Yesterday Jihad Watch reader JS brought to my attention an "anti-hate" website that listed Jihad Watch among "Islamophobes" who hate all Muslims and want them all killed. Since, of course, this is a false and slanderous charge, I asked the site author for a retraction. In a series of virulently hostile emails, he refused to give it, and said:
I understand that you have said for some time that unmoderated comments on your site don't represent your official position, however, allowing such comments to remain on your site clearly implies endorsement.
Is that so? Here are some recent comments that "remain" on this site:
Islam is a perfect, beautiful way of life. If you knew the truth you would WANT to be governed by sharia law because you'd be more free and happier than you are now. It is so far from the warped perception you have of it that you must have been actively and purposefully mislead.
Islam is still the best way forward for all humanity....global Islam IS the way forward....
I am glad that Iran is willing to defend the Ummah against possible attack from the kuffur nations. The Ummah has been dominated and humiliated by the kuffur. The kuffur also dominate and humiliate women....
So let's see. I guess if allowing comments to remain on this site "clearly implies endorsement," by the looks of those comments I'm a supporter of the imposition of Sharia law on the West, as well as of Iranian belligerence.
But of course, any such notions can easily be dispelled by reference to my own writings, in which I have been critical of Sharia's denial of rights to women and religious minorities, as well as of Ahmadinejad's genocidal aspirations. And that's just the point: as I have said many times, if you think I endorse a comment here, please establish that from my own writings. But this writer did not do that for the positions he ascribes to Jihad Watch, and he cannot do that, because they are not my positions.
Open comments on this site exist in order to foster mature discussion, strategizing, exchanging of background information, and the like. We have many times asked commenters not to engage in venting that plays into the hands of the jihadists and their useful idiots. Comments are unmoderated, and there are thousands upon thousands of them at this point, most of which I never see. If I see a comment advocating hatred of all Muslims and calling for them to be killed, I remove it (and I ask you to kindly alert me to such when you see them, so that I can do so). But there is a more important point here, illustrated by further remarks to me from this blogger:
I'm sorry, but I cannot retract what is true. I understand that, if you follow your usual practice, you will now post attacks on me, and some of your more rabid followers will send death threats. I have fought online hate speech for quite some time, and am used to effectively dealing with all the consequences and dangers of such. I would hope that you would be a gentleman and not try to incite such, and I will closely monitor the situation.
When I read that, I understood what this man wanted: he was hoping that I would take his bait and post a link to his site (which I will not do, and I have refrained from quoting it also) so that he would be able to claim victim status on the basis of negative emails he would receive as a result of my posting. (It is ironic, also, that I am apparently supposed to accept being slandered without responding, but that's another matter.) It is plain slander for him to suggest that I incite anyone to issue death threats, but the point is this: I have received numerous genuine death threats, but that doesn't faze him one bit. He is hoping to use the response he thinks he would get from this site to help shift attention away from the genuine death threats issued by the Islamic jihadists, and the violence they commit daily in the name of Islam, to the alleged "hate" generated here.
This is a common tactic, and a widely-used one. The Holocaust conference going on in Tehran is a large example of the same phenomenon represented in a tiny way by this man who is slandering me. The message in Tehran is essentially that the Holocaust didn't happen, but that it should have, and will soon. Ahmadinejad and his stooges are trying to shift attention away from the manifest reality of genocide against the Jews to the trumped-up victim status of Iran and its allied belligerent states. They don't want you to see Israel as a victim, but as a perpetrator.
Likewise, in a small way, so often here at Jihad Watch critics attempt to shift the focus away from the jihad violence we report here, and onto how evil I am simply for the act of reporting it. In doing this, they manifest a moral corruption and hypocrisy comparable, on a vastly smaller scale of course, to that of Ahmadinejad himself.
Robert and Hugh, you've got to take a lot of abuse to do your job, thanks.
Your efforts are very much appreciated, Robert!
...now what were we talking about here? Hmmm. Nobody of any import. Back to the Real story: islamofascist hatred and destruction.
I would add: Someday it might be amusing to have a Hate Mail section like Glen Beck does. Just for laughs.
Do some of us sound rabid?
We see your Muslims' unwillingness to face up to the continuing disaster of Islamic history and belief.
We see their unwillingness to accept the teaching, "The truth will set you free," as is possible (perhaps) even without accepting Jesus as the Son of God.
We see an essential lack of integrity in the character of Muslim spokesmen; in particular, in the gaspingly vile leadership at CAIR.
Mr. Spencer:
Does this "anti-hate" website list any jihadi or muslim websites that incite hate against non-believers?
Do you mind posting the web address so I might take a look?
Best Regards,
Hank
Hhhhmmm,he goes straight to the insults when he
knows he would lose any serious debate !
Hank,
No, he doesn't, and no, I will not post the link here, as traffic from this site (and hostile emails) is just what he is trolling for. And if anyone figures out what site I am referring to and posts the address, I will remove it. This is a blogger of immense dishonesty and moral myopia, and I am not going to be put into the position of feeding those tendencies.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Robert,
You need to consider over-hauling jihadwatch. It needs a news section and a forum section, with moderators that would remove offensive posts and ban repeat offenders. Take a look at http://www.sherdog.net/forums for an example.
Robert, 10 lashes for you and a good canning for Hugh.
As infidels, we have to endure slander from Muslims. Its the superior way that they live while enjoying the peace that Islam brings them.
Actually the term "Islamophobe" is beginning to have a good connotation. It helps keep you alive.
One of major problems with this belief-system is that they fear any alternatives in the Mideast and elsewhere. It is the only religious-belief-system on earth that permits deception in any form. Jesus (e.g.) said all deception-hypocrisy comes from "the evil one". Islam is unique in having any doctrine that permits deception with Unbelievers.
It is part of human nature, from my observation, not to leave anything without an alternative to go to. One sees this with wives that are beaten, etc. Islam (Saudi Arabia, e.g.) fears any alternative because people will flee to other belief-systems if they have the kind of freedom many Muslims pretend they have in Saudi Arabia, and also pretend (CAIR, e.g.) they do not have in America. They (especially the clergy) must deceive and desperately do everything possible to keep people in the Muslim world from freely knowing and freely studying any alternatives to the Islamic belief-system.
The Muslim world suffers from AlternativeReligionphobia for very good reason. They must (Saudi Arabia, e.g.) deceive and allow no alternative to be studied.
I often have to just walk away from the comments on this site because they bring out a really ugly side of mine. But Mr. Spencer's arguments are relentless and ring too true. He's certainly cleared a few cobwebs out of my head. So I read and post and help get the word out that anyone who thinks Muhammad is the perfect man needs to get into therapy right away.
Touched by God? Yes. But these revelations bubbled up through some very nasty and unbalanced psychology. If you factor that in you're good to go. At the end of the line, after all, there really is no such thing as a separation of Church and State even for Christians. Christ rules us all.
How pathetic can you get? This site is one of a precious few where jihad is given the beating it deserves-there are plenty of sites that are pro-jihad or lapdogs of jihad. Besides, where else can one vent against the constant violence in words and deeds that Islam spews forth on a daily basis? Would those who critcize this site have us engage in actual violence to vent? Probably-then more sainted victims would be created. Yes, some posters may get carried away at times but then again many stories here ARE outrageous. Are we to clap and be happy when Iran's president makes daily threats against Israel? Or when some cleric says rape is deserved? Or if some insufficiently pious woman gets acid thrown in her face? I guess if this mystery complainer's assertion that this site condones all the comments posted here is valid then the same holds true for him- he must condone all these horrible words and deeds I've just mentioned by not speaking out against them. I guess the complaint against this site should be looked at as a testament to how great it really is-if nobody found this site interesting or useful nobody would bother with it and it would not be worth complaining about. Congratulations to all at Jihad Watch-those who run it and those who post-you've stuck a thumb in the eye of Islamania!
I would add to Robert's defense of the maintenance of a largely open comments section here --
"Open comments on this site exist in order to foster mature discussion, strategizing, exchanging of background information, and the like"
-- with another important value, which, ironically, that blogging calumniator probably champions otherwise: An open comments section facilitates one of the unique features of the Internet, democratizing a published journal in an unprecedented way in the history of communications with the freedom and ability of an unlimited number of individuals to participate in the flow of communication radiating out from an issue or nexus of issues overseen by the author(s) of that journal.
And when that journal or blog attracts as many readers and commenters as does Jihad Watch, the value of that unique feature is increased -- both in its positive and negative aspects. From my experience of open comments sections on the Internet, Jihad Watch has by and large one of the most mature and intelligent pools around, and the instances of outright calls to violence seem to me to be extremely rare here -- and I have browsed through on a daily basis for over a year.
Due to the name of the (unnamed)site, it will get a lot of hits. In turn since this site, Jihad Watch, is mentioned so often its like a direct link to here. This is good because when viewers hit this site, they will probably stay and help get the word out.
I just love trolls.
P.S. I am suspicious of some (a few) of the postings I've seen on this site and believe they may be made by Muslims pretending to be otherwise. However, the overwhelming majority of posters on this site are from quite thoughtful people. Many comments are very thought provoking. They influence people because of their logical and thoughtful nature. I'm sure of that.
That is a riot. And so predictable.
I guess I am suprised that this person hasn't done this sooner. They are probably emboldened by the Conference of Hate being put on by the Religion of Peace in the City of the Hidden Imam.
Anyway, keep up the good work.
I have just started reading into this, and trying to understand why these people (Islamofacists) are the way they are. The MSM is not providing anything substantive to explain their motivations, beyond the "Death to Israel" rants, and pro-Palestinian propaganda. None of which seem to hold water when asked pretty simple questions, like "Who said 'Palestine' was always 'owned' by 'Palestinians'. And why are these 'Palestinians' the defined 'Palestinians' anyway?
I think it is complete dishonesty what everyone supporting these people are or have been presenting to the public.
And the one thing I have discovered most is that it is not a single group or political bend that is perpetrating this myth. Through intentional, unintentional, and ignorant acts, all sides have a little mud on them.
I agree with you remote_control, as usual. This site occasionally develops threads by which people seem to be piling on. I am as guilty as the next in this regard. These threads, however, are usually in response to comments made by pro-Islamic trolls.
The beauty of this site is that relatively open comments are posted, both for against. You NEVER see negative comments posted on pro-Islamic sites. That is just another example of the very obvious and explicit message of Islam; no recognition for infidels, higly controlled internet material distribution for those that do embrace Islam. This is a weak position from an obviously losing argument.
We are and will continue to be villified by Jihadists, regardless of what we say. We are not obliged, however, to appease them and drift back off into Dhimmi dream land.
I don't need to know what the web address is or need to go to that persons website. Why would i? I can speak FREELY here. I can Voice my thoughts in a Fair and Balanced Forum called Jihadwatch. I have rarely read what could be considered HATE here, and free speech and differing opinions IS what makes true Dialog , not one sided slanted views . Not to mention that it's a long way from words to actions , and i don't see many Westerners Killing Muslims indiscriminitely like we see MUSLIMS doing to Christians, Jews, Hindus etc.. ALL AROUND THE WORLD!.
I'd really like to see Muslims own up and accept SOME/ANY responsibility for what is going on in their Religions name, but i won't hold my breath. It's a rare thing. like a Muslim with a Open mind, it's very hard to find.
That's MY opinion and is in NO way Endoresed by Robert or Jihadwatch.
he message in Tehran is essentially that the Holocaust didn't happen, but that it should have, and will soon. Ahmadinejad and his stooges are trying to shift attention away from the manifest reality of genocide against the Jews to the trumped-up victim status of Iran and its allied belligerent states. They don't want you to see Israel as a victim, but as a perpetrator.
those anti-hate groups often seem to be in league with Iran's thug in chief so it is not surprisingthat they would slander Robert or jihad watch as they often do to anybody or any website that does not agree with how they believe but under the Bill of Rights they do have a right to their opinion.
Robert,
You need to consider over-hauling jihadwatch. It needs a news section and a forum section, with moderators that would remove offensive posts and ban repeat offenders. Take a look at http://www.sherdog.net/forums for an example.
Posted by: george_rem
And I thought I was the only MMA fan/practitioner who loves JihadWatch! George, join the Holy Warriors of TSK!!!
Sorry, but I have the freedom to hate what I want. I don't hate people, I hate their aberrant behavior. I don't like people who live their lives to murder people who are not like them. We like Pepsi, they like murder. This is their hang-up. If the nazis w/ turbans don't like the image that they themselves have created, too bad, then need to fix it themselves.
The proof's in the pudding.
Squire:
If the proof is solid, then you'll break a tooth on it. :0)
"The proof of the pudding is in the eating."
FYI
Cheers,
Am i wrong to mistrust Islam?
anyone?
Am i wrong to mistrust Islam?
anyone?
Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 13, 2006 12:05 PM
The ones who trust Islam are the fools. There are plenty of graveyards to prove that.
I don't hate all Muslims though I am skeptical of almost all Muslims. I do despise the false prophet whose false teaching they have bought into to a greater or lesser degree. I have no use for a cult whose central figure is so evil.
But individual Muslims can be OK as long as they adopt the doctrine of live and let live. If they are aggressors (like CAIR) they are my enemy
Islamophobia means fear of Islam if taken literally. Does it also mean excessive fear or irrational fear?
Islam's goals are stated in the Koran. The first Caliphs represent rightful action according to Sunni Islam and the 4th under Sunni and Shiite Islam.
In 633 AD they attacked the Eastern Roman Empire. In every century since, Christians and Jews have been sold into slavery, taken hostage for ransom, or been killed in terrorist acts or genocide.
Genocidephobia. Fear of being genocided. If a group has genocided your group, and won't admit it and say its wrong, can you have genocidephobia?
Sunni Muslims have Shiitephobia? Shiites have
Sunniphobia?
If we accept their views of each other, we can have Islamophobia as rational?
Is Islamophobia a form of genocidephobia?
Slaveophobia. Fear of being taken a slave.
Hostagephobia. Fear of being taken hostage. This is the intended outcome of taking hostages.
Loss of Freedom Phobia. Fear of losing freedom.
Shariaphobia. Fear of imposition of Sharia law. Almost every Muslim state has Sharia as a source of law, and many have religious courts. Sharia courts operate in Western countries already.
Terroristphobia. Fear of terrorist acts. By the way, terroristphobia is the intended outcome of terrorist acts.
Invasionphobia. The fear of invasion. This is part of the stated purpose of Islam and of the rightful conduct of the first caliphs.
House of War phobia. Fear of being part of what some group designates as the house of war.
Ahmadinejadphobia. Fear of Ahmadinejad.
Islamophobia is defined as the sum of these and similar fears?
Isn't it rational?
The consequence of not having these fears is that they come true?
Our society is so PC it cannot differentiate between hate and fact.
The majority of posters here do not hate for hate's sake, but do hate what the islamic extremists & their sympathizers do......which is "hate"!
Posters also clearly hate the inaction to the hatred demonstrated and threats by islamics to western nations.
The extremists hate is real, clearly stated (threatened) and demonstrated to the world.
Realism is being classified these days as hate.
Lie down and roll over and I guess one will not be called a hater any more.
Robert
Good call (not publicizing the name of the slandering site, and threatening to remove any post that does.) I just wish you had exercised the same judgement re: your many online skirmishes with Dean Whassisname.
On a more serious note, since you allude to the Holocaust conference in Teheran, perhaps time to re-examine the nexus between extreme racist groups and Jihadis. At this conference, David Duke, who the last few years has been a professor at Kiev, was back to holocaust denial. A story probably worthy of DhimmiWatch.
Bravo Dr. Spencer, your words are the most deadly of Black Zionist Arts. P.S. love your new word "kafirophobia"
Robert,
You are so popular! Now every freak, crank and nimrod wants to have your attention.
You must be doing something right!
The Law of Kafirophobics:
Any reporting of anything negative about Islam is spewing HATRED.
Any critical analysis of Islam that does not confirm the superiority of Muslims and the perfection of Islam is HATE SPEECH.
Robert- perhaps it's time to get more forceful with the dude- slander against you for what is said by commentators is not legal- there was just a ruling that stated that a website owner can not be held accountable for comments on their site- however, what the dude is doiong on his site- maligning your site with lies is an offense I beleive. Not really sure hwat the law is regarding htis http://sacredscoop.com
"And why are these 'Palestinians' the defined 'Palestinians' anyway?"
One of my favorite interpretations.
The History and Meaning of "Palestine" and "Palestinians"
"There is no such thing as a Palestinian Arab nation . . . Palestine is a name the Romans gave to Eretz Yisrael with the express purpose of infuriating the Jews . . . . Why should we use the spiteful name meant to humiliate us?
"The British chose to call the land they mandated Palestine, and the Arabs picked it up as their nation's supposed ancient name, though they couldn't even pronounce it correctly and turned it into Falastin a fictional entity."
Golda Meir quoted by Sarah Honig, Jerusalem Post, 25 November 1995
We live in a country that is at war, and won't admit it. It hasn't increased its military since the Sep 11, 2001 attacks.
Between the 1993 attack on WTC and the 2001 attack it decreased its military. Even though during that time war was declared on it, it was attacked multiple times, it itself attacked back, and foreign countries supported the attack on us.
During that time Pakistan was supporting terrorism, and al Qaeda was attacking our embassies and the USS Cole, and Pakistan did a nuke test. Pakistan attacked a neighboring country and said it was the Taliban after its nuclear test.
We have been attacked from within. We have armies in foreign countries. We say we are at war and are called haters.
We say to stop immigration during time of war and are called haters.
Danish Cartoons can't be published in papers like New York Times and Washington Post that defied Nixon to print the Pentagon Papers. We say that's wrong, and are called haters.
We woke up in unreality America after 9-11, and say what's happened and are called haters.
The link below analyzes the goals in the Baker Hamilton Report. The lack of realistic goal analysis is at the heart of the Baker Hamilton report's weakness. They use the word goal and you can search on it with vivisimo, a link is below.
Baker Hamilton: The Goal Thing
The following extends the above analysis. Lack of goal analysis and realizing we are at war, leads to errors.
Baker Hamilton Fallacies
It is ironic that an anti-hate site run by whoever attacks an anti-hate site, namely, JihadWatch. His argument about not deleting the hate by commentators is rather like accusing gas station owners of being haters when they are slow in deleting graffiti in the bathroom stalls. I would say that that the gas station owners and in this case, JihadWatch, should take the slanderer to libel court.
Mr. Spencer:
Thanks for the reply. I am not going to search out the site as my time is better spent reading JihadWatch, LGF, JawaReport etc...
Also, I must endorse, most enthusiastically, the term "kafirophobia"!
It is certainly a term that can be used whenever discussing the cult called “islam”.
Hank
Good call, Robert...
DON'T list/link the projectionistic troll site... many don't realize how 'net traffic works...if you DO, it registers and gives such a "pot calling the kettle black" what they really want: to be relevant.
I learned this the hard way before...glad you're onto it, Robert.
Trolls only gain ammo by inciting you to give it to them...take away that ammo and they're disarmed.
Refer to them in the 3rd person...nothing counter-trolls a troll worse than being 3rd person referenced as if irrelevant. They go ballistic.
Works every time...lol
an "anti-hate" website that listed Jihad Watch among "Islamophobes"
I keep seeing the term islamophobes bandied about. I firmly believe that you can fix an argument by fixing the semantics. In this case the term implies that an islamophobe is some one who is fearful of Islam, and that fear, being based on lack of knowledge is simply a case for some one not "knowing" Islam. The argument goes that if you really "knew" Islam, you would no longer fear it and actually come to embrace it.
I do not, as I suspect most here don't, perceive themselves as Islamophobes. Anti-Islamic to the point of militancy maybe, but certainly not phobic.
I live in an area fairly bereft of Muslims, so I do not have day-to-day opportunities to have dialogs with those claimants of the faith. The problem I see for any Muslim is in defending the preponderance of either heinous theological texts or the rampant errors, factual and/or contradictory found in them. Islamic math in the Qur'an doesn't add up and one verse is in direct opposition to another. It must for them be a gruesome dichotomy, faced with an unarguable text that is equally indefensible. The only kindness you can offer them is permission to renounce it.
"It's okay, you don't have to believe that stuff. There's a more forgiving master. He doesn't want you to hate your neighbor, regardless of what your neighbor does." This is how to address the Yashuaphobe.
Shalom
Theosebes
Robert,
You need to consider over-hauling jihadwatch. It needs a news section and a forum section, with moderators that would remove offensive posts and ban repeat offenders. Take a look at http://www.sherdog.net/forums for an example.
Posted by: george_rem
And I thought I was the only MMA fan/practitioner who loves JihadWatch! George, join the Holy Warriors of TSK!!!
JustaDhimmi, you guys aren't alone. If I recall correctly there was a poster on here who went by the screen name bjjfighter. Practicing martial arts is a great way to get in shape and relieve stress. I'm both a fan and practitioner of MMA, and I'm pretty well endowed in the firearm department as well. I'm certainly anything but a 'type A' personality, and I avoid physical conflict whenever possible, but I feel that it is our civic duty to arm ourselves both physically and mentally so as to be prepared, should the need ever arise, to defend Family, Nation, and Liberty. Just out of curiosity, what is TSK?
Oh, I can't resist ...
The thing is, this islam cleric or whatever, thinks that we need a leader to tell us how to think or what to practice...unfortunately, like the people do in those countries. We do NOT need a leader and Mr. Robert doesn't hv to tell us how to think. He just presents the daily ev events. WE ARE OUR OWN LEADERS!
And as I stated beforre, it is not the people we dislike - it is the religion!
There is still such a thing as free speech here - and our thoughts are free.
So - yes - count me as a confirmed ISLAMOPHOBE!
I am that - and proudly.
Allat
Using their own terminology as to what an "islamophobe" really is...
That means 81% of Americans are...
That's a LOT of "-phobes" (nearly all of which are armed)...not that I put anything into their methodology since it's obvious as to their political militancy they continually fail to conceal.
Hi Robert,
Mark Steyn once commented that warnings about 'anti-Islamic backlash' after jihadist terror acts were moving so close in time to the attacks themselves that he fairly expected the next one to sound something like this:
"CAIR today declared itself very worried about the possible anti-Islamic backlash following next week's terror attack..."
These anti-hate sites are generally leftist, the only people they hate are "right-wing" Americans...then the hate can flow unimpeded. After all we are "fascists" and "haters".
Irony? No, they are much too self righteous.
Good job, for not falling for the trap! We need you guys to do what you do best, get the truth about jihad out!
Mr. Spencer said:
"If I see a comment advocating hatred of all Muslims and calling for them to be killed, I remove it (and I ask you to kindly alert me to such when you see them, so that I can do so)."
Sorry if this post sounds ignorant, but I am unaware of how one would alert anyone in particular about anything, apart from simply posting something here about any infraction. Is there an email address that we can send heads-up's to?
"...the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein." --from the disclaimer above, which appears on every comments thread.
That should have been case closed, right? Or, rather, no case to begin with, if the blogger in question had actually read (or understood?) the disclaimer. But facts don't get in the way of his mission to make false accusations and smear the entire website:
"I'm sorry, but I cannot retract what is true."
He provided not one shred of evidence to support his claim that JW is a hate site.
"I understand that, if you follow your usual practice, you will now post attacks on me,"
Actually, Robert addressed the blogger's accusations in the most gentlemanly manner possible, and did not launch a personal attack. I continue to be impressed with Robert Spencer's ability to maintain a calm and reasonable tone in addressing this seemingly endless supply of vitriol and empty accusation.
"...and some of your more rabid followers will send death threats."
I doubt that any regular JWer would make death threats (though I would not be surprised if some trolls presented such threats in an attempt to smear this site); but again, the blogger is making more unsubstantiated accusations.
"I would hope that you would be a gentleman and not try to incite such, and I will closely monitor the situation."
The blogger did not even bother to read (or understand?) the disclaimer above the comments section. Why should we believe that he would "closely monitor" anything? Why should we expect anything other than more false accusations?
"The History and Meaning of "Palestine" and "Palestinians"
"There is no such thing as a Palestinian Arab nation . . . Palestine is a name the Romans gave to Eretz Yisrael with the express purpose of infuriating the Jews . . . . Why should we use the spiteful name meant to humiliate us?" (from a post above)
Actually, "Palestine" derives from the Hebrew term "Plistim" which means "invader." The 17th century English referred to them as "Philistines" in the King James Version of the Holy Bible.
But of course there is no such thing as a "Palestinian people." The word is alien to all Middle Eastern Muslim people, and why would such people use a term invented by their hated enemies?
Carolyn2 said:
"These anti-hate sites are generally leftist, the only people they hate are "right-wing" Americans...then the hate can flow unimpeded. After all we are "fascists" and "haters".
Irony? No, they are much too self righteous."
The irony would hit anyone but a liberal smack-dead in the middle of their foreheads. They are also wont to refer to us as "intolerant," yet who are the most intolerant amongst us?
The typical tactic is to simply label your enemies as "racists," "-phobes," "Nazis," "intolerant --'s," or any of a number of negative adjectives, without giving any evidence as to their assurtions, or allowing any arguments to the contrary.
My experience with people like this is that once they've finished calling you names, they disappear for awhile, and then resurface once more with another salvo. They never reply back with anything intelligent to support their attacks.
Robert,
My observation of your work is you speak the truth which there is very little from other sources - keep up the good work.
“Anti-hate” site/person,
If you would do a little more reading, you could determine what the posters on this site are saying. A good example - if by chance it is cold enough to freeze my hands and feet off and possibly take my life I am very sure anyone would say - “I hate the cold.” I am sure I can speak for all the posters here in saying we don’t hate all Muslims - we hate all the ones who are causing all the destruction and killings that are taking place in countries throughout the world. We, who are in countries who have the freedom to express our thoughts and opinions, are not very pleased with the ones who tell us to “shut up” when we speak the truth as we see it. I you think the truth is different than the way we see it - then prove to us the Muslim doctrine isn’t responsible for all the destruction and killings.
All the Posters,
I am with all of you. On occasion there is comments that could be very negative, but I know where you are coming from and feel the same way. It is directed toward the criminals who are causing all the problems. I have learned so much from this site and all who post their thoughts. Keep your freedom.
Okay, I admit it. It's all my fault. In one of my comments I did say "Death to Islam." I should have elaborated and said "Death to the ideology that fosters wanton slaughter, abuse of women and the subjugation of anyone who won't buy into it."
If I have caused any misunderstanding or ill-will I sincerely and humbly apologize...in a pigs eye.
Touched by God? Yes. But these revelations bubbled up through some very nasty and unbalanced psychology. If you factor that in you're good to go. At the end of the line, after all, there really is no such thing as a separation of Church and State even for Christians. Christ rules us all.
Posted by: pneumatikon
>>>But these revelations bubbled up through some very nasty and unbalanced psychology!
Interesting comment, do you know according to allah the act of "abrogating" some surahs from the qu'ran was due to muhammad recieving and accepting satanic revelation and adding them to the qu'ran! allah also states in the qu'ran he permits these satanic revelations to remain as a "temptation" to hypocrit muslims.
Now what the muslims are left with is who decides which surahs are satanic and which are not, muhammad, the "perfect" man couldnt tell which was which!
>>>SURAH 22,,22-53-Never have We sent a Messenger or a prophet before you, O Muhammad, with whose wishes Satan did not tamper; but Allah abrogates the interjections of Satan and confirms His own revelations, for Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.[52] He makes Satan’s interjections a temptation for those whose hearts suffer from the disease of hypocrisy and whose hearts are hardened - that’s why the wrongdoers are in such an extreme dissension[53]
I suppose whats being admitted to here is the qu'ran is indeed a book of satanic revelations.
muslims are quick to state the qu'ran has never been altered or changed. then what exactly does "abrogation" men if not to alter or change?
Mr spencer perhaps if you would please share the tafsir on these ayats! surah 22}_52-53
* تفسير Tafsir al-Jalalayn surah 22}_52
Recite Verse
Open in new window
Go to quran page
{ وَمَآ أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ مِن رَّسُولٍ وَلاَ نَبِيٍّ إِلاَّ إِذَا تَمَنَّىٰ أَلْقَى ٱلشَّيْطَانُ فِيۤ أُمْنِيَّتِهِ فَيَنسَخُ ٱللَّهُ مَا يُلْقِي ٱلشَّيْطَانُ ثُمَّ يُحْكِمُ ٱللَّهُ آيَاتِهِ وَٱللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ }
And We did not send before you any messenger (rasūl) - this is a prophet who has been commanded to deliver a Message - or prophet (nabī) - one who has not been commanded to deliver anything - but that when he recited [the scripture] Satan cast into his recitation, what is not from the Qur'ān, but which those to whom he [the prophet] had been sent would find pleasing. The Prophet (s) had, during an assembly of the [men of] Quraysh, after reciting the [following verses from] sūrat al-Najm, Have you considered Lāt and 'Uzzā? And Manāt, the third one? [53:19-20] added, as a result of Satan casting them onto his tongue without his [the Prophet's] being aware of it, [the following words]: 'those are the high-flying cranes (al-gharānīq al-'ulā) and indeed their intercession is to be hoped for', and so they [the men of Quraysh] were thereby delighted. Gabriel, however, later informed him [the Prophet] of this that Satan had cast onto his tongue and he was grieved by it; but was [subsequently] comforted with this following verse that he might be reassured [of God's pleasure]: thereat God abrogates, nullifies, whatever Satan had cast, then God confirms His revelations. And God is Knower, of Satan's casting of that which has been mentioned, Wise, in His enabling him [Satan] to do such things, for He does whatever He wishes.
>>>* تفسير Tafsir al-Jalalayn surah 22}_53
Recite Verse
Open in new window
Go to quran page
{ لِّيَجْعَلَ مَا يُلْقِي ٱلشَّيْطَانُ فِتْنَةً لِّلَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ وَٱلْقَاسِيَةِ قُلُوبُهُمْ وَإِنَّ ٱلظَّالِمِينَ لَفِي شِقَاقٍ بَعِيدٍ }
That He may make what Satan has cast a trial, a test, for those in whose hearts is a sickness, dissension and hypocrisy, and those whose hearts are hardened, namely, the idolaters, [hardened] against acceptance of the truth. For truly the evildoers, the disbelievers, are [steeped] in extreme defiance, [in] a protracted feud with the Prophet (s) and the believers, for his tongue uttered mention of their gods in a way that pleased them, and yet this was later nullified.
So muhammad, the "perfect" man was decieved and accepted satanic revelation and added these satanic revelation to allahs qu'ran!
forcing allah to alter the qu'ran!
Say it aint so!
help us ibrahim, tell us please which of the surahs in the qu'ran are those satanic revelations recieved by muhammad and permitted to remain to be a temptation to "hypocrit" muslims like yourself!
I hate to split hairs, but the person referred to above actually made comments that may constitute libel, but not slander. Libel involves the written word, while slander refers to the spoken word.
I am reminded of a gathering I attended recently wherein an Iranian cleric held that Islam allows for free speech. When asked if that speech were to cast the Islamic Prophet cast in a negative light, he said this would bring "grave consequences", just as would shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Of course, this misses the point entirely because such an incident in the theater has the potential to endanger the public safety, whereas a negative comment about Mohamed would merely draw the ire of muslims. The implication was that the speaker in the latter instance was risking death (at the hands of muslims) for his or her "freedom of expression."
He got quite a laugh out of the audience for drawing the parallel, but the cause of the laughter obviously escaped him. That, of course being, that this was nothing even resembling freedom of speech.
Mr Spencer,
Keep up the good work. This anti hate site was a bait and a trap. You just outwitted that moron.
i meant to say That anti hate site was a trap
One should not apologize for "hatred" if hatred is "of evil".
Hatred can be righteous if justified.
I hate communism.
I hate nazisim.
I hate Islamism.
No problem and no apology for such hatred is warranted.
One should proudly and boldly hate evil.
For the record i would like to state here and now unequivically i am not a racist!
I never ever drive faster than the posted speed limit!
Thankyou for allowing me this oportunity to set the record straight!
-JustaDhimmi, you guys aren't alone. If I recall correctly there was a poster on here who went by the screen name bjjfighter. Practicing martial arts is a great way to get in shape and relieve stress. I'm both a fan and practitioner of MMA, and I'm pretty well endowed in the firearm department as well. I'm certainly anything but a 'type A' personality, and I avoid physical conflict whenever possible, but I feel that it is our civic duty to arm ourselves both physically and mentally so as to be prepared, should the need ever arise, to defend Family, Nation, and Liberty. Just out of curiosity, what is TSK?
Posted by: Abu Allah
TSK.COM