Imran Hosein: Meeting with the Saker in beautiful Tobago by Imran N. Hosein

Meeting with the Saker in beautiful Tobago

by Imran N. Hosein

www.imranhosein.org
inhosein@hotmail.com

I have just spent 10 exciting days with my Russian friend, ‘The Saker’, in the enchantingly beautiful Caribbean island of Tobago. I was born in the island of Trinidad where I now live, and Tobago is located just next to Trinidad in the South Caribbean Sea close to Venezuela:

http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/central_america_map2.htm

This was the first time that I ever met with ‘Saker’, and I am happy to report that I succeeded in persuading him to come out in the open with his true identity, while putting his trust in the One God. As a consequence, his identity is now public. He is Andrei Raevsky, but he will continue to use his nom de plume of Saker. If you visit his website: http://thesaker.is/sakers-open-letter-to-the-saker-community/you will even see his photograph. Those who are not familiar with him will get to know him if they visit his website.

I also got him to agree to record a joint video with me in which I interviewed him for half of an hour, so viewers will soon be able to see us together in that interview in Tobago. It will be placed on my website at www.imranhosein.org as well as my You-tube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/user/SheikhImranHosein

We were joined in Tobago by my Serbian friend, the US-trained Attorney, Stefan Karganovic, and by his friend, a Serbian Neurosurgeon. I got to know Stefan a few years ago through the Saker, and we corresponded with each other by email before I travelled to Belgrade in 2015 to meet with him and so many others in what must be recorded as a blessed visit to that historic city. It was a dream come true for me to welcome my friend Stefan to beautiful Tobago.

Stefan has just completed the Serbian/Bosnian translation of my book on ‘Methodology for Study of the Qur’an’, and Prof Branko Rakic of the Faculty of Law of the University of Belgrade has written a long Foreword for the book. It will soon be published in a new edition with Prof Branko Rakic’s Foreword Insha Allah.

Both Saker’s wife, Ana, and my wife, Aisha, were also with us in Tobago.

I took them for an all-day tour all around the island of Tobago – driving from one end of the island to the other, while passing through Roxborough and Speyside where we stopped for lunch at a beachside restaurant with an absolutely stunning view of the Speyside Bay, until we reached the town of Charlottesville located at the other end of the island. Here are some pictures of Speyside Bay and Charlotteville:

https://www.google.tt/search?q=parlatuvier+bay+pictures+tobago&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwji4_zCgozTAhUESiYKHSBTDQgQ7AkIJA&biw=1163&bih=545&dpr=1.65#tbm=isch&q=speyside++bay+pictures+tobago&*

https://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotos-g1463485-Charlotteville_Tobago_Trinidad_and_Tobago.html

We then drove through the rain-forest from the eastern side of the island across to the western side, got stuck in soft mud at the side of the road, and eventually found a rest-shed where we could enjoy our desert – which, inevitably, was pineapple.

Perhaps the most beautiful sight of all was when we looked down at the Parlatuvier Bay (otherwise known as Englishman’s Bay) from high up a hill. My guests were all absolutely amazed by the stunning natural beauty of Parlatuvier Bay. Here are some pictures of the Bay

We also made the trip by boat to Tobago’s Nylon Pool as well as to the archipelago known as No Man’s Land.

https://www.google.tt/search?q=tobagos+nylon+pool+pics&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjBwfW0hozTAhUGKCYKHYMbCd4Q7AkINA&biw=1163&bih=545

https://www.google.tt/search?q=tobago+no+man%27s+land+archipelago+pics&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjA96HehozTAhXqr1QKHXd9B3EQ7AkIMg&biw=1163&bih=545

Captain Phillips, who piloted our boat, assured my guests that whoever took a bath in the Nylon Pool would emerge looking ten years younger. Not only did they all look ten years younger at the end of their visit to Tobago, but Stefan eventually looked quite red. He spent endless hours enjoying himself swimming in the blue/green Caribbean Sea. I do not know why the native people who lived in what is now known as America, were called ‘Red’ Indians, but I am satisfied that Stefan should enter history as the first ever ‘Red’ Serbian who was authentically ‘red’.

Since it was the Christian time of Lent, when Christians have certain dietary restrictions, we bought lots of fresh fish at the Lambeau Fish Market, and took turns in cooking. I had my turn twice, and I was fortunate to escape, despite my somewhat unconventional menus, without any culinary disaster. I took lots of pineapples and two large watermelons to Tobago from Trinidad, and was very relieved when they turned out to be quite sweet. Indeed we ate pineapples so often that some of my guests may even have had dreams of sweet pineapples. I also took a local Indian bread called Dhalpouri Roti. It is soft, round in shape, and large enough for two people to eat one of them. The flour is mixed with yellow lentil called Dhall, which makes it very delicious indeed. My guests loved it.

Despite the time spent in cooking, touring, and bathing in the blue/green Caribbean Sea, we still found time for all four of my Orthodox Christian guests to visit Tobago’s Masjid al-Taubah to attend the congregational prayers known as Salaat al-Jumu’ah.

The Imam invited me to deliver the Khutbah (i.e., sermon) and to lead the prayer, and I delivered a Khutbah on Christian-Muslim relations which was based on verses of the Qur’an. 

Saker responded to the sermon with a declaration that he wanted all of Russia to be able to hear it, and Stefan had the same wish for all of the Balkans.

My sermon was based on verses of the Qur’an which explicitly affirmed faith in some Christians:

كُنتُمْ خَيْرَ أُمَّةٍ أُخْرِجَتْ لِلنَّاسِ تَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَتَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنكَرِ وَتُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللّهِ وَلَوْ آمَنَ أَهْلُ الْكِتَابِ لَكَانَ خَيْرًا لَّهُم مِّنْهُمُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ وَأَكْثَرُهُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ

“You (Muslims) are an excellent community evolved (by divine wisdom) for the sake of mankind, (provided that you) enjoin what is right, forbid what is wrong, and you have faith in Allah. If only the People of the Book (i.e., Jews and Christians) had faith (in Muhammad as a Prophet of the One God and in the latest Book, i.e., the Qur’ān, as His revealed Word), it would have been beneficial for them: amongst them there are those who have faith, but most of (the rest of them) are perverted transgressors.”

(Qur’ān, Ale ‘Imran, 3:110)

In consequence of the above unambiguous declaration by Allah Most High in which He affirmed that amongst the Christians and Jews (i.e., the People who have the Book of Allah as we, Muslims, also have the Book of Allah) there are those who have ‘faith’, while most of them are sinful in conduct, it became necessary for Muslims to make an effort to identify and demarcate the two groupsi.e., those Christians and Jews who act in a manner consistent with a people who have ‘faith’, and those whose conduct is manifestly sinful. A people who have ‘faith’ would not harbor feelings of hatred in their hearts for the believers in Allah Most High. Nor would a people who have ‘faith’ become friends and allies of those whose hearts are filled with hatred for Muslims.

I quoted the verse of the Qur’ān which explicitly identified Jews to be a people whose hearts will display great hatred for Islam and Muslims. While some Jews did not act in this way towards Muslims, most Jews did so. This was manifest in the life-time of Nabī Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم), and has once again manifested itself in the modern age in the conduct of Zionist Jews:

لَتَجِدَنَّ أَشَدَّ النَّاسِ عَدَاوَةً لِّلَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ الْيَهُودَ وَالَّذِينَ أَشْرَكُواْ وَلَتَجِدَنَّ أَقْرَبَهُمْ مَّوَدَّةً لِّلَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ الَّذِينَ قَالُوَاْ إِنَّا نَصَارَى ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّ مِنْهُمْ قِسِّيسِينَ وَرُهْبَانًا وَأَنَّهُمْ لاَ يَسْتَكْبِرُونَ

“Strongest among men in enmity to the believers will you find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who (openly and publicly) declare, “We are Christians”: because amongst them are priests (who devote their lives to teaching and administering religious rites) and men who have embraced monasticism (and have hence renounced the world), and they are not arrogant.”

(Qur’ān, al-Māidah, 5:82)

Not only did the Qur’ān identify in the above verse the community of Jews as the People of the Book who are without faith, but it also went on to identify those (amongst the People of the Book) who display love and affection for Muslims – and hence display an important sign of faith. They are a people who declare of themselves that: “We are Christians”.

Christians who displayed love and affection for Islam and for Muslims, did appear in early Islam when the Negus of Abyssinia (i.e., modern-day Ethiopia) rejected the request of Makkah to repatriate the Muslims (who were slaves or semi-slaves) who had fled from persecution and oppression in Makkah, and had sought asylum in Abyssinia. Indeed, when the Negus died, and the news of his death reached Nabī Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) in Madīna, he performed the funeral prayer for him, thus recognizing him as a Christian who had faith in Allah Most High despite some of his Christian beliefs with which the Qur’an had taken issue.

There is absolutely no evidence that the Negus had renounced his belief in Jesus as the son of God, or that he had ceased to worship Jesus as God, prior to his death; nor do we have any such evidence from the community of Christians of whom he was the leader. When there is no such evidence from these two primary sources, dubious evidence from self-serving secondary sources is of no scholarly value. Yet the Prophet offered the funeral prayer for the Negus who was a Christian.

I argued in my sermon that such Christians who will be closest in love and affection for Islam and Muslims will once again emerge in the historical process in a time-frame that will match the contemporary emergence of Zionist Jews who have displayed unprecedented hatred for Islam and Muslims. That hatred is most visible in their barbarous oppression of the innocent people of Gaza in the Holy Land.

The verse of the Qur’ān provided important signs by which such Christians who would be closest in love and affection for Muslims, would be identified:

  1. They would be a Christian people who preserve the institution of priesthood and whose priests, from their Patriarch down to the lowest Priest, will demonstrate genuine love and affection for Islam and Muslims. This most certainly excludes the Vatican and the Roman Catholic faith, the Anglican Church (of England), and all other Christian churches in western Christianity.
  2. They would be a Christian people who preserve the institution of monasticism, and whose monks would display love and affection for Islam and Muslims. This most certainly excludes western Christianity which has almost totally abandoned monasticism and the monastic way of life. Monasteries in the West have almost all been sold, and have now become McDonalds Hamburgers etc.
  3. They would be a Christian people in whose conduct there is no arrogance. This again excludes those Christians who brought modern western civilization into being with an unprecedentedly arrogant agenda of imposing its unjust and oppressive rule over all of mankind at the point of a naked blood-stained sword.
  4. They would be a Christian people who would publicly and proudly identify themselves as ‘Christians’. This would exclude the secularized Christians of modern western civilization whose primary identity is with their nation or State, rather than with their religion.
  5. They cannot be a handful of scattered Christians who worship Allah as prescribed in the Qur’ān, and hence do not worship Nabī ‘Īsa (Jesus (عليه السلام as a third person in a trinity; and do not declare that Allah Most High had a son etc. Rather, they would have to be a community of Christians complete with their priests and monks, and hence can easily be identified. One would not have to search for them in some nook or cranny with a fine-teeth comb!

My sermon identified those Christians, referred to in the Qur’an, with the world of Orthodox Christianity.

When the prayer was over, the entire congregation of Muslims turned around and reached out to the Orthodox Christians sitting on chairs at the back of the prayer hall and greeted them with love and with affection. This first-ever visit to a Masjid was a very moving experience which Saker and his wife, Stefan and the Neurosurgeon, are unlikely to ever forget. No one turned away from them. No one rejected them. No one displayed any negative behavior towards them. I felt confident that they would have received the same welcome in all the Masajid (plural of Masjid) in the neighboring island of Trinidad. The only ones who would have displayed hostility towards them would have been those who took state-of-the-art weapons and heaps of US dollars from Santa Claus to fight their bogus ISIS Jihad in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere.

Unfortunately the sermon was not recorded, so we do not have a video of it which can be viewed.

In the ten days which we spent together in Tobago we had adequate time to engage in religious dialogue, and the remarkable thing about our dialogue was that it was always conducted with profound respect for each other, and for each other’s religion. At no time did our discussions reach a state in which either side was subjected to any deliberate discomfort. There was no hint of rivalry, and no debate, in which one side sought to defeat the other side, and yet, we never compromised in stating the viewpoint of our respective religions. In fact, what we did was to set an example for those who come after us, in engaging in Muslim – Orthodox Christian dialogue in a form and manner which was free from rancor and bigotry. In doing so, we conformed to Allah’s command in the Qur’ān in which He ordered as follows:

وَلَا تُجَادِلُوا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ إِلَّا الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مِنْهُمْ وَقُولُوا آمَنَّا بِالَّذِي أُنزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَأُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُمْ وَإِلَهُنَا وَإِلَهُكُمْ وَاحِدٌ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ

And do not argue or dispute with the Ahl al-Kitab (i.e., People of the Book, or followers of earlier revelation who are like us since we also have a Book) otherwise than in a most kindly manner, (or except with means better than mere disputation), – unless it be such of them as are bent on evildoing, (or who inflict wrong or injury) and say: “We believe in that which has been bestowed from on high upon us, as well as that which has been bestowed upon you: our God and your God is One, and it is unto Him that We [all] surrender ourselves.”

(Qur’an, al-Ankabūt, 29:46)

The above verse of the Qur’an has therefore prohibited Muslims from engaging in religious discussions with those who received the Torah, Psalms and Gospel, except in the best way possible. This prohibition did not apply, however, with such Christians and Jews who committed acts of Dhulm, i.e., injustice, oppression, wickedness.

The verse also went on to establish the very foundation of any engagement in religious discussions with Christians and Jews in the declaration that: “We believe in the revelation which has come down to us (i.e., the Qur’an) and in that which came down to you (i.e., the Torah, Psalms, Gospel); Our Ilah (i.e., God), and your Ilah (i.e., God), is One; and to Him we bow (in submission)”.

It is not my intention to write a comprehensive report of all subjects of our dialogue since Saker and I have decided to jointly write a book which will present both Islamic and Orthodox Christian Eschatology while examining the subject of Islam and Russia. Rather I choose to focus on only one subject of our dialogue and, in doing so, offer our readers a glimpse of what is to come when the book is written Insha Allah (God Willing).

Saker already knew that the Arabic word ‘Allah’ was a combination of the definite article (‘the’) and the Arabic word for God (‘ILAH’). Hence the word ‘Allah’ meant ‘The God’ i.e., The One God. Even though the Christian worshiped Jesus as God, he was still insistent that he worshiped One God since the Bible was unequivocal in its declaration: Know Oh Israel that the Lord, Your God, is One! Hence when I repeated to Saker on several occasions that his God and my God were One God, it built between us a solid common foundation for positive dialogue.

There might, unfortunately, be some Muslims who will be uneasy with the above verse of the Qur’an in which Allah Most High ordered Muslims to declare to Christians and to Jews that: Our Ilah (i.e., God) and your Ilah (i.e., God) is One. Their uneasiness would be in consequence of their knowledge that Christians worship Jesus as God. Allah Most High has already responded to such uneasiness by asking them whether they wish to teach religion to the Lord-God (Allah):

قُلْ أَتُعَلِّمُونَ اللَّهَ بِدِينِكُمْ . . . .

Say: “Do you want to teach your religion to Allah? . . . .

(Qur’ān, al-Hujurāt, 49:16)

It is remarkable that we conducted our religious discussions in exactly the opposite way from the boxing matches staged by the late Ahmad Deedat of South Africa which sought to expose several things in the Bible, belligerently so, as false and rancid. Many Christians were enraged by those boxing matches, and those who were not enraged were secretly smiling with Deedat’s Saudi sponsors since they shared a covert agenda of driving such a thick wedge between the two faiths as would preclude any possibility of friendship and alliance ever emerging between Muslims and Christians. I believe that Saker and I were more faithful to the Qur’an than Deedat and his acolytes ever were, and we set the right example of mutual respect and proper decorum for those who will now follow us Insha Allah, in Orthodox Christian-Muslim dialogue.

I asked Saker what were his expectations for the future of Muslim – Orthodox Christian dialogue, and he was very clear and precise in his response in directing attention, first of all, to those matters wherein we differed, and which appeared to him to be beyond resolve. Saker was forthright in his declaration that Orthodox Christianity does not recognize Muhammad as a Prophet of the One God, like unto Abraham and Moses (Allah’s blessings be upon them all), and does not recognize the Qur’ān as a divinely-revealed Word of the One God. However he did go on to explain that Orthodox Christianity does not have a book comparable in absolute authority to the Qur’an. Rather, Orthodox Christianity is dependent on both the Bible as well as the Church, and the collective wisdom of its luminaries through the ages, for an authoritative declaration of what constitute Truth and Faith. And so, it appeared to me that Orthodox Christians have a possible future in which the Church and its luminaries can modify Christian views through new interpretations of Christian religious symbolism and through divine visions etc. I therefore did not close the chapter between us pertaining to the status of the Qur’an and of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah Most High ever be with him).

I was familiar, of course with our own Islamic view that while whatever is clearly and explicitly stated in the Qur’an is eternally binding on all Muslims, there are other verses in the Qur’an which have to be interpreted, and hence that new knowledge would constantly keep on flowing from the Qur’an.

I did address the matter of Christian worship of Jesus as God, and as Son of God, and put the matter to rest between us when I quoted a passage of the Qur’an in which Allah Most High addressed Jesus on the subject:

وَإِذْ قَالَ اللّهُ يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنتَ قُلتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَـهَيْنِ مِن دُونِ اللّهِ قَالَ سُبْحَانَكَ مَا يَكُونُ لِي أَنْ أَقُولَ مَا لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ إِن كُنتُ قُلْتُهُ فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِي وَلاَ أَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِكَ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ عَلاَّمُ الْغُيُوبِ

AND LO! Allah said: O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you say unto men, `Worship me and my mother as deities beside Allah?” [Jesus] answered: “Limitless art Thou in Thy glory! It would not have been possible for me to say what I had no right to [say]! Had I said this, You would indeed have known it! You know all that is within myself, whereas I know not what is in Yourself. Verily, it is You alone who fully knows all the things that are beyond the reach of a created being’s perception.

مَا قُلْتُ لَهُمْ إِلاَّ مَا أَمَرْتَنِي بِهِ أَنِ اعْبُدُواْ اللّهَ رَبِّي وَرَبَّكُمْ وَكُنتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَّا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنتَ أَنتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَنتَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدٌ

Nothing did I tell them beyond what You did bid me [to say]: `Worship Allah, [who is] my Lord-God as well as your Lord-God.’ And I bore witness to what they did as long as I dwelt in their midst; but when you took me (i.e., took my soul and hence made it appear that I was dead, and then returned my soul and raised me into the Samawat or parallel universes), You alone has been their keeper: for You are witness unto everything.

إِن تُعَذِّبْهُمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ عِبَادُكَ وَإِن تَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ فَإِنَّكَ أَنتَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ

If You punish them – verily, they are Your servants; and if You forgive them – verily, You are Almighty (and) Wise!”

(Qur’an, al-Maidah, 5:116-118)

I argued that this response implied that the matter of the worship of Jesus as God, and as the Son of God, should not become a subject of dispute and debate between Muslims and Christians. The Qur’an has advised the Muslim to let the matter rest until Allah Most High deals with it Himself on Judgment Day. This Divine wisdom seems to have escaped the attention of those misguided Muslims who ignore the Qur’an whenever they take up their boxing gloves to do religious battle with Christians and with the Bible.

This brief report does not record all the matters discussed between us, since there is a book coming, Insha Allah, which Saker and I will jointly write. He and I will endeavor to set the example, as well as the stage, for future such dialogue between Muslims and Orthodox Christians so that we can advance the cause of friendship and alliance between our two persecuted peoples.

Saker has already set the example of faithfulness to his Orthodox Christian creed, and I too will endeavor to ensure in my dialogue with Saker that I remain faithful to the Qur’an and faithful Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) who personally received in Madina a delegation of about 60 Byzantine Christians (including many religious scholars) who travelled from their native Najran in Yemen to meet with him. He not only welcomed them warmly and kindly, but offered them the Masjid itself as their place of residence and rest, as well as a place for them to pray, during their stay of approximately 3 days in Madina. The inter-religious dialogue did not yield any break-through regarding the central issues which divided the Christians and the Qur’an, but also did not result in bitter and acrimonious exchanges. Before saying good-bye and returning to Najran in Yemen, the delegation of Christians even requested of the Prophet that a learned and trustworthy Muslim be sent to them in Najran so that, among other things, the lines of communication for continuing dialogue could remain open. Despite all that has since occurred between our two peoples, and which unfriendly critics will now rush to relate, Saker and I are doing precisely that – we are continuing that Orthodox Christian – Muslim dialogue that was initiated in Madina in the presence of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and upon all the messengers of Allah Most High).

——-

Small post-scriptum by The Saker: with all due respect and love for the Sheikh, I don’t believe that he is correct when he writes that “it appeared to me that Orthodox Christians have a possible future in which the Church and its luminaries can modify Christian views through new interpretations of Christian religious symbolism and through divine visions etc.“.  The problem here is that for a teaching to be considered “Orthodox” it has to meet two criteria:

  1. It has to be the expression of the consensus patrum, the agreement of all the Church Fathers, and thus is cannot contradict the past position of the Church.  Saint Vincent of Lérins (5th century) expressed it in the following words when he said that is true that “which has been believed everywhere, always and by all” .  Thus, it cannot be the opinion of only some, contemporary, Church Fathers.
  2. It has to be “upward compatible” with what has been taught in the past.  Saint Athanasios (4th century) expressed this idea in the following words that the Orthodox faith is the faith “which the Lord gave, was preached by the Apostles, and was preserved by the Fathers. On this was the Church founded; and if anyone departs from this, he neither is nor any longer ought to be called a Christian“.  Thus no new teaching can be accepted if it contradicts what was taught in the past.

The Church having refused to recognize Muhammad as a prophet of God and having refused to accept the Quran as a divine book, She cannot under any circumstances change Her point of view.  On issues of faith and dogmatics the Church, being the Theandric Body of God filled with the Holy Spirit, She is infallible.

However, and as long as their is no compulsion in religion and as long as everybody recognizes the absolute right of each human being to follow his/her conscience, I totally agree with the Sheikh when he writes “the matter of the worship of Jesus as God, and as the Son of God, should not become a subject of dispute and debate between Muslims and Christians. The Qur’an has advised the Muslim to let the matter rest until Allah Most High deals with it Himself on Judgment Day“.

As long as our differences are not obfuscated or otherwise minimized, I do believe that it makes little sense to engage in disputes about them. What we all have to do is the explain our beliefs and make sure that the other is not mislead/misinformed about them.  But once that “informational” phase is over, there is simply no point in engaging in disputes.  Finally, we all have to recognize that the other is following his/her conscience with as much honesty, zeal and purity of faith as we do.  While we do not have to agree with the other, we do have to respect this quest for the truth in by the other.

These are my humble comments to the wise and kind words of the Sheikh.

The Saker

بطاقة معايدة للنبي .. أمة بلا نبي ونبي بلا أمة

بطاقة معايدة للنبي .. أمة بلا نبي ونبي بلا أمة

ملاحظة هامة جدا

ياأيها الذين آمنوا لا تتخذوا اليهود والنصارى أولياء بعضهم أولياء بعض ومن يتولهم منكم فإنه منهم* إن الله لا يهدي القوم الظالمين

قال بعضهم وبعض اليهود هنا هم اليهود الصهاينه  أما بعض النصاري فهم أتباع المسيحية الصهيونية فهم أولياء بعض أما اليهود والنصارى  المعادين للحلف اليهودي الصهيوني فلا علاقة لهم بالآية الكريمة

 للمزيد شاهد هذا الفديوللعالم السني الشيخ عمرن حسين


 أما قوله “ومن يتولهم منكم فإنه منهم“ فهم معظم قادة وعلماء “الأمة الأسلامية” شاهد بعضهم في الفديو التالي  

——————————————————

‎بقلم: نارام سرجون‎'s Profile Photo

هاقد اقتربت نار الجهاد “الاسلامي” من جسد النبي ولامست ثوبه الكريم .. ولكني لست بحاجة لشجاعة أجمعها في قلبي لأعتذر من النبي أن النار لامست قبره الكريم واقتربت من جسده المقدس المسجى في المدينة .. فأنا لن أعتذر للنبي ولن أطلب منه الصفح والغفران على شفافيتي وصراحتي وصدقي .. لكني سأهديه في هذا العيد قطعة من قلبي أكتب عليها كبطاقة العيد معتذرا وآسفا أن معايدتنا له كانت هدية من نار .. وهو الذي جاء لعتقنا من النار .. وسأكتب على بطاقة المعايدة التي قطعتها من قلبي ووضعتها في بريد مكة وألصقت عليها طابع بريد عليه علم سورية:

أعتذر منك أيها النبي ليس لأن النار التي أوقدناها في الشرق لفحت وجهك الكريم .. بل لأن غضبنا من اجلك صار صناعيا .. ولأن انفعالنا الهائل صار مبرمجا مثل آلة .. ولأن الحزن لأجلك حزن مسبق الصنع مثل الجدران مسبقة الصنع وورق الجدران ومثل قلاع هوليوود الكرتونية ودمى الحديقة الجوراسية .. فنحن لدينا قوالب مسبقة الصنع للغضب الاسلامي والحزن الاسلامي والانفعال الاسلامي ونخرجها من خزائننا القديمة للمجاملات فقط كما نخرج حكايات عنترة والزير التي يكررها الحكواتيون في المقاهي القديمة .. وليس بامكان أحدنا يارسول الله أن يصنع دمعة واحدة عليك ليس لأننا نزفنا كل دموعنا حتى آخر قطرة بل لأننا تعلمنا في الأحزان النبوية والاسلامية تحديدا أن نتحول الى منافقين نستورد الدموع في زجاجات كما نستورد العطور الباريسية ونقطرها في عيوننا .. ولأننا صرنا نستورد الدين من مساجد “السي آي اي” ومساجد “الموساد” في السعودية كما نستورد المياه الغازية وعبوات الكوكاكولا .. والدين الذي أكملته لنا في يوم الوداع وأتممت به نعمتك علينا يا رسول الله صار فرعا من فروع شركة لوكهيد مارتين الامريكية لصناعة محركات طائرات الشبح وصواريخ كروز بعد أن باعه آل سعود وشيوخ المال مع براميل النفط ..

ورغم أننا منافقون فانني في هذا البوح في العيد سأصدقك القول بأن استنكار المسلمين للهجوم قرب مرقدك الشريف يشبه مجاملاتنا المنافقة لضحايا حوادث قطارات الفقراء في الهند ..ليس هناك الا دموع صناعية

وغضب مسبق الصنع وورق جدران مزوّق ودمى جوراسية اسلامية:

لاتصدق كلمة واحدة من كل ماقيل من غضب يارسول الله .. ولاتكترث بتلك الرسائل المستنكرة التي انهمرت بسخاء من الزعماء والملوك والأمراء وكل ذوي المناصب الفخرية والألقاب الفخمة وكل الشيوخ وأصحاب العمامات النفطية والمقامات الأزهرية .. ولاتلتفت الى كل أكوام الانفعال الذي غصت به الشاشات وأثقلت به البيانات وعبارات الذهول واللاتصديق على موائد الافطار عندما لامست النار تراب قبرك .. ولاتثق بشجب واحد ولابعبارة مليئة بالتوجع والتفجع .. فكل مارأيته وسمعته صادر عن أمة لاتستحي من النفاق ومن الرياء حتى على نبيها الذي صار الحريق حول قبره بورصة استثمار باسم النبي تصب ارباحها في بيت عائلة آل سعود .. يارسول الله ولاتغرّنك تلك القصائد القرشية العربية في حبك والموت على نهج نبوتك .. فهذه أمة صارت بلا نبي .. والأدق أنك – وأقولها وقلبي منقبض – صرت نبيا بلا أمّة ..


هل تصدق يارسول الله أن أمة تحتفل بموت عابري السبيل الفقراء حرقا في حي الكرادة البغدادي هي أمة ستكترث ان رأت النار في مرقدك الكريم؟؟ كيف يستوي في الروح حزن عليك وبهجة في موت الأبرياء؟؟


هل تصدق يارسول الله حزن هذه الأمة التي تلد انتحاريين يذهبون الى مدارس الأطفال الصغار عمدا في حمص ليقتلوا الأطفال لانهم كفار وأبناء كفار وكأنهم اختاروا الكفر صغارا ؟؟.. وهل تدري أن كل مساجد أمة الانتحار هذه لزمت الصمت من المحيط الى الخليج ولم توبخ من هلل لموت الاطفال .. شفاه شامتة وأحيانا ضاحكة من موت الأطفال تابعت صلاتها وصيامها وزكاتها وحجها ودعاءها بالنصر للاسلام والمسلمين .. هذه هي ذات الأرواح الحجرية التي تعلن غضبها اليوم من أن يصل اللهيب الجهادي الى قلبك ..

..

 هل تصدق غضب أمة يارسول الله تبيع الأقصى الذي صليت فبه ولايزال أثر جبينك مطبوعا على ترابه وانت تصلي ؟؟ أمة لاتبالي أن تدوس أحذية جيش اسرائيل ومستوطنيه مكان جبهتك لكنها تنتفض أن النار لامست تراب قبرك؟؟

..



هل تثق يارسول الله بمحبة أمة لك وهي تذبح أبناء الناس وتنحرهم من أجل السلطة والحكم وكرسي الخلافة .. وتقدم أبناءها قرابين من أجل أن يكون لها أي خليفة؟؟

ماهذه الامة التي تغضب من نار اقتربت منك ولكنها لاتستحي أن تحرق الاطفال في اليمن وهم جوعى وتقصفهم منذ عام كامل بالنار .. فكيف لك ان ترضى باحراق المسلمين لأطفال المسلمين ثم يغضب الغاضبون المنافقون من نار تقترب منك ..

يارسول الله .. نحن جميعا أشعلنا النار في جسدك وقرآنك .. جميعنا مذنبون .. بالأمس قتلنا حفيدك وبكينا عليه ثم تباهينا أن اليهود هم فقط قتلة الأنبياء .. واليوم نتباهى ونتسابق لسكب الغضب لاجلك وتدب فينا النخوة والشهامة والغيرة عليك أيها النبي .. ولكن انظر كم فتوى قتل وموت وحرق بحق المسلمين ننتج كل يوم حتى صرنا نقتل بعضنا كالضباع وننهش بعضنا كالكلاب المسعورة .. أحرقنا مساجدنا ودمرنا بيوت الله وهانحن اليوم نقترب من قبرك لندمره بأيدينا .. فهاقد “جئناك بالذبح” شعارا وجاءك المجاهدون المؤمنون الوهابيون بالانتحاريين وحورياتهم تسبقهم ..

يارسول الله سأعترف لك أن كل مشكلة الاسلام أن المسلمين لايعتنقون الاسلام من أجل الاسلام بل من أجل الخلافة والسلطة .. فنحن لانؤمن باسلام بلا سلطة .. ولذلك يجن جنون الناس كلما تسربت السلطة من فريق مسلم الى فريق مسلم .. لأن الاسلام بلا سلطة فارغ من الايمان وغير جذاب ولن تجد له وليا ولانصيرا ..

يارسول الله في العيد سأقول لك .. أننا صرنا أمة بلا نبي لأن ديننا الجديد لم يأت به نبي … وأنك صرت نبيا بلا أمة .. وربما كان ذلك أكثر سعادة لك وراحة في عليائك .. فهذه أمة تثير الشفقة .. وتجلب العار على أنبيائها لأنها الأمة الوحيدة التي تكره نفسها وتكرهها كل الأمم .. وهي لذلك لاتستحقك يامن عفوت عندما قدرت وأطلقت من كان يريد بك شرا .. وأنت أيها الكريم ابن الكريم لاتستحق أن تتبعك أمة مكروهة مريضة مجنونة ..

Related Videos







Brexit, Russia & Proxy Wars Sheikh Imran Hosein Interview

July 03, 2016

 

Related Videos


At a discussion with representatives of various media outlets, Putin urges journalists to report genuinely on the impending nuclear war. 

Related Articles

War by November 4, Says Imran Hosein

Usually when somebody predicts the end of the world by such-and-such date, I don’t pay it any heed. However, Imran Hosein is a man who has made a lifetime study of Islamic eschatology, and whatever your views on that subject may be, I feel compelled to mention that I’ve run a few of Sheikh Hosein’s videos before and found his analyses on world affairs pretty solid. So take it for whatever it’s worth: global war will begin by no later than November 4, 2016. Why the date in November has to do with the US presidential election. In Hosein’s words,

“They cannot take a chance that Donald Trump will become president. They cannot take that chance. Because Donald Trump says, ‘It makes no sense for us to have this antagonistic relationship with Russia.’”

If you would like to construe that as a ringing endorsement of Trump, I guess you’re free to do so, and maybe in some respects it is. But Sheikh Hosein isn’t the only one with such a view of Trump. Consider the remarks of Mark Dankof as quoted in a recent article at Veterans Today:

OK, I’m going to vote for him as the only alternative to the unthinkable election of the Whore of Babylon in November. I agree with Stephen Lendman that Clinton’s election is the best guarantee of World War III. But a Trump Presidency is not a panacea for what ails us. It could end in disaster if he’s elected. Time tells.

By the way, if you follow Sheikh Hosein’s talk all the way to the end, you will see he also predicts that in the upcoming war NATO will be destroyed  and that Israel will emerge as the dominant world power. Interestingly, the Book of Revelation offers a similar view. The following is an excerpt from an article I wrote in November of 2011, almost five years ago:

Part 7

The Final Destruction of YAM

It comes in chapter 18—YAM’s (America’s) final downfall and destruction. “After this,” says John, “I saw another angel coming down from heaven.” [18:1] He then gives us the angel’s words:

Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great. She has become a home for demons and a haunt for every evil spirit, a haunt for every unclean and detestable bird. For all the nations have drunk the maddening wine of her adulteries. The kings of the earth committed adultery with her, and the merchants of the earth grew rich from her excessive luxuries. [18:2-3]

As may be expected, the merchants and kings are quite distraught by this turn of events:

When the kings of the earth who committed adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her. Terrified at her torment, they will stand far off and cry: Woe! Woe O great city, O Babylon, city of power! In one hour your doom has come. [18:9-10]

In one hour? So is YAM destroyed in a nuclear war? We don’t know. John doesn’t say, and of course such things as nuclear bombs were beyond his comprehension. What he does tell us is this:

Then a mighty angel picked up a boulder the size of a millstone and threw it into the sea, and said: “With such violence the great city of Babylon will be thrown down, never to be found again.” [18:21]

Maybe it’s an earthquake. All we know for sure is that at three separate points [18:10, 17, 19] the text emphasizes the destruction occurs in “one hour.” In any case, the Apocalypse has reached a major turning point: one beast has fallen; the other remains standing.

The other beast that “remains standing” is Israel. Interestingly, it would seem that Islamic and Christian eschatology both have similar views, at least on the downfall of America and the emergence of Israel as the global hegemon. There’s more to the story, though. Maybe at some point I’ll repost the entire article. Or if you like you can check out one of Hosein’s other videos or one of his books. There is probably quite a bit of agreement, if you look closely enough, between the two religions and their respective prophecies.

Sheikh Imran Hosein Responding To Questions From The Saker

The Triangle of Akhir Al Zaman By Sheikh Imran Hosein

The purpose of this brief address is to direct attention to a very important prophecy of Prophet Muhammad (sallalahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) in which we expose and challenge the bogus fraudulent and utterly futile attempt to identify Najd of the prophecy (and the Satanic Age) with a part of Iraq. The people of Hejaz have never, and will never, recognize ‘Our Najd’ as any other than the Najd of Arabia.

All that we have done is to confirm what is already well known, i.e., that the present Saudi-Wahhabi ruling alliance which came out of Najd, represent the Satanic Age prophesied by Nabi Muhammad (sallalahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

The great miracle – Adnan al-Rifai – the prophecy of the demise of Israel

The Numerical great miracle

 المعجزة الكبرى – عدنان الرفاعي – نبوءة زوال إسرائيل

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

In the Charlie Hebdo psyop double standards, logical fallacies and crass ignorance are everywhere

The Saker

Many of pointed out that apparently the French and most westerners seem to be much more upset when 12 people die in Paris then when hundreds, thousand and tens of thousands die elsewhere.  It appears that the 1980s slogan “don’t touch my pal” which was originally supposed to denounce racism now has been “re-worked” into a, if not racist, then at least a chauvinistic mode: don’t kill French leftists no matter how offensive their discourse is.  I won’t make that case again here, but because by now anybody still capable of critical thought “got it”, but I will look at another, much less noticed case of double standards: the one about the issue of moral pain.Here is what the official doxa tells us: Muslims have no right to whine about their Prophet being insulted, this is part of free speech.  It is disingenuous for them to claim that they have been hurt by these caricatures, in reality they have not been hurt, they just had their feathers ruffled by a bit of disrespectful speech.  How can you possibly compared such ruffled feathers with issues of life and death?

So is there such thing as moral pain and can it be compared to physical pain?

Let’s look at the record as it stands in the West:

Any psychologist will explain to you that not only does moral pain exist, but it can be worse then physical pain.  This is why some people confess to crimes (whether real or not) when they are told that their family members will be tortured next even though they themselves had found the internal courage not to yield to torture inflicted upon them.  An idea can hurt more then physical pain.

The Geneva conventions specifically forbid mock executions even though all they inflict is fear (a form of moral pain).

In France, it is currently illegal to even question the official version of the so-called “Holocaust” precisely because doing so would cause moral pain to the very few actual “Holocaust survivors” still alive.  This protection from moral pain even extends to the relatives and descendants of “Holocaust survivors” who were born already after the war and how never suffered from any ill-treatment themselves.

At the famous Nurenberg trial Julius Streicher was sentenced to death even though he never committed any other crime then “infecting the German mind with the virus of anti-Semitism“.  He was, by the way, also viciously tortured before his execution.  His crime?  He was the founder and editor of a newspaper, Der Stürmer, a nasty racist propaganda paper whose name can be roughly translated as “The attacked” or “The stormer”.  Apparently, hate speech can even get you the death penalty in the West.

The 8th Amendment of the US Constitution prohibits “cruel and unusual punishment” especially if it “degrading to human dignity”.  Apparently, for the Founding Fathers human dignity was an extremely valuable and real thing which deserved to be protected.

Even in GITMO (hardly a bastion of civilization and human rights!) following the 2005 scandals about the desacration of the Quran, it was decided that the rules about the manipulation of the Quran (which had already existed in the past) would be strictly implemented.  So even in waterboarding GITMO insulting the Prophet is considered beyond the norms of civilized behavior.  Apparently not in Paris.

What about law defending against slander?  Are they not here to protect people from the pain resulting from somebody else’s speech? Do we not care if somebody dear to us is insulted or ridiculed?

So who are we kidding here?  Do I need to bring further examples to make my point everybody in the West already knows that caricatures like the one published by Charlie Hebdo really bring on real pain to Muslims.  We are not talking about ruffled feathers or irritation, we are talking about real moral and psychological distress here, the kind which normally western civilizational and legal norms try to protect people form.

The truth which others dare not speak but which I will spell out for you here is simple: western elites have the same attitude towards Muslims as Victoria Nuland has for the EU: f**k them!  That is the real message not only Charlie Hebdo but the entire teary circus around the Paris massacre sends to Muslims worldwide: bleep you, your religion and your Prophet, bleep you and your victims – thousands and even millions of your dead Muslims (Iraq anybody?!) are not worth 12 of our guys, and we get to limit your speech, but don’t you dare limit ours!

And if a Muslim dares to object, he is instantly reminded about “his” stonings, burkas, terrorist attacks, etc. with the inevitable punch line: Islam is in no position to give lessons to the civilized West.   Sadly, Islam is vulnerable to such attack because of its support for the death penalty and its use of various frankly inhuman execution methods, but that is far from being the full picture.

First, until recently the West ALSO had plenty of execution methods which are infinitely worse then those legal in Islam (anybody doubting this better read the Wikipedia entry under Robert-Francois Damiens or remember that the French abolished the guillotine only in 1981 and against the popular will).  Second, at least Islam is honest about its punishments.  Compare that with the USA were people are officially sentenced to prison terms like in other civilized countries, but where it is well known, understood and accepted that your chances of being brutally assaulted or anally raped are very high, especially if you are weak, and where people are held in supermax isolation units which the UN correctly defines as torture.

Second, it is artificial to compare two (or more) civilizations by only comparing their penal codes.  Why not compare other forms of violence such as warfare or genocides.  Here, even the worst of the worst Muslims (the Ottomans) compare very favorably with the Europeans, I am sorry if I offend the latter, but that is a fact.  Though, of course, there have been plenty of examples of Muslim atrocities (by the Ottomans and the Persians in particular), but compared to what the West did to entire continents (African, North and South America) these are truly minor incidents.  Of course, folks in the West are not too knowledgeable about all this, and the comforting narrative is that Europe was civilized, a heir to the Greek and Roman civilizations (a lie – post Frankish Europe re-discovered antiquity thanks to Muslims and Jews!) whereas the Muslims are just goat herders from the deserts of the Arabian Peninsula.  Comforting narrative for sure, but factually wrong.  Muslims, however, are very much aware of this history and don’t like to be looked down by the very westerners which they see as rather brutish and always bloodthirsty.

Third, there is a feature of modern western civilization which does set it apart from pretty much all others.  The quasi-total absence of the sacred.  For a modern, secular and educated person in the West there is very little which is truly sacred.  In the past, wives and mothers still used to be sacred, and telling an Italian or Spaniard “cornuto” or “hijo de puta” could get you knifed. Nowadays a French rap group proudly calls itself “Nique Ta Mère“.  Some will say this is progress, I suppose.  In the USA, the flag is sacred.  At least to some.  And, apparently, for millions of people in France – free speech, including deliberately offending free speech, is sacred.  Except when it is directed a Jews, in which case it can land you in jail.  For most Muslims, the prophets are so sacred that every time they mention their name they add “sallallahu alayhi wasallam” (peace be upon him).  Now, you don’t have to be a Muslim yourself or to approve of the Prophet to be capable of understanding that the Prophet Mohammed is truly dear and even sacred to Muslims.  The fact that there is nothing sacred left in the West does not mean that the rest of the world has slouched down to a similar degree of degeneracy or that those who hold nothing for sacred have a license to impose their lack of anything sacred or their indifference on everybody else and offend them to their (sick) heart’s content.

The most disgusting kind of westerner is the kind that actually takes pride in offending the feelings of those who still do have things which are sacred to them.  This is what Charlie Hebdo was all about.  Theirs was not a “discourse”, it was an endless quest to become the most offensive, vulgar and crude newspaper in Europe.  And, by the way, before the latest Charlie Hebdo psyop, this disgusting and stupid paper printed 60’000 copies for a country of 66’000’000 people.  But then, apparently, some French matter more then others (what else is new?).  Double standards again.

When considering any aspects of the Charlie Hebdo psyop you will inevitably find that double standards and logical fallacies are everywhere.  That some speech is freer then other, that some victims matter more then others, that some atrocities are more atrocious then others and that some pain gets more respect then other.  But the worst for me is this sickening solidarity with those who made insulting others into some kind of noble feat, these “heroes” are lionized for their “courage” to generate real moral pain in others.  I see nothing noble in that at all and the fact that they were brutally and viciously murdered by, apparently, a gang of Takfiri freaks does not make then anyway more respectful.

One more thing: some of you have expressed outrage at the fact that Sheikh Imran Hosein said that the biggest evil the world has ever seen will rule from Jerusalem.  Clearly, the good Sheikh is a vicious anti-Semite, right?

(Sigh)

I wish that those who speak about the “Christian West” actually knew a little something of Christianity, especially of Christian eschatology.  What the Sheikh was saying is in no way different from what the Church Fathers said, including that the Antichrist would rule over the world from Jerusalem.  A 5min search on the Internet gave me these pretty decent sources:

http://biblelight.net/fathers-on-antichrist.htm
http://www.unitypublishing.com/prophecy/AntichristbySaints.htm
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/hippolytus-christ.html

Islamic eschatology is, by the way, remarkably similar to the traditional Christian one.  A quick search under the term “Dajjal” yielded these sources:

http://www.islaam.org/al_mahdi/dajjaal.htm
http://islamqa.info/en/8806
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL60F84B368D3270FF

As for Sheikh Imran Hosein’s advice to the Muslims of France to leave while they can, it is fully in line with this admonition of Christ Himself who told his apostles

And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.  Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.” (Matt 10:14-15). 
One does not have to agree with what the Sheikh says, but that is hardly a reason to call him crazy or anti-Semitic.Frankly, what I see taking place is mostly a lashing out against Islam and against Muslims which is first and foremost based on crass ignorance.  I personally am not a Muslim and I vehemently disagree with some teachings and practices of Islam.  And I am on record saying that I fully support what I call “Putin’s ultimatum” to the Takfiri freaks: stop or we will exterminate you.  And, when needed, Putin did exactly that: since 2000 Russia has literally executed every single leader of the Chechen insurgency, every single one.  Some were killed in Russia, others in Chechnia, others even elsewhere, but they are all dead.  And the Wahabi “Icherkian” insurgency has been literally exterminated too.  Not only that, but Putin has fully backed Assad, the other man who has not hesitated to physically exterminate as many Takfiri freaks as possible (and Assad did such a good job of it that they had to retreat to Iraq).  And I am on record supporting Assad too.  And, finally, I have always fully supported Hezbollah and Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, not only in their war of national liberation against Israel, but also in their struggle against the so-called “Syrian opposition” (where the freaks who murdered the Charlie Hebdo people came from!).  I don’t think that anybody even minimally honest can accuse me of having any sympathies for the Takfiri/Wahabi terrorists or for their actions in Paris.

But to those of you who take issue with my statement that the “West” cannot win against the Muslim world I say this: take the example of Russia and realize that the Russians can kill Wahabis, but they cannot kill Wahabism.  It took a Muslim man like Akhmad Kadyrov and his son to defeat the Wahabi ideology in Chechnia.  The same goes for the West: no matter how many ISIS or al-Qaeda terrorist the western security services kill (or, pretend to kill!), the ideology of Takfirism will only be defeated by other Muslims (who, by the way, are always the first and main victims of the Takfiri freaks!).

Just take one look at Hollande, Merkel or Obama and tell me that they have anything at all to say other then vapid platitudes and insipid lies?  Do you really believe that they have anything to oppose to the ideas of Osama bin-Laden, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi or even Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab or Taqi ad-Din Aḥmad ibn Taymiyyah?

Methinks that the western leaders are both too arrogant and too ignorant to face this reality and that they think that they can outsmart the devil on their own – hence the unleash the Takfiri demon against Muslim world and the Nazi demon against the Donbass.  I say that with leaders like that the West has exactly *zero* chance to prevail.  And considering that with each passing year the western leaders become even dumber, more arrogant, more pathetic and more clueless, I see no reason to believe that the West will win the “clash of civilizations” it itself created.

Now please don’t shoot the messenger.

The Saker

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

%d bloggers like this: