Christian history. Below, I'll excerpt examples from the document, Greeting to Our Christian Brethren, from the website, (check it out; there're links all over the place which make me wonder, like the claim that a visitor to the organization was cured of cancer, but the link is "under construction"... sounds a lot like a cult to me).
Gilani refers to Jesus in the following manner:
...Jesus, son of Mary, the second Last Messenger of Islam...
This is the first thing he wrote that raised a troubling red flag for me. He seems to be implying that Jesus was a Muslim! Never have I ever heard of Jesus being a Muslim, so perhaps someone who would know the truth would kindly advise... called followers of Jesus are involved in committing adultery, perversion, drinking, and gambling...
Well, I won't take issue that there are indeed many Christians who are involved in these vices, but, who is he, a Muslim, one of the folks who become (sometimes murderously) extremely angry when it is pointed out that there are a lot of Muslims everywhere who believe in and even practice terrorism? Hell, simply draw a picture or cartoon of Mohammed and some actually want to chop off your head! I would expect if giving Christians a "greeting", he wouldn't be speaking so boldly of these vices lest he upset Christians just as Muslims get upset at any kind of criticism at all, particularly the factual observation that most terrorists are Muslims; not all, but most. Perhaps it's more of a blatant offense than a greeting, which he calls it?
Today priests or devils have legalized what he forbade but they could not save mankind from the evil consequence of sins such as AIDS, mental disease, murders, earthquakes and tornados!
With the exception of his shockingly declaring mental disease a "sin", I don't argue with most of the rest of the statement. But what is completely unacceptable and offensive to all Christians is his using the words "priests or devils" in such a manner as to pejorate priests as devils. If we Christians were to say, "Imams or devils", would we get away with it? Really, semantically, it's obvious he's saying that he'll use either term to describe priests. Unacceptable. This man doesn't sound respectful at all, and this is logically a red flag. For those who disagree with this analysis, think about what would happen if a Christian conservative were to use the phrase "homosexuals or devils". You know there's always hell to pay for such phrases.
The priests of his time were not different from Gene Robinson, Jimmy Swaggart and James Baker. They invented lies and falsehood against the Almighty and Jesus son of Mary; they incorporated heathen mythology and paganism in the
Gospel and made him the “son of god” and invented the fable of dying on the cross for mankind.
I quote Thomas Paine, a great thinker and moralist who arrived at the following conclusion when he used reason to under the Bible. “The Bible and Testament are impositions upon the world… the account of Jesus Christ being the son of God and his dying to appease the wrath of God and of salvation by that strange means are all fabulous inventions dishonorable to the wisdom and power of the Almighty. That the one true religion is . . . the belief of one God.” (Age of Reason, by
Thomas Paine)
You be the judge of that. Myself, I say that this man, a Muslim, a very reasonably suspected leader of a terrorist training camp, has no business speaking to Christians this way; if a Christian spoke in such a manner to him, how the would he feel? Perhaps he'd order one of his minions to behead the individual? The sheer nerve of this pretentious criminal/terrorist organization leader! Quoting some author's opinion doesn't make it acceptable to make the slur himself! He says the crucifiction is a lie. He should stick to his own religion and shut up just as he would expect non-Muslims to shut up about his. This man certainly should be considered a dangerous threat; after all, he founded a criminal/terror organization!
It is ironic to observe that, despite the fact the Jews tried to murder Jesus son of Mary, and the so-called church, raised in his name, have no authentic evidence that (He) ever existed. Our Holy Quran is the only evidence of the existence
of Jesus, his mission and his raising up alive of the Almighty.
Notice that he accused the Jews of trying to murder Jesus? If this isn't an incitement to the Jews and Christians to become enraged from this slur on the Judeo-Christian people, then cartoons of Mohammed are, what, nothing at all? What an anti-Semite as well as an Anti-Christ! I would furthermore say to him given the chance: "Guess what? There's no authentic evidence that Mohammed ever existed". And what's up with his phrase, "so-called church"? How about we start saying "So-called Mosques"? And how about his claim that only the Quran is evidence of Jesus and what he did? I doubt this, even though I didn't read either texts. Still, he's merely preaching Islamic dogma. Did this actually come from the Quran or was it made up by dishonest Islamofascists?
Near the bottom is the line:
Contact the International Quranic Open University branch nearest you:
And three addresses, including the terror training camp in Hancock. The others might ring a bell with watchers of terrorism. If so, don't hesitate to let me know. Links are always welcome.
In closing this post, I would contend that the words he wrote in his so-called "greeting" to Christians are no less offensive than the cartoons of Mohammed which have been leveraged by Islamofascists across the planet to incite their brethren to extreme violence. The whole "greeting" is nothing but an arrogant affront to Christianity. This man is obviously one to watch closely. Talk about "hidden agendas", eh?
This is the founder of Jamaat ul Fuqra. This post was intended to expose some of his attitude towards non-Muslims. I myself find his attitude troubling, especially when combined with the facts unearthed in the investigation by CP and the NIN.