Spencer: The Railroading of Geert Wilders

The fact that you are not allowed to be called as an expert witness says everything Mr. Spencer.

Do not give up the fight Mr. Spencer and Mr. Wilders - keep going. Many of us are doing our best to help you.

To Geert supporters, check out the following and explain why Hitler's Mein Kampf can be banned, but not the much more vile and deadly Koran.

Hitler and Nazis look like angelic little old ladies compared to Mohammed and Muslims

How does 'ol Mo stand up to Buddha, Moses, Jesus and Confucius?

An excellent piece.

It is not exaggerating to say that the Geert Wilders trial is a defining moment in the history of Western civilization.

Unsurprisingly, therefore, it has been pretty much ignored by the BBC.

Geert Wilders needs to be left alone, and this silly trial and its underlying charges must end. Whatever issues there may be with his views, there is no basis for the power of civil authority to be brought down on him.

By the way, Jew Lover [nice to know somebody here loves me!], do you really want to start scrutinizing Moses?

"And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males."

"And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire. And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts."

"And Moses said unto them, Have you saved all the women alive?"

"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

Fairuzfan, strengthening one's social group at the expense of those deemed "backwards", "unfit", "reactionary", or whatever is an old established rule. And, if you'd read the Old Testament a little more carefully, you might have noticed that God did not spare Israel and Judah a similar fate when--tempted by the women "that have known man"--they followed the same abominations that the nations around them followed, and ended up in the Babylonian captivity.

Besides, for those of us who believe that M'shiach has come, we look back on the Old Testament history knowing that our last divine marching orders are "make disciples" (Mt. 28:19), and pray that God does not so see our world that it deserves the kinds of judgements which God meted out to Midian and the Seven Nations of Canaan.

God was at work preparing a people through whom redemption would come to our fallen, sinful planet by a wide number of means that worked themselves out over millennia (Miriam/Mary the mother of Jesus was NOT the sister of Moses, as the Qu'ran might lead you to believe, but lived about 1400 years later). Why don't you stop your kicking and railing against the God who made you and accept that He became flesh, made atonement for your sins on the cross, and was raised from the dead as the firstfruits of God's eternal triumph?

Why am I reminded of the "trial" of Joan d' Arc?

People - we all know that "fairuzfan" is an insult-slinging Mohammedan. An "enfeebled lackey," as he so enjoys calling others, among other ad hominem insults. He was esp. rude and vile to champ on a previous thread, as well as to myself and others here on JW.

As for your Moses comment, Mohammedan, I hope that a real Jew here will take you on. Yes, the Old Testament has violence, everyone knows that. However, it's not *eternal* violence, such as this Jihad verse from the "Mein Korampf":

"Kill non-Muslims wherever you find them. Lie in wait and ambush them, seize and capture them using every stratagem of war." - Qur'an 9:5

That command is for-all-time, never-ending, as you well know. The Islamic Jihad NEVER ends until:

"Fight then against them till strife be at an end, and the religion be all of it Allah's." - Qur'an 8:40

Your Mohammedan ideology is simply mass-murder until Islam is the only "religion," and "allah" the only god worshipped. And I do mean "god," not God. Islam is like Fascism and Nazism, combined. Islam is a plague on humanity. Eventually Islam, like Fascism and Nazism, will be crushed. That will be a day of colossal celebration for all freedom-loving peoples of the world.

Nonetheless, this decision indicates the hollowness of Dutch justice and the court's bias against Wilders.

Oh, it's nothing against Wilders, although they woulda preferred he keep his mouth shut, self-censorhip is the most effective censorship and all that. Give up one for the team.

*** 5:41 ***

There's no more bias against poor Geert than a cabal of shaman priests would have against a goat about to be sacrificed at the altar. The altar this time is the biggest death altar of all: Islam (in all its relentless unreasonable demands).

I try to put myself in the position of those who are intent on prosecuting Geert Wilders. They have said that the truth does not matter. What they care about is results. The results that Mr. Wilders is achieving in catalyzing the once-sleeping Dutch has put them on the defensive. They want him broken. They want Holland to be a country without a national consciousness. This same mindset is pervasive at the BBC and in much of the British ruling class. Hallmarks of this group is a desire for power and a deep rejection of their own national roots. The trial of Geert Wilders is psychodrama of the highest order. He represents all that they despise -- imagine, a Dutch man in Holland standing up for himself and his culture! What temerity! He needs to be made an example of lest others think that they too can speak out. Who are these people who are set on this agenda of repression? How did they become this way? What are the psychodynamics of those in the West who are intent on bringing down their own national groups? What is it about western societies at this point in our history that we have produced these people who lust for power and then misuse it so badly? The answers lie doubtless in issues of self-hatred, overcompensation for their own racism towards minorities, reverse racism against whites, and hatred of masculine energy as it rises in its own defense. Because we are dealing here with deep-seated issues of psychopathology it is hard to get through to this elite group. They are well-defended psychologically and highly educated. Their power over others is a compensation for so much that is lacking in their lives, and that is why they cling to it desperately. They know how to work the system, to create new terms when needed, and to define the new rules of the brave new world they hope to birth. However, their Achilles heel is the fact that they are not in the world of reality. The sham society that they have pasted together with all of their repressive laws and regulations is destined to come unglued as a popular revolution sweeps them and their haughty pretensions of moral superiority out into the gutter where the tiresome mess belongs. They have miscalculated in putting Wilders on trial. Perhaps this reveals their unconscious wish to finally get what they deserve.

"Yet despite the fact that he has nothing like their numbers, wealth, or resources, he threatens to topple their entire multicultural house of cards – for he has on his side a weapon that all of their power cannot defeat, the weapon of truth. And so they are desperate to silence him, and end forever his truth-telling about jihad and Islamic supremacism." - RS

Why in the world the Dutch give a cr*p about Islam I have no idea.

Have they all gone insane? Mass insanity?

http://newstime.co.nz/2010/political-show-process-geert-wilders.html
Pat Condell 06:30 “… This man (Geert Wilders) is a HERO!!! Not a criminal! And it’s time, the rest of us stood up and said so, loud and clear, because …”

Among those who cherish freedom, Robert's warning that "It is not exaggerating to say that the Geert Wilders trial is a defining moment in the history of Western civilization" will be as long and as dolorously remembered as Sir Edward Grey's lament on the eve of World War I:

"The lamps are going out all over Europe; we shall not see them lit again in our lifetime."

Kepha,

I'm well-versed on the context and theological contigency regarding the material in Numbers/Bamidbar. That doesn't change the fact that it is there and that it happened. And theological fulfillment does not apply to Judaism with regard to this as it does with Christianity.

By the way, I do accept and affirm Christ, contrary to the implication in your post.

Rahman bin Rahman,

Excellent post!

Robert is absolutely correct. Under total liberal/progressive control, courts are nothing more than kangaroo courts much like the old Soviet courts many years ago. The old Communist trials became well known as show trials. The trial outcome was decided in advance and the show is mearly to fool the public. Everything in countries like this is at the convience of the elite rulers. It really resembles the medival system of justice and when might they bring back the inquisition...secular style.

I sincerely hope that Geert will avoid prison and where are the people of the Netherlands. Is this the kind of country that those people really want?

Hans Jansen's work on Islam is superb and groundbreaking, and he will be an excellent witness, as will Admiraal and the exemplary freedom fighter Wafa Sultan.

I haven't checked, but is the Biblical reference Fairuzfan gives accurate? I do realize that the violence of the Old Testament is not to apply to Christian's actions today, unlike Islam, therefore making Christianity a vastly superior religion to Islam. However, trying to put such actions as those referenced as being carried out by Moses in a justifiable and positive light through convoluted reasoning ("we cannot understand Gods long-term plan and the reasons for his actions", or "the innocents would not be punished in the hereafter, only the guilty" etc.) is the same kind of reasoning our enemies the Muslims use. Christianity today is a vastly different moral guide than the old testament of 3000 years ago, and I realize the ways of the Old Testament do not apply to the present age. But slaying "the male little ones" as God's will, was a vile justification for the murder of innocents 3000 years ago, and it remains a hideous, vile reference today. Reading it made me sick to my stomach.
And please, let's not get into another biblical passage quotation contest. The Old Testament is full of violence, which cannot be denied. To make a valid point, we need to stress that it is ISLAM TODAY, unlike Christianity that STILL justifies such evil violence in the name of ALLAH.

A (true) coalition of the (truly)willing has to be assembled comprised of anyone who opposes Islam, without regards to their political or religious affiliation. Whether one is left or right-leaning,Islam seeks to subsume you and eliminate the existence of your beliefs, your freedoms, and ultimately your life. Muslims are taught that they are rewarded for killing infidels. Anyone who considers themselves non-Muslim has to band together and form a cohesive strategy on how to eliminate the threat. It might be a good idea to create Arabic (our Coptic/Maronite/Assyrian brothers and sisters will be instrumental in this!), Persian, Urdu, Turkish, Malay, etc,. websites (ala the "VOA" of times past) educating people in Muslim countries themselves about the repressive nature of the religion...oops...I mean political ideology that is Islam and how it destoyed their ancestors cultures. And "political ideology" is exactly how it should be portrayed, because it is the most accurate description, requiring a proportionate response--an Opposition Party to Islam. Islam and it's adherents have been, and are on a war-footing with us ever since it's satanic inception-they are like a hive consciousness whose every exertion is dedicated to the elimination of the "infidel other"-ie, non-Muslims, and eventually art and culture itself, rendering the world into an nightmarish and post-apocalyptic cross between the Taliban and Mad Max...with no hope or renewal, just time to wait for the imaginary "dajjal" to appear and usher in the imaginary end-time of Islamic eschatology.

I, Kafir.

Various comments have been made comparing the Wilders trial to the Stalinist "show-trials" of the 30's and 40's. The prosecutors and judges of the Wilders trial would do well to remember what happened to many of those involved in the show-trials: once they had served their purpose, they in turn were executed or sent to the Gulag. Virtually every head of the KGB and its predecessors ended up killed at Stalin's orders. The same fate awaits these Dutch tools of the Islamic conquest once they have enabled the Islamic victory.

When all the arguing about scriptures is over, the question remains: when the knife is at your throat, do you want to survive or not? What if we decide that yes, we Christians (or non-Muslims) have a dreadful history and are awful people, are Muslims so much better that they deserve to subjugate us or wipe us out?

As for the Dutch, I don't know many but the ones I have met are more embarrassed by Wilders than they are by the results of their multicultural tolerance. Has anyone done some kind of survey about Dutch attitudes? Or would such a survey be impossible to conduct?

OLD TESTAMENT = DESCRIPTIVE

koran = PROSCRIPTIVE
============================================

The vile, self-hating fairuzfan (who is NO JEW, but an end-of-the-world, self-annointed Catholic) is a complete intellectual poseur.

His latest effort to produce moral equivalence between the OT and koran is so silly, it has been debunked before so many times, that it simply shows that this nasty little deceiver doesn't bother reading what anyone else posts.

KipHamilton: The passages are from chapter 31 of the Book of Numbers.

Yankel: So, howya doing, there? Well it seems I've gone up in the world in your estimation, from being a lying Muslim and miserable piece of shit to now an end-of-the-world, self-annointed Catholic. Going soft on me? Is this post from some squishy impostor, or are you sending subtle hints you want to make up with me?

But hard as it is to take, I am nonetheless a Jew. Sorry Yankel, if that somehow grates on you. But if you're ever feeling down, or don't think you're being nasty, idiotic or stupid enough, here's some famous dialogue you can practice with:

Various Peasants: Witch! A witch!
First Peasant: We have found a witch--may we burn her?
[Various calls to burn her.]
Sir Bedivere: How do you know she is a witch?
Peasants: She looks like one. [Various calls to burn her]
....
Sir Bedivere: What makes you think she's a witch?
First Peasant: Oh, she turned me into a newt.
Sir Bedivere: A newt?
First Peasant: I got better.
Second Peasant: Burn her anyway! Burn her!

Wellington, PG, Kiphamilton, Christian Soldier:

I do not look the other way or exculpate when it comes to the violence in the Old Testament. I stare it straight in the face. Hence, when I tremble for my country because I reflect that God is just, I am not simply spewing 4th of July rhetoric: my reading of the Scriptures, including the "scary stuff" convinces me that this is true.

PG, God did not tell the Israelites to wipe out the Canaanites because the Iraelites were more righteous, for the Israelites were a "stiffnecked people" (Dt. 9:1-7). And, certainly, the Mesopotamian nations that exiled Israel and Judah were not more righteous than Israel and Judah--indeed, Babylon is God's byword for immorality and idolatry. By the same token, the Muslim ability to challenge a proudly apostate Western world is no proof of Muslim moral superiority.

On the other hand, Jonah was sent to Nineveh to warn them that they were about to be overthrown. But, as Jonah parked himself outside the city to watch the fireworks, the Ninevites repented, and so were spared. When Jonah, upset that his prophecy did not come to pass and that the gourd plant that shaded him withered, complains to God, God replies:

"You had pity on a plant for which you have not labored, nor made it grow, which came up in a night and perished in a night. And should I not pity Nineveh, that great city, in which are more than one hundred and twenty-thousand persons who cannot discern between their right hand and their left, and also much livestock?" (Jonah 4:10-11--this, not the great fish, being the true point of the book).

We are in crisis--a fancy Greek word meaning "judgment"--yet we act more like Israel under Ahab and Omri than like the Ninevites who heard Jonah. We despie the cross of Christ through which redemption came to us no less than the Muslims, who declare that this event did not happen.

I put my bets on God being merciful, and resist Islamicization, no less than a Jeremiah might resist the cults of Bel and Marduk. But I know full well that God has the right to turn a proudly apostate culture in an empty ruin whenever He likes.

Actually, well put, Kepha.

Why can't everyone else take islam to trial for offending Christians and Jews?

"...the hollowness of Dutch justice and the court's bias against Wilders."

Hollowness is right! ...as "Dutch justice" has now aligned itself with the likes of evil islamic justice.

Justice? What justice?!

Wellington- Glad you agreed with me. I'm always glad when someone does that. However, when I have posted similar comments on Jihad Watch in the past, I have been pummeled, and I mean PUMMELED for them, even though I have NEVER equated modern Christianity with Islam, and have always maintained that Christianity is in every way a vastly superior religion.
My point has always been that it is not enough simply to quote violent passages from the Koran without giving evidence and arguing that, unlike Christian treachings concerning the Old Testament, in Islam those violent examples are meant to be models for behavior today.Without showing that in Christianity such passages in the Old Testament are no longer used as behavior models today, Muslims and their apologists will come back, every time, with "yes, but what about Moses ordering the killing of "all the male little ones" etc..
I hope that Geert Wilders,(one of my personal heroes) does quote the Koran during his trial. But he also needs to show the relevance of Koranic violence in todays Islamic teachings. If he doesn't, I can hear the prosecution clearly "and what about such and such violent passages in the Old Testament- why do you not equally condemn the Bible then"? No. The difference is, in Christianity, unlike Islam, such acts of violence are not acceptable in todays world.

On this OT OT (Off-Topic Old Testament) debate, I agree with kiphamilton and Wellington. However, regardless of the obvious ability of Jews and Christians (unlike Muslims) to evolve past theocratic militancy (which both did practice heavily for centuries), the problem remains that for literalist Jews and Christians, there is no way around the fact that the descriptions fairufzan adduces of God commanding mass slaughters, as well as the punishment of death for adultery and homosexuality, directly point to the God that Jews and Christians believe in -- including Jesus Christ Himself, being divinely one with God the Father who was the God directly involved, putatively, in those Old Testament slaughters and punishments.

At this juncture in the problem, the literalist Jews and Christians must either give up their literalism about the Old Testament and see those descriptions of battles, along with the testaments of divine command for them, as human narratives describing history and imputing divine inspiration to various historical forces and decisions, divine inspiration which is to be understood as figurative with the possibility of human error; or the literalist Jews and Christians must admit that the God they believe in directly ordered those grimly violent things.

If they do the latter, the question then becomes, why has the same God seen fit to stop doing what he was recounted in the Old Testament as doing so often for a good two millennia? The answer of the New Testament does not imply that the same God changed his mind; and yet the massive and substantive change in behavior that differentiates the first two millennia of God's covenant with man (approximately 2,000 B.C. to the birth of Christ) from the behavior documented by the last event of revelation (as recounted in the New Testament) logically indicates a change of mind -- unless, again, one relaxes the inerrantist literalism that produces this overall problem in the first place.

When I was working in The Netherlands, I had a Dutch colleague whose wife was a lawyer. She was aghast at the concept of a jury, where a bunch of legally untrained laymen would pronounce on a dispute.

The jury system was set up by the Magna Carta at Runneymead in 1213(?). The idea was and is that if anyone tried to create abusive laws, or carry out malicious prosecutions, a jury would simply find "not guilty", regardless of the law.

I bet Geert Wilders wishes Holland had a jury system...it would be "no contest."

The Netherlands is the country of Casper ten Boom and his courageous children who all watched the lamps go out there in the 1930's. They stood firm in the truth that God has created all humans and that makes each one of great value. Their resources were small, but their comprehension of what was required was great. They lived with oppression and terror; never-the-less risked their lives to save the lives of those who were hunted down by those in league with evil and cruelty.

Casper died at the hands of the Nazis as well as one of his daughters, his son and grandson. But he left a legacy which would be well to be heeded by the Dutch people today as Geert Wilders faces judgement. Courage and self-sacrifice is needed desperately and desperately found wanting in Holland, and in my country also.

Reading "The Hiding Place" by Corrie ten Boom gives me the erie sense of that history beginning to repeat itself over again now. The lamps are going out once more before our very eyes! I would despair, except for knowing Jesus Christ and knowing Him, I cannot despair!

Interesting question, GravenImage.

I hold my present-day legal views regarding Mr. Wilders' statements and activity based on the general form of government that prevails in the present-day West.

If you're asking me about what I would envision for Geert W. in a theocratic state of my choosing, we have to start with the premise that I am referring to a Catholic confessional state as my ideal form of government. And present, authoritative Catholic teaching would now call for the application of the theological teachings stated in Second Vatican Council's Dignitatis Humanae to be applied as part of its laws. So we're not talking about an exact carbon copy of the High Middle Ages.

Given all that, if Mr. Wilders were a citizen of a Catholic confessional state of my design, based on what I think that would look like and based on my understanding of what Wilders has said, done, advocated etc. I do not see why he would be arrested or otherwise legally penalized for anything, or in anyway legally restrained from continuing to say and do what he has been saying and doing. But if he has been calling for the 'banning' of the Quran, whatever that exactly means, I don't think that proposal would go anywhere.

Now, if we are setting all government power here aside, and if Mr. Wilders were a Catholic, I think the situation of him and the Church could have its gray areas. I imagine it would be a judgment call by Church authorities, depending upon what Wilders is saying and doing, as to whether there could be any ecclesiastical penalities or admonishments involved.

Here we're talking purely about Mr. Wilders personal standing in the Catholic Church [assuming he's a Catholic], not anything that would involve the Catholic confessional state government itself.

Although insofar as there may be any special prerogatives that Catholics in good standing have compared to other Catholics and non-Catholics in my Catholic confessional state model [again all of this would be within the context of Dignitatis Humanae], those could, I suppose, be in jeopardy for Mr. Wilders, depending upon the Church's view of the matter.

KipHamilton, a compelling and important subject you raise. My sympathies. To take a general, very imprecise, but nonetheless useful analogy, no Menshevik should ever think that their common ground with Bolsheviks will win them any consideration or respect when the differences move front and center.

Never forget, as I pointed out to one poster on another thread some time ago, that it's not what you're against that counts, at the end of the day, it's what you're for that matters.

LivingEngine,

So what's wrong with me donating to Life for Relief and Development? You don't approve? Do you know anybody who works there or what the organization does? Do you engage in charitable relief efforts and work that are vastly superior to what they do?

I'm pretty sure they're doing more for the suffering of Haiti than Jihad Watch is.

Or is having poor people fend for themselves without any assistance from others the way you enjoy the world and think it ought to be?

Anyway, if you're so interested in my charitable giving, then in the interest of open disclosure for you and everyone else, the following are Islamic and Arab charities that I donated to in 2009:

Life for Relief and DEvelopment
Islamic Relief USA
Zakat Foundation of America
Palestine Children Relief Fund

In case you think I'm too skewed in my giving, the following are Jewish and Israeli charities I donated to in 2009:

ORT
Magen David Adom
Chazon Yeshaya
Yad Eliezer
Colel Chabad

In addition, I gave to a host of Catholic charitable organizations and religious entities, as well as a few non-Catholic Christian organizations and a number of purely secular ones in the microfinancing field.

If you ever bother to learn anything about the true nature of true charity, and that doesn't mean the less than enlightened views of Mr. Fitzgerald, you can come to understand that it entails giving assistance to those in need apart from theological and political differences. And, yes, even apart from potentially serious geo-politically related clashes of life and death.

The fact that I'm no longer an adherent of Judaism, and have become an anti-Zionist politically, doesn't mean that Jews and Israelis in material need are not deserving of help, however Zionistic they may be.

On the glorious day that you're actually capable of understanding this, perhaps, then, you're worthy of having a conversation with me.

Fairfuzfan- While on the subject of being on the same side of an issue with those you are uncomfortable with, as an anti-zionist, (Jewish though you may be) you must realize that the term "Zionist" has become a substitute for "Jew" for many anti-Jewish individuals and groups, Islamic and right wing as well. Anti-Zionist, for so many, is really just a substitute for anti-Jewish. If you read some of the European newspapers and blogs, the vitriol aimed at Jews, usually thinly disguised by using the term "Zionist", is shocking in this day and age.
My experience with many Muslims I have known, is that even if they are not extremist, or even particularly serious about their religion, the one thing many hang on to is an absolute hatred of Jews- Jews as a people, not just Jews because they support Israel. As you so aptly pointed out, it is not what you're against that counts, it's what your for.

Let me also add that it is not just Islamic and right wing groups which use the term "anti-Zionist" as a substitute for anti- "Jewish", but the left has been doing it as well.

http://www.avraidire.eu/?s=fitna

Vous pouvez trouver ici le film Fitna de Geert Wilders en version française sous-titrée. Ainsi que beaucoupde vidéos de Robert Spencer traduites en français.

http://www.avraidire.eu/?s=fitna

Wellington,

It's not just that "the modern West owes a great deal to Christendom" -- it's that the modern West is Christendom: as a butterfly is a caterpillar, as water is ice, as a grown Wellington is the younger Wellington; etc.

KipHamilton,

Looks like you're making it through without much of any blasting after all!

Yes, while I realize that anti-Zionism does get played as a guise for true anti-Semitism, I tend to think that's the exception and not the rule. I certainly hope so. But even if I should be wrong, it is still out of bounds to always equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, an equation which has plenty of support in the Jewish community. And an equation that all too convienently places a number of morally problematic aspects of the Zionist movement outside of open discussion and examination.

I think the Arab/Islamic view towards Jews is no less complicated than the relationship between Americans of European background and African Americans, despite Mr. Spencer's attempted simplifications. While genuine anti-Semitism is certainly there, my experiences in my travels, if we accept that people are being reasonably candid with me, is, again, the exception not the rule.

To take one current relevant example, Iran is excoriated in Zionist circles as being Nazi-like at this point, and Ahmedinejad as the next Hitler. However deplorable Iranian government conduct may be on a number of issues, the fact is that Iran has thousands of Jewish residents who have not been carted off and exterminated in 31 years of Islamic theocratic rule. Whatever else one may say about Iran, Nazi has no place in the discussion on that basis alone. No, Jews in Iran don't have all the rights they should, but they are treated no differently than Christians and Zoroastrians, and actually better than Bahais who enjoy no official religious minority status.

And as bizarre as it may sound, from my exposure to Iranians, even some relatively hard-line political and religious ones, there seems to be a certain paradoxical pride in their having this Jewish community, the largest one now in the Islamic world. It seems to be something to show off regarding Iranian national heritage and pride, as well as defending their Islamic regime as not being anti-Semitic.

If the country now inhabiting what was the section of Arab Palestine west of the Jordan river were founded and inhabited by Aleuts, Eskimos, Cherokees, or Amish, instead of Jews, I don't think the Arab/Islamic reaction would be much milder, though it wouldn't have the features of over 1,000 years of Islamic history, thought, sensibility and psychology to draw upon for invective and hostility.

And among Western Leftists, I think the opposition is less anti-Jewish and more from a vein of an anti-American or anti-Western-imperialist mindset that they tend to work from. Again, if it were Eskimos or Amish, I don't think Leftist opposition would be much different or lowered.

Wellington,

"I'm not sure I'd go quite as far as you and equate Western Civilization with Christendom, though I concede your point is an arguable one. But don't forget about the classical strain, both Greek and Roman"

I guess it depends on how one defines Christendom. I define it as necessarily including the Graeco-Roman heritage, which would take care of your objection in that regard. If the modern West isn't Christendom at a later stage of evolution, then where did it come from? Outer space?

Darcy-We may disagree with him, but it should be recognized when Fairuzfan gets a punch in, rather than dismissing him. It doesn't do much good to simply call him names. When Jew_Lover asked how Mohammed "stands up" to Jesus, Moses, Buddha and Confucious,Fairuzfan answered the comparison with Moses quite well,witheringly in fact,with the horrific quotation from Numbers concerning Moses' slaying of the "little ones" and their mothers.Sadly, I will never think of Moses in the same way again, as I had missed that passage somehow.Of course I realize that such actions in the Old Testament have no relation to the practice of Christianity today, as I stated in my posts. There is too much name calling as a substitute for good argument.

BTW, Fairuzfan have you contributed to JihadWatch this month?

The last (I promise) posting on this Old Testament quotation about Moses. I can't get it out of my mind. Of course it is true that the New Testament replaced the Old, and the Old Testament laws were superceded by the teachings of Jesus, which is why Christianity is a vastly superior religion to Islam. I get that. However, even today's Chrisianity holds up Moses as one of the greatest and most Godly men in history (along with other bloody examples). It gives me pause that even modern, enlightened Christianity can hold up a man who ordered the execution of many, many children, "the male little ones" and their mothers, as a great, positive role model. Here on Jihad watch, similar passages from the Koran about Mohammed are constantly quoted (and rightly so) to show how horrific he was (and he was horrific, of course). Yes, Christ's new testament changed everything. But a mass killer of women and children as the Bible itself describes Moses to be held up as a great historical hero?