Eight years later, 9/11 is an occasion for outreach to Muslims

We have a right to expect, and to demand, eight years later, that interfaith-healing nonsense be replaced by a sober understanding of the texts and tenets of Islam, of the attitudes that naturally arise toward Infidels in those who take those texts and tenets to heart, as most Muslims do, and that what may be called the "atmospherics" of Muslim states and societies and even families -- what is "in the air," the very air that those Muslims who grow up in such families or societies or states breathe in, take in, and find, sometimes without close notice being taken, that it affects their view of non-Muslims, of women, of the nature of the universe, of free and skeptical inquiry, of artistic expression, of the rights, not collective but individual, guaranteed in advanced Western democracies, of everything that makes the West the West, and that is flatly contradicted by the spirit and letter of the Shari'a, the everything that is both the West's quiddity and its claim to civilisational fame, and that could never have for one minute been achieved in places where Islam dominates, and Muslims rule.

well said, Hugh.

mutual interest and mutual respect of others who are not adhearants is not forthcoming from the ummah.

Bravo, Hugh, for we also have a right to be outraged by what they did to us on that day. And just because some muslims at a Taco Bell in Texas got yelled at, a couple days thereafter, or some Sikh (indeed not muslim) was shot by some drunk unemployed man, does not mean that we "infidels" have anything to "reach out" to muslims for. The muslims have committed outrage upon outrage against us. To which, we bombed a few buildings, attempted to rebuild a couple of their nations (at a cost of billions of dollars to us), and then attempted to teach Greek to monkeys (with this flawed notion that they would take this opportunity to establish freedom and democracy within their own lands). To which what did we get? Oh, we must attempt to please and understand them. NO! Let them know that we are not all castrated by the notion of multiculturalism and have not all been rendered ignorant by revisionist history. Some of us in the west know the deeds of their prophet, and we know that by the fruits of his labor, he was an evil man who begat an evil religion. A religion whose sole desire is the subjugation of humanity under the heavy yoke of its legalist construct. Thus, they can be no appeasement. Let us hold fast against the naive liberal, and let us realise it is they who need to "reach out" to us. And until they denounce jihad (a concept intrinsic to their beliefs), we can not continue to appease them, for such in their eyes is a sign of weakness.

Indeed, faith should bring us together."
-- Obama in his Cairo Speech on Islam and Muslims

Why is that? When did "faith" -- if it is a question of different faiths -- ever, in the past, "bring [us, we, them, you, he, she, it] together? When?

And what if the "faith" in question, the very "faith" which Obama knows so little about (but he apparently has, like George Bush, a conviction that it must be fine, and unlike George Bush, has the childhood memories of a few years in a most unrepresentative school in a most unrepresentative city, in a most unrepresentative Muslim country, at a most unrepresentative secular interregnum in that nation's history, to also give him that warm feeling, that feeling that he just knows if a billion people believe something, then it must, on the sophie-tucker theory of "Fifty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong," be true for Islam, with a vengeance.

Oh, with a vengeance, alright.

There is no substitute, in talking about, thinking about, making policies about, Islam and Muslims, for a detailed knowledge of what is contained in the texts of this text-centered faith, of how literally, or how figuratively, or how deeply, or how shallowly, Muslims take in what those texts attempt to inculcate, and by what mechanisms the message of Islam is reinforced in families, societies, states suffused with Islam. Obama, and those around Obama, have not done this. They have relied only on their feelings, or on the plausible smiling Muslims (a Pakistani-American girl in a hijab who acts as an advisor is not, I submit, likely to be telling the home truths that Obama needs to hear, from Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Wafa Sultan and other Defectors from the Army of Islam who make perfect sense, who are highly intelligent, who are not merely articulate but often quietly eloquent). It is also amazing that whenever real scholars of Islam -- Snouck Hurgronje, Schacht, Jeffrey, Lammens, and dozens of others -- are mentioned, or quoted, or excerpted from, a certain indifference or lassitude is shown, as if what the latest apologetic pap, decked out as scholarship, by the venal Esposito or the coherently incoherent Karen Armstrong with her undercurrent of anti-Catholic hysteria (she's a former nun)told us all we know about Islam on earth, and all we need to know. It does not help that Saudi and other Arab money has bought and paid for so many chairs, departments, "centers" of "Islamic studies," nor does it help that MESA,or MESA Nostra, has been quietly taken over by a membership that is 70% Muslim, and that, as Bernard Lewis has noted, the mode even of Muslim scholars is ordinarily that of apologetics, not of disinterested scholarship which will even tell unpleasant truths.

Why would "faith" bring us together if that "faith" is one that contains such passages, attributed to Allah, considered to be the literal and immutable Word of God, as 9.5 and 9.29 and a hundred other blood-curdling calls for war against the Unbelievers, set out in the Qur'an, or the hundreds of like-minded Hadith, or the example of Muhammad the warrior, who countenanced, who was pleased, to watch the decapitation of 600-900 helpless, because bound, prisoners of the Banu Qurayza, who was delighted to receive the news of the murder of the poetess Asma bint Marwan (who offended him by writing a few satirical verses about him), who spotted a six--year-old, and then demurely waited three years before "marrying" her and consummating that marriage too, when she reached the ripe age of nine, who attacked the inoffensive farmers of the Khaybar Oasis -- even one of his closest collaborators questioned the justice of such a raid -- in order to seize their property, and their women, one of whom, Shafiyah, he took after having killed her father, her brother, her husband.

Why can't Obama, or Hillary Clinton, or Richard Holbrooke, or Robert Gates, or a hundred other people in Washington be bothered, before spending another two trillion winning-hearts-and-minds dollars in Afghanistan -- having moved the Theatre of the Absurd Squandering eastward from Iraq to Afghanistan -- stop, think, read, study, and find out, for god's sake, just find out what Islam is all about, and why Muslims behave as they now do in southern Thailand, and in Xinjiang, and in the southern Philippines, and in Great Britain, and Denmark, and why Muslims in Denmark have whipped up death-threats against Danes, and why Muslims raised in every country in Europe, given every advantage, go off to fight the violent Jihad in Muslim lands, or stay right at home, some plotting, some quite correctly guessing that there are better, more effective ways to conduct Jihad (which does not require violence if there are other ways to succeed in the struggle to remove all obstacles to the spread and then dominance of Islam) within the countries of Western Europe.

Why must nonsense such as that offered in the epigraphic quote above be composed, be uttered, be by some -- not Muslims, but by non-Muslims, who are the main victims of such misinformation -- even believed?

Why?

The only appropriate, rational response to this would of necessity include the F word -- and not in any restrained manner, but in a manner of utterly letting it all hang out; as for example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foyLyriak-Q&feature=channel_page

"Indeed, faith should bring us together......."

I believe the President needs to spend some time researching the history of Islam.

I guess the next step will be for Obama to pay compensation to the families of the 19 martyrs perished in the 9/11 "interfaith dialogue".

So, when is POTUS going to choose a mosque?

Islam is part of America? Well, to the extent that it is, it is not a good part of America. Islam, in fact, is at best deeply troubling, at worst evil. The best of Islam is still nothing as compared to the best of America. There are noble achievements in man's history. America is one of them. Islam most definitely is not.

"I believe the President needs to spend some time researching the history of Islam."

It wouldn't do him any good. In fact, it would likely only reinforce his axiomatic prejudice about Islam.

How, you might ask, could this possibly be, when we know that the history of Islam is replete with facts that indict it? Well, fortunately or unfortunately, people are not blank slates. When they seek out facts, or are presented with facts, they do not merely assimilate those facts without prejudice. Everyone carries in their head a more or less complex filtering mechanism that filters and then organizes incoming data. This filtering mechanism is cultural. And over the past 50-odd years, the entire West has undergone a sea change in consciousness, a shift in paradigm of worldview, and this is the filtering mechanism most people in the West use when assimilating incoming data about Islam. Part of this PC MC filtering mechanism is pre-set to raise alarm balls whenever any incoming data is sensed to be negative about Islam. A complex array of assumptions, exculpations, and contextualizations is deployed when such negative data about Islam enters into the filtering mechanism, and for most of these types of people, whatever chance that negative data had to begin to sway their minds to a more rational appraisal of Islam is effectively neutralized. Often, in fact, negative data about Islam almost serves, perversely, as positive fuel for the PC MC mechanism in their brain, actually strengthening their pro-Islam disposition, not weakening it. And a crucial part of this perversity involves their underlying fear that the evil white West will go down the slippery slope toward genocide against the preciously ethnic Muslims, if such negative data were allowed to catch fire and rationally unfold its logical conclusions among too many people.

Etc. This is only to begin to palpate the complexities of the situation.

perhaps we need to attend these interfaith meetings and take along with us Robert's newest book. l am sure it will help those poor Muslims understand their faith a little better.

9 1 s 1 a m

Astute analysis, Hesperado. I wish you were wrong in it but I fear you are not. Still, Islam is so messed up and so inimical to freedom that I hold out hope that even the last fifty years or so of Western societies going astray will not in the long term result in Islam triumphing over the West. I see resiliency (or at least I think I do; unclear which sometimes) in Western institutions and concepts that will preserve it in the end. I also believe that Islam's built-in pathologies (e.g., its glaring absence of a true Golden Rule for all) will do it in eventually. Hey, call me a skeptical optimist.

OT-OT-OT-URGENT-OT-OT-OT

Allowed SIOE demo in rememberence of 9/11 in front of mosque in London busted. Mohammedans start attacking in masses. Police fear for their poor police-lives. Canceled demo. CNN reporting in favour of Mohammedans. More to come.

http://sioe.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/sioe-demo-called-off/

http://edition.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream1

++++++++ Steven Gash arrested ++++++++

You all know how it will play out: Racism! Peaceful Muslims who have been living since 1400 years in Britain and have shaped the culture of the land are now threatened, although they invented the Magna Carta, told the Canterbury Tales and built the Great Eastern to connect Britain and the US for the first time via sea-cable, are all with a sudden attacked by a Right Wing Mob.

"I SWEAR THIS ON THE HOLY KORAN, OFFICER!"

Thanks Hugh, great comments. I appreciate the information about coherently incoherent Karen Armstrong, good term.

But I'd like to say this. The events of 9/11 were not tragic. Earthquakes, tsunamis, accidents caused by human negligence or ignorance which cost a lot of lives are tragic. But 9/11, these events were man-made atrocities and I've got my doubts whether I should label the perpetrators human beings. Mohammedan zombies would be more appropriate. Islam is not a tragedy, it's a plague, it's a cancer in the body of mankind. It has to be removed from this planet.

G*d bless America! My heart is with all the victims and their families. They are indeed tragic heroes.

Hesperado - I was trying to be (subtly) sarcastic.

Besides, the One does not need to read books. With his infinite intellect, his precious posturing, his mobile mannerisms, his blazing brain and his bottomless bowl of long suffering patience our Dear Leader can instantly grasp the core concept of any situation and solve any problem with a sincere apology.

Not only is he more powerful than a locomotive, faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings with a single bound; he can look good on television.

See? No need for books and smarts and common sense.

From SIOE's homepage on the arrest of Steven Gash:

"He has been arrested to prevent a breach of the peace…"

That was called "Schutzhaft" in a well known Totalitarian State a while ago. The justification was exactly the same. They granted this priviledge to everyone who opposed their agenda.

++SIOE London++

Note: "Anti-Fascist Supporters (the notorious Antifa)are nowhere to be seen at the SIOE demo. Only Mohammedans:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Anti-Fascist-Protesters-And-Right-Wingers-Clash-With-Metropolitan-Police-Near-London-Mosque/Article/200909215380167?lpos=UK_News_Top_Stories_Header_0&lid=ARTICLE_15380167_Anti_Fascist_Protesters_And_Right_Wingers_Clash_With_Metropolitan_Police_Near_London_Mosque

Sorry for flooding this thread but for me as a European this is another hallmark for the looming civil war. The police back down. It's like the old Cold War saying "Rather red than dead" (Rather Dhimmi than dead).

Some leftover patriots say "Rather dead than red". (Rather dead than Dhimmi).

underlying fear that the evil white West will go down the slippery slope toward genocide against the preciously ethnic Muslims, if such negative data were allowed to catch fire and rationally unfold its logical conclusions among too many people....

Bingo. It's not that they need to learn more about mohametanism. They are in denial and exist behind a Rodney King mentality that says that the only chance for humanity is if we can all "get along". When you ask, "Do you know much about islam?", the face glazes over. There is no way to breach the defense since logical conclusions which follow represent banned thoughts.

The nabi witnessed this phenom with his nephew just over the last weekend. This pattern can be generalized to the various governments and functionaries. "We are not going to start that way because that way leads to horrific war and genocide."

nabi ZK (pbum)

From Sky News:

A message on the SIOE website tonight claimed the protest had been called off by organisers at the request of police.

The posting at 6.30pm said Mr Gash had been arrested and asked to cancel the meeting.

It read: "If you are on your way to the demo, don't go, it's being called off right now. The police can't handle the Muslim counter demonstrators. The senior sergeant said that he doesn't want any of his policemen killed."

http://tinyurl.com/ldnxzc

Killed? By peaceful moslems? /sarc

Here you can admire some of the "Anti Facists" of London - friendly people filled with the brotherly love of Islam:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1212831/Tensions-threaten-boil-right-wing-extremists-anti-fascist-protestors-clash-outside-London-mosque.html

In a nutshell, I have learned about Islam on a sunny and warm Tuesday morning eight years ago.

Food drives for donation to mosques at the end of Ramadan? What a great idea! We know Muslims in Muslim countries like Pakistan and Egypt are always donating food to Christian churches to help them celebrate Christmas dinners. Right?

I'd like to start by donating a nice case of bacon to my local mosque. Or do you think they might prefer some nice pork chops? (In case you can't tell, my Sarcasm-O-Matic is cranked way, way up!)

Actually Mr. Spencer I think you meant to say it's "our" fault, not "out" fault. But yes, I do indeed agree that's how Obama, Osama, and the rest of the Muslim world and their apologists see it.

Obama is a corbon copy of Jimmy Carter. Both have impecable academic credentials, both highly educated, but both incurable ideologues. Neither of them would allow facts or evidence, no matter how obvious, to contridict their ideological views of the world.
Just as Carter made a fool of himself in his policies towards Iran, Obama will do the same in his policies towards the Islamic world. The problem is that Obama will endanger all of us with his policies, because the world is a more dangerous place today than it was in Carter's day.

http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=16354#comment-58371

"From Dreams of My Father:’I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.’

From Dreams of My Father :’I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race.’

From Dreams of My Father:’There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.’

From Dreams of My Father:’It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.’

From Dreams of My Father:’I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself: the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.’

And FINALLY,
From Audacity of Hope:’I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.’

IS THERE ANY QUESTION WHERE Dictator OBAMA’S ALLIANCE ARE??? Really?"

.........................read the rest

buraq is dead - thanks for linking those items about the marauding Mohammedans vs the SIOE in Harrow, England.

When I got up this morning (it's September 12 in Australia) at around 6 am, I went straight to the New English Review blog and got Esmerelda Weatherwax's collection of British news items on the same event, with her sardonic commentary.

I will pray for Mr Gash's vindication; and for a hundred people to stand up to take his place. The UK needs hard-headed cool-headed people to join the Resistance, not by tens or dozens but by the hundreds and the thousands.

And for everyone reading this now, or who in future may stumble across it, everyone who is remembering September 11 2001, but *also*, most particularly, everyone and anyone who is a non-Muslim from the UK, and from other parts of Europe, the article at the following link may prove inspiring.

http://pajamasmedia.com/ejectejecteject/2007/05/

It is at the 'Ejectejecteject' and it is from May 21 2007, a posting called 'You are not alone'.

The whole is worth reading; but what is most relevant to Sept 11, and to the spectacle in Harrow, and those few SIOE protesters who dared to stand up in public but were not properly supported by the police and were pursued with murderous intent by hundreds of howling Mohammedans, is the portion that comes under the heading 'THE REMNANT'.

Scroll down till you get to it.

I shall quote, here, just in case the link breaks in future, or the article vanishes, the most arresting portion:

"I have been, and remain, a staunchly anti-elitist individual. I find the idea of belonging to a special group the most dangerous philosophical ground you can stand on.

"But what is remarkable about this Remnant is that the people that compose it seem to be drawn completely at random.

"It is not a philosophy. It is a frequency. You are on it or you are not.

"And this is not a million-dollar lottery win, either: it is a call to face unpleasant facts and impending hardship.

"It is a quiet summons to duty. It often makes one uncomfortable, and, most often, this unfocused, vague desire – this need – to do something useful most often makes one feel very much alone.

"What’s remarkable about the Remnant — to me, anyway – is the sheer unpredictability of its composition. Perhaps that homeless drug addict, panhandling under the overpass… perhaps he will be the one to run into a burning building while other decent and good people stand idle, waiting for something to happen.

"Waiting for some*one* to happen.

"During the 1992 L.A. riots, a white truck driver named Reginald Denny was pulled from his vehicle and nearly beaten to death by a mob of enraged blacks. Cinderblocks and fire extinguishers where hurled at his head. The police had been told not to enter the area. He was rescued by other black neighbors, who at great risk to themselves waded into that fury and took him into one of their own homes. He eventually recovered.

"That was Remnant.

"Not the actions of Delta Force operators or other First Responders – the obvious assumption — but rather of decent, ordinary people who showed extraordinary decency and courage when the moment called them.

"And what did the passengers of United Flight 93 have in common? Men and women, gay and straight, liberal and conservative, Republicans and Democrats, rich and poor… who knows, and more importantly, who cares?

"They were motivated to do extraordinary things – not all of them, for most of the people remained in their seats.

"But some of them (enough, as it turned out)

"heard that ancient and distant call, heard that tone, that frequency –

"and likely saved the Capitol building,

"symbol of our government; not to mention all the people in and around it.

"That is Remnant. That is the strength, the foundation, the core, the essence of civilization and decency in the face of barbarism and murder."

Anthropologically, any outreach to Muslims should be same as how we outreach to other sociological or primitive groups, with delicate respect for their ancient customs to better understand their sensibilities, so we study them within the context of their natural settings and try not to intrude into their primitive worlds or it becomes very disturbing for them. So we must study them anthropologically to better understand what motivates their actions, for both our own benefit as well as to bring a sense of civilizing influences into their communities. That is how it should be ideally, and to some extent such outreach is justifiable. Muslims do what they do, or believe, and we watch them.

Where the problem becomes self evident is within our own modern societies when large demographics of Muslims begin to dominate with the intent of us changing our ways to accommodate their anthropological practices, and this done without mutual respect for our progressive societal norms and freedoms, which they apparently do not understand. So this outreach, though valid on anthropological grounds, fails when their primitive cultural norms affect our well being, because then the studies are unequal, since they do not understand us and ours. If I went to a native village in the Amazon to witness their culture, life habits, dance, religious practices, I would do so with utmost respect for that culture. But if I enter that world and am attacked for trespassing, I would be foolish to continue such studies until we can establish safe conduct and communications. Likewise in the Muslim world, that to enter it now is fraught with dangers, since they have exhibited a great deal of anymosity towards us. So for any outreach program to work, we must first secure safe conduct on their part in order to effect communications. At this time, such safe conduct still appears illusive. These are not the days of colonialism where European powers took over their lands, so there is no Pax Europea at present, nor even Pax Americana, as the wars fought in Afghanistan and Iraq have shown. These worlds are fraught with dangers for us.

What complicates this issue further is that these Muslim anthropological groups now have settled within our societies, and it has become abundantly clear they do not fit in with us and our norms, nor do they seem to really care to do so. It is transparently clear this has become a primitive anthropological group that mistakenly has taken itself to be more than our equals, when in fact that is very far from reality, and thus attempt at using our respect for their cultures, as we respect any understanding of culture, especially as it applies to our tolerance of others, our constitutional freedoms, and the equality of all, including equality of sexes; that they strive to take advantage of our good will and laws to better serve themselves, at our expense. Muslims hark back to a very primitive era of mankind, one from which the rest of humanity has largely evolved, but they had not yet done so with any significance, where they still prefer to pose themselves as desert Bedouin Arabs. So to study them makes sense, but it must be done with circumspection as this tribe is still hostile.

So outreach if you can, but beware the social group under question is at this time still hostile, so great caution must be part of that plan. This is the new world we entered since 9/11, a heinous attack which some within Islam saw triumphant. And it is one day of social awakening for us that in our midst resides a hostile tribe to be studies and understood, with prudent circumspection. It is time for government, media, and academia to reorient their strategies towards this hostile anthropological group that has settled in our midst.

I think we have "outreached" to them enough, and those of us who aren't blinded by notions of liberal "multiculturalism" (in which one thinks all cultures are "equal"), we know that they are homogenic, intolerant, and incapable of coexisting in our contemporary society. Thus, one must question our "open door" policy, and one must not be amused with the naive perpetual push for further accomodation on the part of the left. Perhaps, therefore, we should respond in the manner of Charles the Hammer.

Indeed, faith should bring us together."
-- Obama in his Cairo Speech on Islam and Muslims

Such deluded, blind, ignorant error!

Faith has always divided mankind. When it brings peoples together in the "neither Jew nor Greek" mode (to paraphrase Paul), it is when the Jew confesses M'shiach and the Greek burns his idols.

Still, I'm all for outreach to Muslims. I will always be polite, concerned, and respectful to my Muslim colleagues and students. But if questions of faith arise, I will always confess that I believe that God became man in Jesus Christ; offered his sinless life for our sinful ones on the cross; and rose from the dead on the thord day--while Muhammad remains in his grave in Medina, awaiting the final judgment with the rest of us.

May God be gracious and pour out His Holy Spirit on millions of Muslims, that they may turn from their falsehood and confess the Scriptural Christ, not some phantom of a man's dreams. And may God open the eyes of our president and State Department!

www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/betraying_our_dead_H6T95r1BTCnkC1UbEdUfsO?offset=0#comments

ooo rah!

dda

Thanks for that link. It is truly upliftig, just what an islam-savvy citizen needs these days.

Flight 93 was on VOX-Channel on German TV, 2015 hours on 9/11. What I still consider one of the strongest scenes are the looks some passengers exchange, instilling a silent d'accord and a deep knowlegde before they start rolling.You are not alone. There still is a great rapport among like minded people in the free West. Mohammedans should not underestimate this.

DDA's link the the "Remnant" article brought to mind the French men and women who, at enormous risk to themselves participated in the rescue of jews from the nazis and their Vichy collaborators. When interviewed after the war and asked why they did what they did, almost all of them anwered, in effect, "because it was the right thing to do."

DDA's link to the "Remnant" article brought to mind the French men and women who, at enormous risk to themselves participated in the rescue of jews from the nazis and their Vichy collaborators. When interviewed after the war and asked why they did what they did, almost all of them anwered, in effect, "because it was the right thing to do."

Don't forget, tomorrow (September 12th) is Jan Sobieski Day, the day in 1683 this brave Polish king routed the Islamic hordes at the Battle of Vienna and saved the West from enslavement.

9/11 should stand as eternal testimony to what Islam can inspire, a religion like no other. Had those 19 Arab monsters who perpetrated those foul deeds that day been raised in any other religion (or no religion) than Islam, the evil events of September 11, 2001 would not have occurred. The ultimate cause, the "but for" cause, of 9/11 was Islam itself. One knows this or should know it. Explanations to the contrary are not arguments but obfuscations or excuses.

As a personal, live witness to 9/11, I cannot ever forget.

Islam is certainly NOT a "religion of peace".

End of story.

Sorry to jump in out of nowhere but there is a discussion on NewsReal Blog regarding David Horowitz's commentary about 9/11 and the existence of radical Islam. The clarification I'm seeking is whether or not there's a misunderstanding even at top notch sites that Islam is Islam without any prefixed adjective. I mean to say that there are moderate, conservative, liberal, radical, etc.. muslims but Islam is just what it is. Also a new video called The Third Jihad made by the Obssession folks is disturbing because again there is a distiction being made between RADICAL Islam and someother brand of Islam. Did I miss something? Isn't Islam already set in stone: un-reformable, unchangeable, no more new revelation-able--a true follower either does what Mo did or he's up for a fatwah nomination?

Islam_is_islam: "Isn't Islam already set in stone: un-reformable, unchangeable, no more new revelation-able--a true follower either does what Mo did or he's up for a fatwah nomination?"

That's a fallacy. Any tradition boils down to what people do with it. Islam's problems is that the texts contain really, really nasty stuff, so that integrist movements are difficult to avoid. However, it would be absurd to say that all Muslim communities at all historical junctures have been fundamentalist, or irredentist. Or that a modernistic reconstruction of Islam is impossible. However, because of the content of Islam's texts, a modernistic reconstruction is certainly problematical and bullying by integrists makes such a project unattractive.

Dear Hesp, a very good analysis, as usual. Outreaching only makes sense to people with whom you can communicate who speak the same language. In his book "The Clash of Civilisations" Samuel P. Huntingtons noticed pretty early that American capitalists and Soviet communists were able to communicate, because they shared certain ideas and values. This doesn't hold for Mohammemedans and the civilised world. I had this conversation with my boyfriend tonight. He's English and we were talking about the clashes in London on account of 9/11. He said that was an attack against America. Me, no an attack against the civilised world and think of what happened in London and Glasgow. He, an attack against the Western world. Me, no an attack against the whole civilised world, as everybody is affected, think of Thailand, the Phillippines, India etc. I think he understands by now. But there are so many people overhere in Europe who haven't got a clue, what's really going on. Living in Germany I can only see these goody-goodies who want to do everything right and get get everything wrong.

I think we are heading towards another Civil War.
The Civil War began in the 1860s. But if you look back in history you could see it was coming all
the way back to the late 1780s. I think the same thing is happening now.It won't happen in my life time but its going to come. If you look at what
is happening you can clearly see the storm gathering.

The foundation for Obama's actions was laid by George W. Bush:

1. "All Americans must recognize that the face of terror is not the true faith -- face of Islam. Islam is a faith that brings comfort to a billion people around the world. It's a faith that has made brothers and sisters of every race. It's a faith based upon love, not hate."
-September 10, 2002 - at Afghanistan embassy

2. "Islam is a vibrant faith. Millions of our fellow citizens are Muslim. We respect the faith. We honor its traditions. Our enemy does not. Our enemy doesn't follow the great traditions of Islam. They've hijacked a great religion."
Remarks by President George W. Bush on U.S. Humanitarian Aid to Afghanistan
Presidential Hall, Dwight David Eisenhower Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C.
October 11, 2002

3. "According to Muslim teachings, God first revealed His word in the Holy Qur'an to the prophet, Muhammad, during the month of Ramadan. That word has guided billions of believers across the centuries, and those believers built a culture of learning and literature and science. All the world continues to benefit from this faith and its achievements."
Remarks by the President George W. Bush At Iftaar Dinner The State Dining Room, Washington, D.C.
November 19, 2001

4. "The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war."
Remarks by the President at Islamic Center of Washington, D.C.
September 17, 2001

There are many more where these four came from and some were delivered before all the remains that anyone could find had been brought out of the World Trade Center. Who can blame Americans for thinking all we need to do is reach out and hug a Muslim and everything will be okay? Our "wartime president" couldn't understand the danger we were (and still are) in. It's hard to fault Obama, given the role models he's had - Bush and Clinton.

http://www.afghanland.com/islam/quotes.html

austin - can you provide page numbers for those quotes?

LGF Schadenfreude update:

Charles has now been delinked by PowerLine (www.powerlineblog.com).

I understand where you're coming from, PMK, but there isn't a single President going back to Wahsington who would have said statements otherwise than did Bush (or Clinton) under similar circumstances (Jefferson, Quincy Adams and Teddy Roosevelt being the possible exceptions here). The ultimate problem is the refusal of the world at large to understand that a major religion can be evil. Once that conception takes hold, Presidents and most all others will know what we really face and comprehend what must be done.

I understand where you're coming from, PMK, but there isn't a single President going back to Washington who would have said statements otherwise than did Bush (or Clinton) under similar circumstances (Jefferson, Quincy Adams and Teddy Roosevelt being the possible exceptions here). The ultimate problem is the refusal of the world at large to understand that a major religion can be evil. Once that conception takes hold, Presidents and most all others will know what we really face and comprehend what must be done.

Reaching out to Muslims is important, especially on 9-11, because only when all religions coexist will the world know peace. When you ask why Obama should reach out to Muslims on 911, it sounds very much like you are stating that all Muslims had some responsibility for 9-11.

And Wellington, did you just state that Islam is an "evil" religion? You are stupid.

What's your beef, Wellington?

I think Islam is evil also...Whatcha think of that?

Never mind, I don't CAIR what you think of it...

Why am I stupid, BF? Be specific. As I have stated several times here at JW, Islam is troubling at best, evil at worst. It was founded by someone who fits the mold of a brutal, lecherous psychopath. Mohammed had intercourse with a nine-year old when he was in his fifties and ordered the death of thousands. Contrast his life with Buddha, Jesus and other religious founders about whom we have no information that they ordered anyone killed or used their "spiritual" state to justify numerous sexual passions. No one who lived a life like Mohammed had any business being the founder of a religion.

Yes, I think it was almost inevitable that mankind would get a major faith that is rotten to the core (e.g., the equation in Islamic religious law that non-believers are the equivalent of human waste). Mankind did. It's called Islam. So, why am I stupid? Go ahead, I'm waiting.

As for all Muslims being responsible for 9/11, no they weren't. But then not all Communist Party members were responsible for Stalin's and Mao's atrocities, yet that didn't mean Marxism was a good thing. Hopefully, even someone as dense as you can see my point here.

What's your beef, Family Values? I explained mine. You didn't. Give it a shot.

Hey Ben F, what gives you the right to call people (Particularly Wellington, who, by the way is very well thought of on JW) stupid?

The islamic faith is inherently evil. Read the quran, read the hadith, look at the adherents of the cult.

Subjugation, violence, oppression of women, mind-numbing devotion to a hate filled opportunistic child molester.

If you think islam is here to coexist the you're showing how stupid you are.

Hey Ben, not all muslims had responsibility for 911 but all islam did and that's the distinction. hopefully, islam, the evil ideology, will be irradicated and you can keep calling yourselves muslim; but just not koran-totting muslims. Find some other fals God to worship that doesn't call for the destruction of everything unislamic.

Islam's not an evil religion.

It's an evil cult.

As for reaching out to these cultists on 9/11,
I'd like to reach out with an enormous Roto-Tiller
and rightly turn over all the "Islamic World" and plant,like,peaceful flowers,Maaahhhnnn..

and then I would step on them.....

Fornicate their cult.
Fornicate their horrid book.
Fornicate them.

phtt!beef wellington(snicker)

Wellington: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beef_Wellington

I suppose Wellington wants to boot me for that pun.

No, I don't, Family Values. Just ignoring you henceforth will be sufficient.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellington_boot FYI, Wellington.

Family Values,

Are you saying that Islam is not evil?

Hesperado, I'm saying you're a twit and don't care to talk to you.

On LGF, if one ignored Charles, it was at one time possible to find intelligent life.

Rasulullahhaha Obama the first undocumented American Caliph, and the last...From now on, all American Caliphs will have to produce a birth certificate...

Hesperado, it seems Family Values fears to (or can't) debate you. Instead, this person merely insults you and nothing more. Desperate. Pathetic.

Can any Jihad Watch readers from the UK explain to me why the BBC television drama "MI-5" (also known as "Spooks") was so popular?

I have been renting the episodes of that show and have watched thus far the first 4 seasons, and into the first two episodes of season 5 -- and that show consistently whitewashes Islam and goes so far as to implicate members of UK government in evil terrorist plots against its own people (equivalent to the "Truthers" conspiracy theory) in order to let Muslims off the hook. Even after 7/7, that show continued to depict the threat of terrorism as coming from British non-Muslim elites (and various "right-wing" sorts), and NOT from Muslims. Now why was that show so popular in the UK? Could it possibly be that the UK has an audience that likes that horseshit? I'd like an answer as to why the British people didn't storm the BBC and demand that that show be taken off the airwaves. Thanks so much.

Like wrestling with pigs, you know, Wellie? You get dirty and the pig enjoys it.

Yes Wellington, I see that Family Values is irrational.

Calling Islam evil is a metaphysical statement. I don't do metaphysics.Many of its core ideas are repugnant to me, obviously, or I wouldn't be here. But I don't believe in good and evil. That's religion too. I'm Jewish, but basically a humanist.

I didn't believe in evil either until I saw it up close...There are some things that go beyond repugnant...

You're entitled to feel that way, duh_swami, but you and I have to share a planet with 1.2 billion of 'em and they ain't goin' away.

And Wellington, did you just state that Islam is an "evil" religion? You are stupid.

Posted by: Ben F at September 11, 2009 7:42 PM

To answer on Wellington's behalf, I will absolutely draw the conclusion that YES, Islam is an "evil" religion. Prove otherwise or begone you troll.

To Family Values:

I empathize with your purported unwarranted banning from lgf. You are certainly not alone in that regard.

That in itself, will not buy you a single extra second here at JW with commenting privilages if you continue to defend the ideology of Islam and attack regular posters here, especially ones that are absolutely correct in their sentiments about Islam.

Read more, comment less, lest you be relegated back to lizard land (assuming that Charles will take you back).

Comnsider that an overt threat issued by your's truly.

Awake:

Who the f*** are you to threaten me?

You're entitled to feel that way, duh_swami, but you and I have to share a planet with 1.2 billion of 'em and they ain't goin' away.

Posted by: Family Values at September 11, 2009 9:10 PM

Says who, you? Share in what way? Specifics? Please elaborate.

Maintaining that calling Islam evil is a metaphysical statement is horseshit. Evil exists and one doesn't have to be religious to conclude this ("Value And Virtue In A Godless Universe" by Erik J. Wielenberg is a good counter, among other works, to so-called humanists who think evil is a fiction). A serial killer is engaging in evil. One knows this or should know it. Nazism is evil. Marxism is evil. And Islam is evil. An open-mind is a good thing but not if it is so open that one's brains fall out.

Wellington:

That's hysterical nonsense. I don't like what Islam stands for compared to other prevalent belief systems, but evil is something out of a Manichean conception of the universe that I don't embrace.

Who the f*** are you to threaten me?

Posted by: Family Values at September 11, 2009 9:15 PM

I am just a commenter here at JW, but you were threatened by me, nontheless.

Do you expect that I will retract?

You're entitled to feel that way, duh_swami...

I don't 'feel' that way, I leave 'feeling' to liberals...I have first hand knowledge...You simply don't know what you are talking about...Evil exists
no matter what you think about it...Wellington above is right...

"I don't like what Islam stands for compared to other prevalent belief systems, but evil is something out of a Manichean conception of the universe that I don't embrace."

Posted by: Family Values at September 11, 2009 9:21 PM

We appreciate your opinion, but in the absence of a cogent argument it is just that, your opinion.

Atheists generally suffer from the same fault as you do, a religious moral equivalence conundrum when comparing Islam to ANY other religious belief system.

Hugh Fitzgerald, an avowed atheist, immediately comes to mind as a perfect example as one wholly informed about Islam, and one who does not suffer from your apparent logical fallacy affliction of moral relativism.

What say you?

Well, Awake, at least you're not making silly threats now. But where did you get the idea I was a moral relativist? I think Islam has the worst ideas of any major religion and is the most conducive to human rights abuses, wars of aggression, and economic failure. I just wouldn't call it evil. Stupid, perhaps; I'm closer to the Augustinian idea of the devil than the Manichean one. In fact, I'd primarily call it backward. Which implies that Muslim societies could, perhaps not in my lifetime, but at some future point, move forward.

Much hysterical nonsense does indeed exist, but asserting that evil exists does not qualify as being either hysterical or nonsensical. In fact, quite the contrary. As that old liberal, Daniel Patrick Moynihan once observed, one of the major flaws of modern liberalism is its inability to recognize and effectively deal with evil.

Awake, my views about Islam would have been plenty strong enough to get anyone charged under Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, though this seems at the moment to have been struck down. If I fail some litmus test of yours because I don't like the word "evil," well, I'm sorry.

I think Islam has the worst ideas of any major religion and is the most conducive to human rights abuses, wars of aggression, and economic failure. I just wouldn't call it evil.

Posted by: Family Values at September 11, 2009 9:37 PM

Once again, thanks for your opinion, but unless you can present an argument to support your assertion, your attack on Wellington is baseless and ad hominem at best.

This ain't the mindless lgf lounge, where Johnson's uninformed, iron fist passes as law, in case you haven't noticed.

Why not start with an argument with examples why you think Islam isn't evil, as you say, besides the fact that a billion plus currently subscribe to it?

If I fail some litmus test of yours because I don't like the word "evil," well, I'm sorry.

Posted by: Family Values at September 11, 2009 9:44 PM

Don't apologize to me, apologize to Wellington, for a start.

Enough already. I have to get up in the morning and fix a stove oven. FYI, "Awake," I've been around JW for years and years and off LGF, except for a sock puppet, since last December. FYI as well, the intellectual level of discussion on open threads, when CJ wasn't around, was often higher than this. Many of the people there ignore Charles and enjoy the place as a virtual community, and there were a lot of first class minds to interact with, though I suspect most have left by now. The open threads, though, were often illuminating.

Family Values,

Are you saying that a belief system that believes that God tells them to beat women is not evil? Have you gone mad?

From what I find - liberals 'eat up' stories about evil vs good on TV but cannot imagine that it exists in real life. They imagine the evil to be some ugly creature, or vampires (that they even turn into good guys nowadays), etc and just love going to watch movies about it. Like when Schwarzenegger combated an evil entity trying to get a virginal gal pregnant before the end of the 20th Century.

But, then they are unable to fathom that evil could exist. But why would it take the form of a nasty old monster that they watch on TV or the movies? It would be smooth talking, a facade of virginal/coy/peacefulness, in order to attract people by its promises of earthly desires. It cannot promise anything else. Just as islam only can promise eternal sex with virgins and little boys, and gorging themselves - it cannot promise anything else. Just a promise of something that would probably get really boring in a week or two if one has to spend eternity doing it - unless their consciousness was erased clean and they were just mindless robots just having sex and eating.

Islam is the new 'cool' to these left wingers. It is 'cool', just like Obama is 'cool' and even though they know about zero to nothing about Islam, or Obama, they defend them no matter what.

We heard, daily, their rants that they just could not handle anyone who spoke differently than them as Bush did. And now they are doe-eyed Obama worshippers because they think he speaks well. Of course, not a mention Obama can't get his history straight, or can't give a speech without a teleprompter, hangs around people who are on a terrorist list, or Marxist scumbuckets, or really has proven to be a liar in his speeches which blazed at us in this last speech of his.

We have the documents that tell us the exact intent of Muslims in our lands. They use different words such as 'special work' for their military, etc. They have redefined terms such as 'innocent' which only applies to muslims so as to throw us off from thinking that it is ok in islam to attack innocent civilians, women, children. But we should look at the behaviors of this worldwide, and also the silence of the umma when their jihadists do such things.

Would someone besides Family Values simply (if it is possible) answer my question about whether or not at this juncture in history, once all is said and done, there is any brand of Islam besides radical Islam?

"I have to get up in the morning and fix a stove oven."

[...]

"FYI as well, the intellectual level of discussion on open threads, when CJ wasn't around, was often higher than this."

Posted by: Family Values at September 11, 2009 9:54 PM

Bye. Enjoy your crawl back to Chuckles and enjoy the high-minded discussions on threads when Charles and his cronies like "Sharmuta", "Killgore" and "Madaura" aren't around.

R_not, actually one doesn't have to go to the supernatural to find a suitable villain for the Leftist:

"From what I find - liberals 'eat up' stories about evil vs good on TV but cannot imagine that it exists in real life. They imagine the evil to be some ugly creature, or vampires"

Leftists are quite happy to locate all evil in the worst monster of all: The White Western Man.

So family values, if you find someone you agree with they are 'first class'?

I went to a speech given by Walid Shoebat this past weekend at a Jewish Community Center (I am a Catholic) and he said one thing that really resonated with the Jews because afterwards they were ready to do something. (they were going to meet about what they should do)

But, Walid said something to the effect of the Jewess who did her part during Hitler's reign who saved hundreds of children. Who eventually ended up in a concentration camp and who lived, but her sister died. She stood up and did what she could in the face of the evil of her day.

And now where are the Jews standing up and fighting the evil of our day? They cannot grasp the idea that they should start learning about islam and what it is about, that they should not appease/apologize for it. They cannot grasp that thinking they should just ignore it and hope that it will go away and not bother them is the wrong thing to do.

Walid had some things to say to the Christians too, but since he was in a Jewish center he tried to wake them up to what the evil of our day is. And he had first had experience in knowing the hatred for the Jews that muslims hold just because the koran tells them to hate.

What to do about islam? Make sure they do not put organizations like the MSA in our schools, or establish sharia laws (in banking, or any of our laws), etc. All these things are tied to the Muslim brotherhood, but your thinking is just going to let them further their dreams of establishing sharia laws more and more, and believe me - you don't want to be subjugated to them because they don't take to Jews very well in dhimmi status, and they only have two options if one is an atheist and that is death or conversion. Look at the Middle East today and you will see the numbers of Jews, and Christians, dwindling due to persecution, death, etc.

R_not, you might be wasting your breath, since Family Values already apparently said he doesn't think Islam is evil -- so what's to worry?

Hesperado - you are right. I forgot that I now am a terrorist! Our politicians are having dinner with the real islamic terrorists tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, and telling us we are un-American terrorists if we disagree with them. And our media - what a bunch of moronic, useless waste of airwaves. Even Fox news is being bought up by Saudi Wahabbists.

By the way, Schwarzenkennedy and my Assemblyman, Tom Torlakson, and many other California politicians had dinner with the same ilk that Obama had dinner with - terrorists with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

It made me want to puke.

R_not

I happen to agree. And Israel must remain officially Jewish. At least until such time as the Muslims evolve into liberal pluralists. Or the Messiah comes, whichever happens first :)

BUT, if the Muslims were really multicultural and embraced secular values for real then much of what Israel does now could not be justified. So not so simple.

Family Values,

You asked Wellington "What's your beef?" He then asked you what you meant.

You haven't given him an adequate reply.

Why don't you do so now? It should only take you 5 minutes.

Hesperado:

It was a pun. I even explained it. Beef Wellington is a French gourmet dish.

Too many Jews are liberal pluralists and that is why we see Jews in the West just letting Muslims have their way instead of taking an active stance and doing something to help stop their advance.

All you are doing is labeling political correctness and multiculturalism, mixed with socialism, to sound like it is savvy. It is all bunk.

Maybe when you finally crack open some books on islam - its history past and present and its islamic texts - you will find out that concept in islam doesn't exist. They work to the end of making themselves dominant, and they work on it tirelessly because they actually believe they will get to their orgy in the sky. And if they do not work tirelessly to that goal they believe they will go to hell.

It doesn't matter what you believe - it is what they believe. They declared war on us decades ago. And the Muslim Brotherhood has been working in our shores since the 1960s infiltrating. we did not declare war on them. and now we have people like you who just cannot fathom that they don't think like you do. That they would just willingly accept 'liberal pluralism'. Heck, they don't even have the concept of forgiveness, or human being being applied to non-muslims let alone 'liberal pluralism'.

I wrote: "BUT, if the Muslims were really multicultural and embraced secular values for real then much of what Israel does now could not be justified."

Note, however, that if my grandmother had runways she'd be an airport.

Family Values,

Why don't you like the word "evil"?

Too many Jews are liberal pluralists and that is why we see Jews in the West just letting Muslims have their way instead of taking an active stance and doing something to help stop their advance.

All you are doing is labeling political correctness and multiculturalism, mixed with socialism, to sound like it is savvy. It is all bunk.

Maybe when you finally crack open some books on islam - its history past and present and its islamic texts - you will find out that concept in islam doesn't exist. They work to the end of making themselves dominant, and they work on it tirelessly because they actually believe they will get to their orgy in the sky. And if they do not work tirelessly to that goal they believe they will go to hell.

It doesn't matter what you believe - it is what they believe. They declared war on us decades ago. And the Muslim Brotherhood has been working in our shores since the 1960s infiltrating. we did not declare war on them. and now we have people like you who just cannot fathom that they don't think like you do. That they would just willingly accept 'liberal pluralism'. Heck, they don't even have the concept of forgiveness, or human being being applied to non-muslims let alone 'liberal pluralism'.

Helloooo
I know I'm a newbie but because I am I'm looking for confirmation or not of the danger I see by making a distinction between radical Islam and some other kind of Islam (at this immediate juncture in history). It seems to me to be especially important since this so-called distinction SEEMS to be being made people like David Horowitz and the team who made the documentary, Obsession. If this is a non-issue, tell me to bugger-off or go play in a corner and I'll leave you to your fisticuffs.

esperado wrote: "Family Values,

Why don't you like the word "evil"?"

It overgeneralizes about 1.2 billion people and it's unscientific. Religion is an anthropological phenomenon,it's something that people do, it's about their values and their view of the world. The Muslim world is in transition, it faces challenges---even Bin Laden would say that, though his diagnosis would be a bit different from mine. Islam is very dangerous right now and we need to stand up to it, but just calling it evil just blows up the problem into a caricature that stands in the way of practical, rational action. If Islam is evil and 1.2 billion people in the world are evil then what course of action does that lead to? Nuking them all?

Since muslims don't make any distinction in islam between radical and moderate - only believers, unbelievers, and hypocrites (muslims who don't wage jihad or give of their wealth), then neither do I.

It is in their koran.

And as for family values, the junk that Israel has to do this or that and the muslims will stop is just total bunk.

When you crack open the islamic texts and history of islam you will find that they were doing the things they do against israel, and against the west, and India, and Africa WAAAAAY before the USA had a foreign policy in the Middle East and quite often WAAAAY before the USA was even a nation, or discovered.

Slavery still exists in islam because it is in the koran. Jihad exists in islam because it is in the koran - and it 97% of the islamic texts teach the violent kind. And if a muslim doesn't wage jihad, or give of his/her wealth, then they are labeled hypocrites and told they are going to get the same fate as us unbelievers - the fires of hell. In fact, they are never assured of salvation unless they die while killing unbelievers. Then the community celebrates (as they did worldwide after 9/11) and they are on a fast track to their orgy in the sky.

Wake up! Read, and stop defending the indefensible.

islam_is_islam --

Different people here have different answers to your question. My answer is that there is no difference between "radical Islam" and "Islam". The problem is Islam. Islam itself is extremist, supremacist, evil, unjust, and dangerous. And it has been this way for 1,400 years.

islam_is_islam --

Different people here have different answers to your question. My answer is that there is no difference between "radical Islam" and "Islam". The problem is Islam. Islam itself is extremist, supremacist, evil, unjust, and dangerous. And it has been this way for 1,400 years.

Whoever brought up wife beating as evidence that Islam is intrinsically evil: Christian societies used to accept it and it was often justified on scriptural grounds. It really hasn't been so long, either, since it was like that.

Family Values,

You ask,

"If Islam is evil and 1.2 billion people in the world are evil then what course of action does that lead to? Nuking them all?"

This is irrelevant to the question of whether it's evil or not. Just because you don't like one potential response to the answer doesn't mean the answer is wrong. You are thinking childishly. If you agree that Islam is evil, the sky isn't going to fall. Don't worry -- white people aren't going to start rounding up precious brown Muslims and genociding them. Just answer the question rationally: Is Islam evil? Is a belief system that believes in beating women, in killing apostates, in hating people outside its system -- is that belief system evil or not? It's a simple question? We don't have to "nuke" em based on your answer.

Look, Hesperado---we have 1.2bn people in the world in various forms of Muslim culture. I wish they were all Methodists or Reform Jews, but they're not. So what do you do? Treating it as a monolithic evil leads nowhere.

"Don't worry -- white people aren't going to start rounding up precious brown Muslims and genociding them."

We're back to the racist subtext again. That's it. Goodnight.

The racist subtext was anticipating what's in your mind.

If anyone is interested in sharing some time with me, please feel free to comment at "dag." I'm in a musical mood today: "Lead Pipe."

Anywho, Family Values seems to be at the deep end of the asymptotic pool, if not down where the PC MC sharsk are. I'm not sure why he's here at all. What is it about Jihad Watch that attracts him, if he's so concerned about all those precious Muslims?

"Islam is very dangerous right now and we need to stand up to it, but just calling it evil just blows up the problem into a caricature that stands in the way of practical, rational action."

Islam has been dangerous since mohammed went to Medina and found that waging war against the infidels not only got him untold wealth and slaves - he got people to finally treat him like a 'king tut'.

The kind of practical and rationa action that has been going on today with the 'liberal pluralists' in charge is to muddy the waters of islam and the intentions of its adherents. We can't say jihad, islamic terrorist, etc. Well I do since I am not going to accept the stupidity of the 'liberal pluralists' when it comes to the future of our children - we can just sit back and let them have their way as they do in every single country that has appeased/apologized for them. They end up muslim donkey holes.

Even Turkey - every one thinks is an example of a peaceful nation?!?! How many know it is Mullahs in Iran that control and have the power over Ahamadinejad and those mullahs are Turkish controlled?!

Everywhere else our media doesn't report the violence until the muslims start their wailing and whining and claims of victimhood. It is the same whenever Israel finally strikes back. Not one peep over the atricities and violence the muslims perpetrate against others.

How many know that the Pakistani government was complicit in the Mumbai Terrorist attacks? I bet not too many since the media is controlled by 'liberal pluralists'.

'Liberal pluralists' are nothing but fools who play to the hands of the terrorists such as the ones connected to the Muslim Brotherhood.

As for rational - well, you can't deal with someone rationally if you don't know them and from the notes that I have read of family values I would say that knowing about islam is the last thing that he has done. And he tells us that we are not the 'first class' brains here.

I love it when 'liberal pluralists' call me names. Or when muslims call me names. It is usually their attempt at projecting of what they are onto me. Sit back and take note of the names, and labels, they use to categorize anyone who doesn't agree with them. It is interesting.

Hesperado, I asked myself the same question. I will also say that his name sounds like what I hear muslims say all the time - the West has no family values and they have all the family values. Of course, the definitions are totally different, but hey - beat 'em up, "honor kill" 'em, stone 'em, and do what you want to them.

I am not saying he is a muslim, but the thought crossed my mind a few times because of his id he chose.

I wouldn't feel too bad - 'liberal pluralists' have little patience with those who disagree with them. Usually the name calling, and bashing, comees when they have little else.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XSBZ8YE76g&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ebing%2Ecom%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dnat%2Bking%2Bcole%2Bsmile%26first%3D61%26docid%3D1053799285518%26mid%3D598E38053642AECEBDA8598E38053642AECEBDA&feature=player_embedded#t=204

family values, does the 'separation of church and state' sound familiar?

Do not make our kids learn their koran, pray/act like a muslim, take on muslim names, or visit mosques, etc. If they do that to our kids then we should be demanding that the muslims do the same for Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, etc. But the ACLU, and 'liberal pluralists' are silent when it comes to islam.

Tell the truth about islam in our history books and stop with the fairy tales. Islam is a bloodthirsty, imperialistic movement that is still going on. they have committed genocide against Armenians, helped Hitler (in fact gave him the idea) of exterminating the Jews, and their goals is to make islam dominate and subjugate/kill/convert the rest of us. Sorry if that offends anyone - but that is what islam is about.

Stop catering to a religion in financial institutions since sharia finance was nothing but a Muslim Brotherhood 'invention' in the 20th century. Us infidels should make up rules for a financial 'something or other' to benefit us and demand the institutions honor it - OR STOP DOING IT WITH MUSLIMS ONLY!!

Stop appeasing muslims when they demand segregation - or demand the places who cater to them give us the same rights of 'Christian only', 'Jewish only' prayer rooms, bathrooms, etc.

Call the ones found to be terrorst, a terrorist. Jihad is jihad.

Clean out those over 30 compounds around the USA of Muslim only areas. Have muslims take 'sensitivity training' in regards to them learning how to tolerate others. Tell them to take off the tents when in courtrooms, for pictures of licenses, when they drive, etc - or else they get fined. We don't want to hear their wailing and whining. If their men are unable to control themselves then put them in some psychiatrist's office to help them to learn how to control their lusts, anger, etc.

Do you get the drift? Learning about islam certainly gave me some alternatives to violence - which is the only thing that you seem to be able to wrap your mind around.

R_not, Hesperado

Thank you for replying. As I grope my way out of the fog instilled by the propaganda of institutionalized schooling and self-serving apathy, I notice that it is getting easier to call something what it is without emotionally checking my PC meter for the level of offense I've caused.

Family Values
I can now say that Islam is evil and know that this statement does not generalize to mean that all 1.2 muslims worldwide are evil. I can distinguish the sin from the sinner or the message from the messenger. Evil is found in Islam itself; those adherents of Islam who do what Mohammed did yeild objectively evil fruits.

Being a non-commenting reader of JW for the last 3 or 4 years has been a great help to getting out of the fog.
Thank you again.

Dogmatists have no arguments, so they call names or "evil" labels those with whom they disagree. This is as true of pseudo-liberals like the ones kowtowing to the Muslim Brotherhoods agenda and Arab oil money, as it is of fanatical religious craven anthropomorphs who think the whole world who disagrees with their barbaric creed are evil. Evil is as evil does, so no dogmatist argument holds any sway on reasonable minds, except what they do. What they do for their fake prophet and moon-god has proven they are evil, slavers, booty hunters, rapers, mutilators and destroyers of family life and values. Islam has done evil, and that is what people saw on 9/11, the evil of Islamic dogma in action.

Muslims, their 1.2 billion born into that miserable cult, have only one hope, and that is to leave it, let it go, and join the rest of humanity as normal human beings. Let go, use your reason and see your evil dogma for what it is, evil, and become human again.

All Muslims who support Islam are evil.

Now, was that so hard?

IMO it is sad that 9/11 wasn't the wake up call it SHOULD have been for the western democracies.

What we should be doing is celebrating the victory of September 11th 1683. The Battle of Vienna. Letting the Islamists know that they will be halted again and driven from our lands if they don't behave.
Instead our governments are just handing over to them.

''Indeed, faith should bring us together."
-- Obama in his Cairo Speech on Islam and Muslims

Muslims are not interested in bringing faiths together. They want to be the only one. Omamma's running logo. ''A change you can believe in'' ? Since then, his dogma has been one of pushing Islam so you can believe in it. Using His right to taqiyya as he acts like a Christian to set up Islam in America, being supported by the strength and wealth of that faith while He destroys American's faith in its own foundations and constitution.
Islam is a Trojan horse filled with boa constrictors. Americans are asleep in the light. How soon we forgot what we said we would never forget.

"Whoever brought up wife beating as evidence that Islam is intrinsically evil: Christian societies used to accept it and it was often justified on scriptural grounds. It really hasn't been so long, either, since it was like that."

Posted by: Family Values at September 11, 2009 10:52 PM

Wow, Charles really must have a tight grip on this lad's melon, if he thinks that offering tu quoque arguments, with weak scriptural support at best passes as debate here.

So Christianity had, in your opinion, a troubled PAST history with regards to the treatment of women, so therefore we must endure the same or worse misogyny scripturally inherent in Islam today and for the unforseeable future?

Try again.

Posted by: islam_is_islam at September 11, 2009 10:37 PM

My answer is posed as two questions.

Ask yourself why there is so much hoopla made by Muslims and Islam apologists alike about the distinction between Islam and "radical" Islam?

And then ask your self why Islam is the only major religious belief that requires this distinction to even exist?

That will answer your own question.

From Serge Trifkovic's "The Sword of the Prophet", pp. 207-208 of the paperback edition, a statement that I believe to be completely true and correct:

“The fruits of attempted escape from the shackles of natural morality are as predictable as they are grim, for the Muslims no less than for their victims: both are enslaved, brutalized and dehumanized by Islam.

"The all-pervasive lack of freedom is the hallmark of the Muslim world.

"Discrimination against non-coreligionists and women of all creeds,
racism,
slavery,
virulent antisemitism,
and cultural imperialism
can be found – individually or in various combinations – in different cultures and eras.

"Islam alone has them all at once, all the time, and divinely sanctioned at that.”

"There is no presumed equality of different people’s claim to life, liberty or any pursuit at all in Islam.”