Esposito: Spencer an "Islamophobe," but right

Hatred can be rational.

Where does Esposito admit Spencer is right?
Kind of ambiguous wording, kind of like the Fatah/Hamas agreement.

"It is noteworthy that even as the Saudi-funded Esposito goes out of his way to insult me with the politically manipulated, trumped-up, and ultimately empty term "Islamophobe," he has to admit that I'm right".-Robert

I had a hunch he is a paid flunky. He's probably taking antidepressants to counter what would normally be low-self esteem and consequent depression because he betrays his best friend-who is always one's own self. We have to be good to our friend to be good and truthful to others. Esposito and others like him betray themselves first.

Recently, I heard Mike Savage say he thinks a lot of these types (in politics, media, etc.) are on Prozac. I agree. I think it explains a lot of their disconnect with reality, their disconnect with self-respect, the bizzare thinking of these people. They do not deal with their demons but put a chemical mask on them-a happy face on them.

Someone once said that "I do not want to get rid of my demons because I do not want to get rid of my angels". The demons are in charge with these phonies and flunkies such as Esposito. They should be depressed because they have a lot to be depressed about. They have no straight road to truthfulness, to their angels.

Islamophobe? Maybe, maybe jihadophobic, because a religion that has the concept of jihad in it has to be reciprocated, it's only natural...

Robert,

All you have to do is change sides, write about how old Mo was really a saint and the Saudis will finance you just like Esposito. After all, what's your soul when you can have the whole world?

Provoslavni-

Robert has a big ego and a lot of self-respect, he'll never be a flunky for anyone, nor will he need Prozac. Esposito and others like him are another story.

It occured to me this morning that Dinesh D'Souza is having his worst nightmare. He had the respect of Daniel Pipes and many others in the community, and now he has lost the respect of everyone.

He attacked the Left, which mounted little, if any revolt. Instead, his whole attempt -- to garner the support for Islam of conservatives -- failed utterly, and he lost his career in the process. He has exposed himself as many things that are unforgiveable in a pundit: lying about what he has read, showing zero comprehension of what he has read, engaging in pure polemics, and being (most egregious of all) stupid.

His career is dead. When Esposito bails on him, you know, for sure, he's toast. He's watching his future dissolve right now, today.

His credibility is completely destroyed, and there is nothing, now, that he can do about it.

Re: E$po$ito hurling the fatuous, baseless Islamophobe accusation:

This has been a paid announcement brought to you by "John Esposito director of the Prince Alwaleed Bin-Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding."

Esposito ...

I have long believed that Esposito is actually a Muslim.

In fact, I had great fun with this at the "Saudi Accountability" Senate subcommittee meeting in November of 2005.

While we were waiting in line to get in, I spotted the great Saudi dissident Ali Alyami in the line behind and went to say hello. Ali gave me the usual big hug and launched into the usual happy chatter about a million things (Alyami's son is serving with U.S. troops in Iraq).

So, then I notice that there are a whole bunch of Arabs watching the whole line carefully, and as we filed in, some of seemed to "pick up" a ... well ... companion.

So this Saudi guy sits down beside me and starts trying to trump up some support for me about Wahhabism. Did I know, he asked, that a WOMAN (Natana deLong-Bas, of course) had written a WONDERFUL exoneration of Ibn abd al-Wahhab?

Yes, I said, I am aware of that. And he asks what I thought of it.

Worse piece of whitewash political PhD pollution I've ever seen, says I.

But, he counters, Esposito was her PhD advisor, and he's a Christian.

Yes, says I, I am aware of that he was her advisor, but I have a question somebody should ask Esposito.

What is that, he asked.

Somebody ought to ask him, says I, if he took a secret shahada to Wahhabi Islam on one of his many trips to Saudi Arabia.

He couldn't speak, and immediately I knew it was true. The color drained from this Saudi spy's face, and I realized he wasn't even breathing. The shock registered on his face was palpable, and he blinked a couple of times as if he just didn't even believe what he'd just heard.

I thought I was going to have to give him CPR.

Get away from me, I said. And he got up and left. He didn't come back for the whole two days of the hearing.

Esposito should answer this question. He has every right to choose whatever religion he likes. But he doesn't have the right to pretend to be a Christian at a major university if that be not the truth.

Provoslavni ...

Good point. Natana deLong-bas sold her soul for $20,000 in expenses to get her PhD, paid for by the Saudis, used to whitewash Ibn abd al'Wahhab. Then somebody gets around to asking her if she was allowed to see al'Wahhab's personal correspondence, and she admits that she wasn't. She got to see JUST those things that the Saudis allowed to her see. And for this GWU gave her a PhD that makes believe this insane man -- whose father and brother spent their lives warning people to stay away from him, known he was off his bean -- was a mild-mannered supporter of women.

Nowhere in her book does she mention that al-Wahhab personally stoned a woman to death for zina. But not the man, of course.

"Spencer is an "Islamophobe," says John Esposito director of the Prince Alwaleed Bin-Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding."

Well, Mr Esposito doesn't seem to show too much understanding here, does he?

I'll wager that the same people who fund Mr Esposito's rather grandiose-sounding position would happily pay to have Robert Spencer silenced.

That Mr Spencer is effectively a fugitive in his own country suggests as much.

So much for understanding, eh, john?

Morgaan Sinclair-

I think you have a keen eye for the real thing, for the truth. A little diffficult..but for real...

When people are fearful of spiders they run from them, when people are fearful of heights they stay off the and with any phobia there is fear.

I have yet to see Mr. Spencer fearful of anything Islam, anyone Muslim or anything spelled Koran for 2000 Alex.
This idiotic labeling to try and smear good people is a leftist trick from the 50's. First it was divorce lawyers calling women sluts. Then it was divorce lawyers calling men queer. Then it was hippies calling American warmongers....and the list goes on to Nazi for every Republican.

The doctor who founded the aborticide "talking points" designed the psychology of spin words and revealed them all when he left the aborticide clique.
The Gay lobby picked up allot of this as the same groups of Gay, green anti fur and aborticide all had protesters for hire showing up at the same events...hence Homophobia was born to smear people to the tune of Phil Donahue.

The Muslims are the same communist related front which was pushing this destroy the American fabric which created a united people called Americans.

They utilize the same spin words of Islamophobe, when they can not defeat in debate they attempt to silence by intimidation or the label tossed at me yesterday of "crackpot".

These are sinister individuals as they are not based in Truth, honesty or caring for others. Otherwise known as God Love.

It is the people who use the terms Islamophobe who are the ones existing in fear, because they do not want to face the ugly person they are inside and venting chaos and hate on others is their "pill" of choice to deaden reality.

"I am extremely surprised that anybody could interpret my prayer as belittling, insulting, or otherwise disrespecting ... Christian and Jewish brothers and sisters."

Why? are you crazy or stupid?

Esposito appears to be homosexual. He is a trustee of Saudi tycoon Al Waleed. He wouldn't be if he was not a Muslim.

Perhaps somebody else knows more, but for all I know it all adds up....

Mr. Spencer, there is no gain to be had, but much weariness and frustration, in attempting to refute, negate, or otherwise reply to the vilifications of one's enemies. It can consume all of one's time, energy, and passion, but it never accomplishes anything.

There's a story about a Broadway producer -- call him Smith -- whose show was tottering financially, who was called by a top Variety reporter -- call him Jones -- about it. The conversation went thus:

---

Jones: "Mr. Smith, there are rumors that your show is about to go bankrupt. Is it?"

Smith: "I suppose if I were to answer that it isn't, your lede tomorrow would be 'Smith denies bankruptcy imminent.' Is that about right?"

Jones: "Well, more or less."

Smith: "Then I'll answer your question if you'll answer one of mine. Fair enough?"

Jones: "All right, what's your question?"

Smith: "Mr Jones, does your wife have syphilis?"

Jones: "What the hell does that have to do with anything?"

Smith: "Well, I have a reporter here from the Associated Press who's very interested in the subject. I'd imagine that if you were to answer that she doesn't, his lede tomorrow would be 'Jones denies wife has syphilis.' More or less."

Jones: "I see your point."

---

Do you see mine? Believe me, your enemies do.

Posted by Frank:

"Recently, I heard Mike Savage say he thinks a lot of these types (in politics, media, etc.) are on Prozac. I agree. I think it explains a lot of their disconnect with reality, their disconnect with self-respect, the bizzare thinking of these people."

Frank, I think there's something to this. If you read D'Souza, you see that he's disconnected from what he writes and bizzarely thick-skinned when reprimanded by real scholars in the field. It's like we're dealing with happy-face balloon filled with gas.

Probably when D'Souza swallows his retard pills, he tells himself, "Well, it could be worse. I could be snorting coke, or toking Hindu Kush, but this is completely legal and the Muslims wouldn't take this away from me. No sir."

Let's please keep playing fair, OK?

ESPOSITO IS ****NOT**** GAY.

Neither is Alwaleed. Alwaleed also is not Wahhabi freak. He's done some spectacularly wrong things (9/11 comment at the top of the list).

But he is probably the most progressive thinker in the royal family, is a major pusher of women's rights in the Kingdom, and is avidly studying how to usher Islam into some kind of democracy.

The person in trouble here is more likely Esposito, whom I think is the agent secret of the Arabian Wahhabi establishment.

Isn't Islamophobia a fear of Islam?

If so, what's wrong with that?

We need to watch out for Muslimophobia. Muslims can be perfectly decent individuals, as long as they don't pay too much attention to the more hateful aspects of their religion.

I have my doubts that Islam is reformable. My hope is for either eventual conversion to something more civilized (modern Christianity is the obvious choice if one wants a religion at all), or, even better, a rationalistic unbelief.

Not that Christians and atheists can't be monsters, but neither Christianity nor unbelief makes them monsters.

"Hatred can be rational."
I too agree - 'hatred' has had a bad rap recently!

There was a time, not to distant in the past when it was considered prudent and right to hate anyone or any entity that would attempt to destroy either you personally or your way of life.

We seem to have demonised that as well. Hate, it seems is always bad - always wrong now but that of course like many things today is nonsense.

I personally have no proplem hating anyone or anything that threatens either me - my family or my democratic society.

There are many things that deserve to be hated. How one expresses that hatred, and whether that particular expression will further a goal that one wishes to further, is more complicated.

If 'Islamophobia' is an irrational fear of the belief system of Islam, then what is the word for the rational fear of this ideology.

I think that to not have a fear of the demonstrated capacity for Islam in its many guises to mass corrupt minds and lead them to dehumanize others in the name of Mohammed and Allah, would be lemming-like irrationality.

agreed - but the mobilisation of a nation through a shared hatred has been an old and trusted tactic through the ages. It has been both used and abused - sometimes the hatred was deserved and sometimes not.
Maybe its a tactic that we should take a look at again?

The whole premise for this argument is non-existent.

To quote Mr. Spencer "The Imam's invocation echoes the Muslim daily prayer, which asks Allah to "show us the straight path ... not the [path] of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray." Islamic writings say that Muslims follow the straight path, Jews have earned Allah's anger, and Christians have been led astray, says Robert Spencer, author of The Truth About Muhammad."

The words Jews and Christians in that Sura 1: 1-7 do not exist. That is the whole truth. Get a Christian Arab or any one to read in Arabic and ask them if those words are in that Chapter 1, referenced above.

Take a look at 2 power points - APOLOGY and QURAN TRANSLATIONS if you wish to at www.WorldMuslimCongress.com if you do not have access to an Arabic reading person.

Qur'aan is it! It is a holy book like any other holy book and it does not have any hatred in it. Period.

Take a look at the website.

Mike Ghouse
www.MikeGhouse.blogspot.com
www.WorldMUslimCongress.com
www.FoundationforPluralism.com

"Gosh, maybe we should get "Islamaphobes Anonymous" bumper stickers printed up?"

Posted by: Catawhumpus

"Hatred can be rational."

Posted by: MP

A bumper sticker is a great idea, Catawhumpus!
I suggest:

ISLAMAPHOBIA,
Hatred can be rational.

or

Islamaphobes Unite!
You have nothing to lose but your heads.

"To quote Mr. Spencer "The Imam's invocation echoes the Muslim daily prayer, which asks Allah to "show us the straight path ... not the [path] of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray." Islamic writings say that Muslims follow the straight path, Jews have earned Allah's anger, and Christians have been led astray, says Robert Spencer, author of The Truth About Muhammad."

The words Jews and Christians in that Sura 1: 1-7 do not exist. That is the whole truth. Get a Christian Arab or any one to read in Arabic and ask them if those words are in that Chapter 1, referenced above."
-- from a posting by a Muslim apologist above

Of course the words "Christian" and "Jew" are not used. Very often in the Qur'an they are not used, but it is absolutely clear -- the Qur'anic commentators have made it clear since the earliest centuries -- that what is meant here are the Christians are those "who go astray" and the Jews those who have "earned Allah's anger."

Either Mike Ghouse does not know this, in which case he knows nothing about Islam and so what he has to tell us is without any value, or he does know it and is determined to continue to mislead Infidels. I think it clearly the latter.

And this of course calls into question the good faith and intent of all those so-called "moderate" organizations which he lists, and does more than call them into question -- in fact, it fatally vitiates their claim to "moderation" and should make all sensible people look askance.

In the meantime, simply consult the Muslim jurisconsults and see what they say that passage means. And for the very best guide to what Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira are all about, consult those who have defected from the army of Islam -- the apostates, including the famous ones, such as Ibn Warraq, Ali Sina, Wafa Sultan, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and the ones not known to the public, but who are about us, and some of them are quite willing to talk.

Of course the Muslim reaction to these apostates is one of violent hatred. And then the most absurd claim is made: that anyone who leaves Islam knows nothing about Islam, has somehow magically forgotten, from one day to the next day when he declares his apostasy, what Islam is all about, what he learned as he was growing up in a Muslim society, or what he learns today when he visits a mosque. But Ibn Warraq, and Ali Sina, and all the others, could slip into a mosque any day, and hear what is said behind the backs of Infidels, in a mosque, or in any store run by Muslims, or any place where Muslims gather.

And of course more and more reporters and others are finding this out. And some of them, no doubt, have ways to record what is really said by Muslims, about Infidels.

But such undercover work is not needed. One need only read, with intelligence and some modest guides, the texts. There is no secret about them. They can't be hidden. They can only be defended by the kind of nonsense and lies that Mike Ghouse offers above -- noting, utterly irrelevantly, that the literal words "Jews" and "Christians" are not used in this particular passage, but are referred to in a way that he, Mike Ghouse, thinks he can use to fool you.

He can't. But his attempt to do so tells you all you need to know about him and those in the same groups, and their false claims, and sinister aims.

Show us the straight way, The way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, those whose (portion) is not wrath, and who go not astray.
--- Koran 1:6 and 1:7

Innocent enough in and of itself, just an expression of stark division between goodness and sin. At least until the Islamic scriptures build out context around the above statement of division, which is conflict to the end.

I shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle.
--- Koran 8:12

Here, God confers on Moslems the right, indeed the duty, to terrorize non-Moslems.

But Allah desires killing non-believers to manifest the religion.
--- Ishaq 327

And also to murder non-Moslems.

It was Allah who drove the [Jewish] People of the Book from their homes and into exile. They refused to believe and imagined that their strongholds would protect them against Allah. But Allah came at them from where they did not suspect, and filled their hearts with terror.
--- Koran 59:2

Here, God institutes antisemitism, and war against another religion (Judaism in this instance) for disbelief in Moslems' religion, as a central precept.

When Allah's Apostle fought or raided people we raised our voices saying, "Allahu-Akbar! Allahu-Akbar!" None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.
--- Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 516

Two things in this one:

1) Our God is greater than your god.

2) Anybody who believes in another god, or no god at all, does so on the pain of death.

* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *

The eschatological basis of Islam is clear to anybody who can listen or read its scriptures: Terrorize, oppress, and kill until Islam is imposed on the entire globe.

Intellectual frauds like John Esposito are getting away with treason and aiding and abetting murder. Explain this one, Johnny boy:

The battle cry of the Companions of Mohammed that night was: "Kill! Kill! Kill!"
--- Tabari 8:141

raven, "If 'Islamophobia' is an irrational fear of the belief system of Islam, then what is the word for the rational fear of this ideology."
Common sense.

Mike G. slowly but surely your warriors are showing what taqyyia really means. People 'are' paying attention.

If you're beginning to be worried about the momentum that is gathering then you need to leave the religion. Those who are driving it could care less about whether you become a martyr or not. Get ready to die for them because they will demand it and we will listen when they call you.

Mike Ghouse is indeed leading people astray, as Hugh and others have noted. You can see that the brief National Journal item says, "Islamic writings say that Muslims follow the straight path, Jews have earned Allah's anger, and Christians have been led astray, says Robert Spencer." Mike Ghouse responds that the words "Jew" and "Christian" do not appear in the Fatiha, the first sura of the Qur'an.

But of course, I didn't say they did. I said, "Islamic writings," not the Qur'an. The traditional Islamic understanding of the Fatiha is that when it speaks of the “straight path,” that path is Islam -- cf. Esposito’s book "Islam: The Straight Path." The prayer also speaks about those who have earned Allah’s anger and those who have gone astray. The classic Qur’anic commentator Ibn Kathir explains that “the two paths He described here are both misguided,” and that those “two paths are the paths of the Christians and Jews, a fact that the believer should beware of so that he avoids them. The path of the believers is knowledge of the truth and abiding by it. In comparison, the Jews abandoned practicing the religion, while the Christians lost the true knowledge. This is why ‘anger’ descended upon the Jews, while being described as ‘led astray’ is more appropriate of the Christians.”

Ibn Kathir’s understanding of this passage is not a lone “extremist” interpretation. In fact, most Muslim commentators believe that the Jews are those who have earned Allah’s wrath and the Christians are those who have gone astray. This is the view of Tabari, Zamakhshari, the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, the Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas, and Ibn Arabi, as well as Ibn Kathir. One contrasting, but not majority view, is that of Nisaburi, who says that “those who have incurred Allah’s wrath are the people of negligence, and those who have gone astray are the people of immoderation.”

Wahhabis drew criticism a few years back for adding “such as the Jews” and “such as the Christians” into parenthetical glosses on this passage in Qur’ans printed in Saudi Arabia. Some Western commentators imagined that the Saudis originated this interpretation, when in fact it is venerable and mainstream in Islamic theology.

A sincere Muslim reformer would have acknowledged all that, and explained why he favored the view of Nisaburi or some other, and showed how he was working against the mainstream interpretation in the Muslim community. Instead, Mike Ghouse just tells us it's not in the Qur'an and relies on the probability that no one reading will have any familiarity with the Qur'anic commentators.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Moderate Muslims are engaged with the fundamentalists in a life and death struggle for the heart and soul of Islam. We need to form an alliance with moderate Muslims in order to aid them in their historical struggle. The Equality of Women is an essential cornerstone in the Reformation of Islam.

A GOD OF REASON AND ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM

Ialamic Fundamentalists have taken Islam and turned its teachings into a murderous medieval ideology – that the killing of infidels in the name of Allah will be rewarded in heaven - allowing the Islamists to sexually molest for all eternality 72 virgins, in 72 mansions, and 72 beds – that the murder of millions of non - believers is a religious duty, women are inferior to men - their virtual slaves to be denied education, beaten, killed for adultery or other sexual transgressions (real or imaged), covered from head to toe, people can be mutilated and tortured, barbers giving hair cuts can be killed, music and movies banned, women practicing folk dancing murdered, schools teaching young girls blown up, anyone who believes in a different interpretation of Islam to be killed and on and on. Muslims have paid a terrible price at the hands of these Fundamentalists. Children mutilated. Grand parents brains blown all over the street. Women, children, old and young. Over one hundred and fifty thousand Muslims have been slaughtered in the most horrid, unimaginable ways since 9/11.


The Pope in his recent speech on God and Reason has shown the way forward. A very important event occurred recently when 36 Islamic Scholars sent the Pope a communication in which they agreed – that in Islam, Allah is – "A GOD OF REASON." This important declaration - perhaps one of the most important by a group of such eminent Islamic scholars must be seized upon. The Pope should call for a world religious conference on the scale of Vatican 2 bringing together all the top religious leaders and scholars from EVERY world religion to draft a Universal Declaration of Religious Principles. This Declaration will form the basis of an historic alliance between Christianity and Islam to turn the murderous fundamentalist tide before it is too late. Before a nuclear weapon is exploded in the Name of Allah in a Western City killing millions.

Following would be the format of this Universal Religious Declaration.

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF RELIGIOUS RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

There is only one God
God is God
God is a God of Reason.
God is not an irrational being. If God is irrational then God is not God.

Ordinary people on the street understand the words – "reason" and 'irrational". Any such declaration must be kept simple - not an intellectual rambling on of the Philosophy of Reason. (For a very important article on the Philosophy of Reason and Pope Benedicts controversial speech I draw your attention to article – "Socrates or Muhammad? Joseph Ratzinger on the destiny of reason" by Lee Harris.)

God Being a God of Reason Therefore:

All violence in the Name of God/Allah is the GREATEST evil anyone can commit. Suicide is an evil act in every religion. Suicide bombers killing themselves and others in the Name of God/Allah – this is the Supreme evil act. The second most evil act is killing, maiming, and torturing others to the Greater Glory of God/Allah. The concept of Jihad as religious holy war must be condemned. All references to violence in any holy book/text is not the word of God but the word of man. No God who is God would ever instruct anyone to commit acts of violence against any other human being. Violence in religion must be totally and completely renounced – WITHOUT EQUIVOCATION . There is no heaven for these murderers. No mansions. No virgins. Just the black hole of eternal damnation. You cannot climb to heaven on the corpses of the murdered. If God /Allah believes in violence then God/Allah is irrational and therefore God/Allah is not God/Allah.

God Being A God of Reason Therefore:

Women and men are equal in the eyes of God. Women are the equal of men. God did not create women to be the chattel or slaves of men. Females have full rights in society before the law, under the rule of law, can dress any way they freely desire without fear of death, walk the streets without a male relative escort, do any occupation, receive all educational rights, drive planes, trains, automobiles, fly to the stars, choose their husbands etc. These equal rights of women in society are very important. Their exercise without fear of violence - without the fear of being victims of Honor Killings must be declared WITHOUT EQUIVOCATION in any such declaration. If God/Allah is a sexist then God/Allah is irrational and therefore God/Allah is not God/Allah.

God Being A God of Reason Therefore:

There are many ways to God/Allah. Each individual has the total and complete right to find his/her own way to God/Allah or not. Religious freedom is the right of all mankind. The right to build churches, mosques etc. To practice ones religious beliefs non – violently is a corner stone of all civilized societies. The right to change ones religion without fear of death. Only an irrational God/Allah would order people put to death for not believing in religion or deciding to change ones beliefs from one religion to another religion. It is an unimpeachable right.

God Being A God Of Reason Therefore:

All human beings are created equal. All races are created equal. God/Allah does not wish that any human being be a slave. No one person is the lesser of the other. To use religion to spread hate against other races, religions in places of worship, employing television or any other medium, teaching hatred to the young in schools – this is evil incarnate. If God/Allah is a racist then God/Allah is irrational and therefore God/Allah is not God/Allah.

God Being A God Of Reason Therefore

God/Allah blessed man with an intelligence to reason, to explore, to seek the truth of any question – total freedom of thought. To think and reason without fear of jail/death. It is against the will of God/Allah to threaten anyone with death, torture or prison for freely exercising his God/Allah given brain. The human brain is the greatest gift God/Allah has ever bestowed on man. It was given to mankind to purse - the arts, literature, sciences, intellectual pursuits. Its free exercise is the will of God/Allah. Declared WITHOUT EQUIVOCATION. If God/Allah is anti intellectual then God/Allah is irrational and therefore God/Allah is not God/Allah.

God Being A God Of Reason Therefore

All mankind has the right to freedom and democracy, equality before the law, freedom of action, freedom of thought, right to elect their leaders. God /Allah does not want dictators and tyrants to rule over other men. NO EQUIVOCATION. If God/Allah does not believe in the right of mankind to Freedom and Democracy then God/Allah is irrational and therefore God/Allah is not God/Allah.

Pope Benedict has opened the way to a great reconciliation of the world religions. A Grand Conference issuing this Universal Declaration of Religious Rights and Freedoms to be read in every Church, Synagogue, Mosque would be the start of an alliance between faiths against ALL religious extremists. A turning point in the struggle for the minds of young people especially young Muslims who are being constantly bombarded by a religious evil ideology.

Sincerely,
Larry Houle
24602 Timberland Path Dr.
Spring, Texas
239 – 935 – 5495
intermedusa@yahoo.com

Re: E$po$ito hurling the fatuous, baseless Islamophobe accusation,

this is a great way to describe those turncoats who lie about islam and are paid well to do so.
we need to add much more to this list!

Esposito actually blamed America in the aftermath of the attacks. “September 11,” he said, “has made everyone aware of the fact that not addressing the kinds of issues involved here, of tolerance and pluralism, have catastrophic repercussions.”

Esposito also minimizes the damage that Shari’a, or Islamic law, has done in the countries that have implemented it – including Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Sudan. Freedom House, a watchdog group, ranks all of these countries as the worst offenders of human rights in the world. Their economies are all on the brink of destruction, and each one is undeniably linked to the export of international terrorism.

Still, Esposito writes that "contrary to what some have advised, the United States should not in principle object to implementation of Islamic law or involvement of Islamic activists in government."

Esposito has also thrown his weight behind a University of North Carolina requirement for all freshmen to read parts of the Koran, but that failed to address the parts that justify violence.

In 1994, he supported the notion that Hamas, the suicide-bombing Palestinian terror group, is also a community-focused group that engages in “honey, cheese-making, and home-based clothing manufacture.”

Esposito also claimed on NPR that Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasir Arafat’s call for Jihad is comparable to a “literacy campaign” or the “fight against AIDS.”

Clearly, Esposito accepts a rose-colored version of militant Islam that has little connection to reality. But rather than damaging his reputation, this approach has served him surprisingly well in both academic circles as well as government. Indeed, he was a leading source of information on Islamic movements for the Department of State during the Clinton years.

Read it all here:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/Printable.asp?ID=2651

Hussainy
I love what he said because God would be pleased. There is only ONE GOD and we must unify under Him and OBEY HIM !!

I don't think that God is required at all.