Lipstick? Eye shadow? You be the judge
Islamic supremacists are wholly intellectually bereft. They cannot answer the arguments of anti-jihadists, since anti-jihadists in general simply explicate what is in the Qur'an and Sunnah, and show how jihadists act upon these texts and teachings. So since they cannot engage their opponents on the level of ideas, they instead try to bludgeon them into silence. They do this either by ignoring us altogether, or by engaging in the Alinsky tactic of ridicule -- which allows them to adopt a posture of superiority, but only reveals their utter intellectual exhaustion and desperation.
Examples of this abound. Most recently, Islamic supremacist metrosexual Ahmed Rehab of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group with numerous ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, has responded to my pointing out a lie he told about never ducking debate with adolescent ridicule and abuse rather than substance.
Rehab's refusal to engage his opposition's arguments is a sign that he feels keenly his own intellectual vacuity. He knows that in light of it he can do nothing but ignore, mock, or try to bully people who speak the truth. Even the Soviet Union under Stalin was confident enough that its own people were sufficiently cowed, and that it had enough useful idiots among the intelligentsia abroad, that it was able to mount high-profile show trials of dissenters and Stalin's political rivals in the 1930s.
But by the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet regime had grown sclerotic, and had lost the assurance that its own people were still terrorized enough to keep silent, or that it could still count on a foreign intelligentsia willfully blind enough to defend the regime. And so instead of mounting flashy show trials, it packed off its opponents to mental hospitals under the cover of darkness. They simply didn't exist any longer. It was an effective tactic in the short run, as it certainly silenced their opponents of the day; in the long run, however, it was an expression of exhaustion, an admission of defeat.
But as Rehab, his fellow Islamic supremacist metrosexual Reza Aslan, and others practice these tactics, the implicit admission rings louder and clearer all the time: they have no arguments. They can't really explain away what's in the Qur'an and Sunnah -- the long-winded "refutations" and "proofs" that Islam is really a Religion of Peace™ are rendered hollow every day by the jihad news worldwide: if "Islamophobes" are really misunderstanding the peaceful teachings of Islam, then coincidence of coincidences, so are innumerable Muslims, including Islamic clerics and scholars, in exactly the same way.
Aslan, a Board member of a group that is often described as an apologist for Iran's bloody Islamic regime, has to lie about what I say in order to mount even the semblance of an argument. And Rehab in this piece has to bluster and sneer, because it is all that he can do.
They are cornered. They know it. They just hope you don't notice.
Ridicule, of course, is not always a sign of intellectual bankruptcy. Rehab and Aslan are ridiculous, and in their self-righteous posturing, preening self-importance, and fronting for moral evil, they richly deserve lampooning. Also, in their self-inflated pomposity, they cannot endure to be mocked. The difference is in whether or not one has substance to back up the ridicule. Aslan offers lies. Rehab offers bluster. There is virtually nothing of substance in Rehab's screed, but he does say: "Spencer, I never agreed to debate you in the first place, and it is highly unlikely that I ever will." Of course, I never said that he agreed to debate me; I merely pointed out that the ALA invited him to do so, and he refused -- as he himself admits here.
Rehab also complains about how I have ridiculed him, claiming that I have made "an allegation" that he wears "lipstick and eyeshadow." Actually, as you can see above, it's not an allegation, it's a photograph, taken undoctored from Rehab's website by Joe Kaufman. Lipstick? Eyeshadow? Looks like it to me.
Remember also that Rehab is a front man for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR operatives have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. Several of its former officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. Two of its other officials have made Islamic supremacist statements. CAIR also was involved in the Flying Imams' intimidation suit against the passengers who reported their suspicious behavior.
CAIR has attempted to intimidate the FBI and JTTF and dictate their choice of speakers, and in doing so retailed numerous false charges, defamation, distortions, and outright lies about me, SIOA, and Pamela Geller.
CAIR has a long record of duplicity and deception. Although it has received millions of dollars in donations from foreign Islamic entities, it has not registered as a foreign agent as required by the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), despite spreading Islamic supremacist propaganda within the United States.
Although it presents itself as a civil rights group, CAIR actually has numerous links to Islamic supremacist and jihad groups. CAIR founders Omar Ahmad and Niwad Awad (who still serves as CAIR's executive director) were present at a Hamas planning meeting in Philadelphia in 1993 where they and other Hamas operatives conspired to raise funds for Hamas and to promote jihad in the Middle East. CAIR has steadfastly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups.
Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror:
* Ghassan Elashi, founder of CAIR's Texas chapter, in 2009 received a 65-year prison sentence for funneling over $12 million from the Islamic charity known as the Holy Land Foundation to the jihad terrorist group Hamas, which is responsible for murdering hundreds of Israeli civilians
* Mousa Abu Marzook, a former CAIR official, was in 1995 designated by the U.S. government in 1995 as a "terrorist and Hamas leader." He now is a Hamas leader in Syria.
* Randall Royer, CAIR's former civil rights coordinator, in 2004 began serving a 20-year prison sentence for aiding al-Qaida and the Taliban against American troops in Afghanistan and recruiting for Lashkar e-Taiba, the jihadist group responsible for the 2008 Mumbai jihad massacres.
* Bassem Khafagi, CAIR's former community relations director, was arrested for involvement with the Islamic Assembly of North America, which was linked to al-Qaida. After pleading guilty to visa and bank fraud charges, Khafagi was deported.
* Rabih Haddad, a former CAIR fundraiser, was deported for his work with the Global Relief Foundation (which he co-founded), a terror-financing organization.
In 1998 Omar Ahmad, CAIR's co-founder and longtime Board Chairman, said: "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
After he received unwelcome publicity as a result of this statement, Ahmad denied saying it, several years after the fact. However, the original reporter, Lisa Gardiner of the Fremont Argus, stands by her story.
CAIR's spokesman Ibrahim Hooper once said: "I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future."
That's the group Rehab is connected with, and yet he adopts a posture of moral superiority. Only Leftist dupes will be fooled.
And finally, Rehab concludes:
And now for some irony. Spencer, you are claiming you are ready to debate anyone but that alas no one wants to debate you because no one can. But, is this actually true? Does the name Danios of Loonwatch ring a bell Spencer? You may be burying your head in the sand hoping no one will notice, but a simple Google search on "Robert Spencer debate" reveals your hypocrisy. How come you are ignoring an invitation from another blogger who has challenged you numerous times and whose articles shredding your arguments to pieces are all over the web without a peep of a rebuttal from you? Are you conceding defeat? Are you "running away?"
Sorry, I don't debate fictional characters or pseudonyms. "Danios of Loonwatch" can go debate Scot Harvath or Harold Robbins. I use my real name, have received numerous death threats, and cannot appear in public without guards, because so many coreligionists of "Danios of Loonwatch" misunderstand the teachings of his peaceful religion. What is "Danios of Loonwatch" afraid of? He knows that Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore can appear in public with no concern whatsoever, so why does he cower in the shadows?
In any case, "Danios of Loonwatch" has already discredited himself with his windy tu-quoque arguments about Christian doctrines that never existed and that no one has ever heard of, his defamation and outright lies about my owning domain names I never knew existed until he made the charge, and his refusal to acknowledge or correct false information he has posted. Debating such a compromised and dishonest individual would be a waste of time, but nonetheless, since Rehab invokes him and others have referred to his site recently, I am willing: if "Danios of Loonwatch" reveals his real name, finds a university willing to host the debate and contracts an impartial moderator, I'm ready when he is. But I won't be holding my breath.
And as for Rehab, he will no doubt continue to flail. And I will continue to shine the light of truth on him, Reza Aslan, and their unsavory and thuggish associates.
I'm sorry it's come to that. What a waste of a hunk! Looks like a U.S. military man. Yeah, looks like a good ole boy, a Yankee.
Does the name Danios of Loonwatch ring a bell Spencer?
Now that's funny...Loonwatch is a good name for that site...If you have good bug protection, and wear a plastic suit, you can watch the loons play...Same for its sister site 'Spencerwatch'...But watch out for the bugs...I don't recommend either of them...They are loaded with useless information, smear campaigns and leaping insects...
Debating Danio's is on the same level as debating Charles Mason about 'Helter Skelter'...
Bravo, Robert!
"Most recently, Islamic supremacist metrosexual Ahmed Rehab of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)".
Found in my dict:
Metrosexual = An urban-living fashion-conscious man; a heterosexual with many attributes commonly attributed to gay men.
Didn't CAIR should have push him over a tall building? wait, maybe there is another metrosexual member of CAIR who is his lover? :D
As far as eye shadow and lipstick, the picture is a bit peculiar..however if Ahmad Rehab would have elected to grace his eyes with eyeliner (arabic kohl), he wouldn't have been far off following the Sunna of his prophet..
"...or that it could still count on a foreign intelligentsia willfully blind enough to defend the regime."
As I know, Islam could still count on kaffir intelligentsia willfully blind enough to defend them.
Until the anonymous cockroaches that infest Loonwatch and the other sites come clean, and go public, they should not be taken seriously.
That Rehab acknowledges that site, speaks volumes. It is obvious that it is well-funded, but they certainly do not want anyone to know who is behind that front.
The illogical reasoning behind their anonymity was correctly denoted by Robert. Their supposed concern for protection of their identity from violent retribution from non-Muslims is a canard.
I can smell their fear from way over here.
Divine luck or stupidity..otherwise how can you explain the lucky break Islam is getting having this Armada of intelligentsia actively promoting it...Mo must be turning in his grave lamenting all the white Roman women (nessa al room) he is missing out on...sigh
how i wish there were an actual live debate (not edited beyond recognition) between this lowlife or any of the others (no shortage of , unfortunately that keep on bamboozling the idiotic representatives from the alphabet networks), and you, Mr. Spencer.
a debate where their hideous lies and twisting of the truth and just plain cowardice is exposed for all to see, and THAT should play on the news over and over...(instead of the idiotic behar-johnson storming out episode of (the view')
He's a jihadi and he's okay
works all night, sleeps all day
Likes to wear women's makeup
And hang around in bars!
Ah yes, Ahmed Rehab.
A proverbial giant among the self deluded islamobot hordes...
Or is he?...
And that is the real question at hand. Whether or not he and the other pisslamic front men and women are merely stuck deep in denial, or are touting their evil wares intentionally...
I am an ex-Muslim
http://www.considerationsofacanadianex-muslim.org
Tanstaafl-- I think he lost the choir of Mounties (and the girl) when he put the lipstick on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zey8567bcg
OH! I'm all aquiver and weak at the knees! You just KNOW His Royal Hirsuteness waxes his chest.
*snicker*
Take another look at that photo, JihadWatch commenters. He's also wearing foundation makeup in a tint much darker than his skin. Maybe he was drawn to Cover Girl, an inexpensive brand available at drugstores nationwide.
"Stupidity knows no colour or nationality. Tony Blair’s sister in law ‘reverts’"
Useful idiocy over at Vlad's place:
http://vladtepesblog.com/
Oh brotherrrrrrrrrrr. *rolls eyes*
As someone else has commented in a prior post regarding this tool: this is indeed one of the most disturbing photos of a devout follower of Islam ever posted anywhere.
The fact that this guy is as queer as a two dollar bill makes it even more bizarre, given the supreme masculanity that Muslim men project to the world, especially wrt to their fine record of defending and protecting the rights of their women.
Given this example of his facility with the English language:
'How come you are ignoring an invitation from another blogger who has challenged you numerous times and whose articles shredding your arguments to pieces are all over the web without a peep of a rebuttal from you?', it is clear why he won't debate you. He can't. He's incapable of it. He's barely literate. He would get his clock cleaned, his hat handed to him.
This sentence is almost as incomprehensible as some of the 'love mail' you get regularly.
BTW, I know of no literate adult in this country that uses 'how come' in standard speech and writing.
The more acceptable variant for 'how come', that used once one is older than say, age 10, is: 'why'.
I wish Robert would stick to the topics and skip the ad Hominems. I don't give a F if the opponent is a transvestite-- as any introductory logic class teaches, details that don't effect the argument-at-hand are distracting fallacies. If I wanted to spend my time considering personality and sexual preferences, I would go to a site that specializes in the subject. Robert is not an authority in fashion or sexual behavior, so skip it. Robert's defenses against his opponents' ad Hominems are justified because it bears on veracity of the opponents' other claims, but when he fires off his own ad Hominems, it greatly reduces his own standing as the more honorable participant.
FABULOUSLY BRILLIANT ARTICLE! These thugs must eventually wither and fall by the wayside under the light of truth.
According to this information at the link, his foundation is definately halal so when he finally screams "Aloha snackbar!" at detonation, he'll fit right in with the pearly boy-toys he's promised.
Judging by the pic from the link, halal make-up may be a BIG improvement.
*snort*
http://focusuk.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/muslim-friendly-make-up-launches-in-uk/
Tziona | October 24, 2010 8:25 AM | Reply
....Robert, perhaps Pamela or Marisol could explain to you about the differences between eye-shadow and eye-liner, if you're not to shy to ask :-)
Classic.
except that the "pearly boy-toys" are naturally white
"The fact that this guy is as queer as a two dollar bill makes it even more bizarre, given the supreme masculanity that Muslim men project to the world,"
Don't forget, in the twisted minds of mohammadan males they're not gay if 1)they're the top, 2)they take no pleasure from it and 3)the bottom looks like a girl.
Obviously, Rehab is the bottom.
And please, for the love of God and for the sake of my eyes and stomach stop showing the typically ugly and disgusting mohammadan porn.
Robert,
I have nothing but respect for your work, and in making this suggestion I don't mean to be malicious, but would I be wrong to detect a slight hypocrisy in your insistence that Danios of Loonwatch' reveal his real name before you debate him? The other conditions are perfectly reasonable, but how can you insist that 'Danios' reveal his name, as if it were obviously enough to disqualify the possibility of debate by itself, when you're absolutely respectful of the pseudonymous writers Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina, who do the same thing?
Granted, they have much, much, much better reasons for doing it, but I don't know that that's enough. I worry that if you maintain your stance on that you'll open yourself up to charges of hypocrisy from more malevolent sources, and if you'd relax this one requirement, those would be easy to deflect. In my experience, you are generally so scrupulous in not being hypocritical at all, in sticking to your principles and living by what you say, that I didn't want to let this one issue, which could give the jihadists ammo, pass you by.
Perhaps he needs the lipstick and eyeliner to go with his moobs: http://www.americansagainsthate.org/images/Ahmed_Rehab_Nude_1.jpg
OT:
{When there is a crisis -- such as a mass-exodus of Christians from the Muslim-Arab world -- simply blame it on the Jews! "Never let a serious crisis go to waste."}
Ayalon: 'Vatican Synod became a forum for Arab propagana'
By JPOST.COM STAFF AND ASSOCIATED PRESS
10/24/2010 17:39
Bishops demand that Israel accept UN resolutions calling for an end to "occupation" of Arab lands; Pope calls for religious freedom and peace in the Middle East.
Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon slammed the Vatican synod after bishops called for an end to the "occupation," in a statement released on Sunday.....
".....In reaction to the Vatican's criticism, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said: "We express our disappointment that this important Synod has become a forum for political attacks on Israel in the best history of Arab propaganda. The Synod was hijacked by an anti-Israel majority."
"We are especially appalled at the language used by Archbishop [Cyrille Salim] Bustros during his press conference," Ayalon remarked, referring to the archbishop whose committee drafted the statement. "We call on the Vatican to distant themselves from Archbishop Boutros' comments which are a libel against the Jewish People and the State of Israel and should not be construed as the Vatican's official position. These outrageous comments should not cast a shadow over the important relationship between the Vatican, the State of Israel and the Jewish People."
A Foreign Ministry spokesman criticized the bishops' statement that Israel shouldn't use the Bible to justify "injustices" against the Palestinians.
"This has never been a policy of any government in Israel so this position sounds particularly hollow," Yigal Palmor said Sunday. "Let he who has never sinned cast the fist stone."
Palmor also said Israel is the only Mideast country whose Christian population is growing, and called on Christians not to flee the region. "Israel views their presence in the Middle East as a blessing and regrets their decline in Arab countries," he said.
According to statistics he provided, there were some 151,700 Christians in Israel last year, compared with 132,000 in 1999 and 107,000 two decades ago....."
I would like to point out to sebjoeko and Istanbul_Chick that the correct American slang expression is "queer as a three dollar bill", as there currently is no three dollar bill in the United States. A two dollar bill is actual currency, and has been know to show up in cash drawers on occasion.
Because he's worth it?
Funky Child:
Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina live under Islam's death penalty for apostates.
"Danios of Loonwatch" does not. Indeed, no one at all is threatening him.
That's all.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Danio's alter ego Dave 742, posted here many times in the past...He tried to best posters here and failed...There is no way he can best Spencer...
What is he, a lesbian trapped in a man's body?
I don't think that's lipstick, Robert. I'm thinking it's either lip gloss or a good case of whisker burn from a lover.
I'm curious why he has chosen to publish a photo of himself half-naked (at least) if he is a spokesman for a religion that claims to value modesty so much.
But perhaps he is actually wearing a tube top or a woman's corset that just isn't visible in the photo.
Robert, I can agree with your request that "Danios of Loonwatch" come clean on his identity prior to any potential public debate. I believe it is a legitimate request.
Several weeks back I visited the "LW" site, as we have leftist (anti-Spencer / anti-Geller) member on one of our political discussion groups who in the past has posted articles from this anti-jihadwatch / anti-Spencer web site, stirring a good deal of debate as well as questions the member cannot answer. To be honest, I've not got the time to read this man's (or woman's) extensive rebuttals to claims you've made in your several books and articles. Nor do I have the time to read his extensive writings (or ramblings).
I did however find this one which interested me (though I've not read it in its entirety):
Title: "Robert Spencer is on the Ropes; Spencer’s Bumbling Reply to LoonWatch"
He begins with a critique of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades" which I have on audio. I hope to acquire a hard copy as I've got at least three of your books in print now.
Danios wrote, 'Chapter four of this book is entitled “Islam: Religion of Intolerance.” On p.47, he (Spencer) summarizes the chapter into three points:
He (Danios) attempts a lengthy rebuttal on the third point: "The idea that Jews fared better in Islamic lands than in Christian Europe is false." '
Unlike you Robert, I am not a scholar of either Islam or Christianity. I am a student; a beginner. It seems to me however, you are on much firmer ground when you educate the public on Islam, its teachings, its historic treatment of women, infidels, the life and the example of the prophet, etc., than when you defend the historic church as "a religion of peace." I cannot say any great world religion is historically been a religion of peace; not even my religion.
Nor can I unequivocally state, the Jews fared better historically under Christendom than we have under Islam. I do not believe your friend Bat Ye'or attempts to make this case in her writings, nor do I believe other credible scholars attempt to make this case.
Certainly, Jews fare much better in (nominally or overtly) Christian nation-states today than we do in Muslim nation-states, if (even) we are allowed to live in Muslim nation-states today (some / perhaps few).
The historic antipathy between the Catholic Church, the Vatican, the Jesuits, etc., and the Jews has been a volatile one (and well documented by scholars), as exemplified by the position the Vatican is taking even today against Israel's right to and legitimacy in our God-given land. This most recent Vatican statement is traditional "Replacement Theology" that has been responsible for much historic anti-Semitism. It seems to me, as a Catholic Robert (and a prominent one at that), you might at least respond to some of these baseless charges.
Quoting from one piece I read today: "'(Melkite Bishop) Cyril Salim Bustros escalated the situation by declaring that the original promises made by God to the children of Israel “were nullified by Christ. There is no longer a chosen people.”......The Catholic Church has for years been trying to repair its image as an institution steeped in anti-Semitism. But Bustros’ remarks make fairly clear that the Vatican remains as dedicated as ever to replacement theology - that teaching that says God has tossed aside the Jews, despite is irrevocable promises to them, and that “the Church” has instead inherited those promises.'
http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=22093
This is pretty harsh stuff coming from today's Church Robert, is it not?
Wildjew
Yes, and I utterly and unequivocally reject it. Archbishop Cyril Bustros's comments were as heretical as they were irresponsible and reckless, and I denounce them wholeheartedly. Am going to post about this asap.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Someone get this slimeball a shirt! (And a bag to put over his head would be nice.)
Miss Trixie
re the 'reversion' of Lauren Booth.
She's not a Useful Idiot; she's a Dozy Bint. That's what people like her - who convert to Islam or who, without actually going that far, still sing the praises of the hijab, etc. - are called over at the New English Review.
I wouldn't be surprised if NER gives her the 'Dozy Bint of the Week' award.
"And now for some irony. Spencer, you are claiming you are ready to debate anyone but that alas no one wants to debate you because no one can. But, is this actually true? Does the name Danios of Loonwatch ring a bell Spencer?" -- Rehab
Hmm, is Rehab also "Danios"? If so, then what a cowardly way of letting on that they are one in the same ...
This is what I do not understand and perhaps you do:
1) Doesn't this Vatican-sponsored Synod speak for the Vatican itself? For the Church? I have not seen any repudiation or clarification from the Vatican. Not yet. Pope Benedict participated in the Synod, did he not?
2) Is the statement historic church teaching, that (since Jesus came and died) God abrogated His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and their descendants, even though Jesus plainly said he did not come to "abolish" the LAW which is God's covenant with the sons of Jacob but also God's covenant with all of mankind, those who will join God's people and keep His covenant (Isaiah chapter 56)?
I spoke to our local priest - a man I have known for several years and worked with from time to time in the pro-life movement - on the matter of the land of Israel. He told me the Church holds there is no longer any notion "sacred geography," quoting from the fourth chapter of the book of John:
"Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers...."
According to this interpretation there is no longer any "holy" land; to the Church, Jerusalem and the 'Holy Land' have no relevance as sacred. Nor does it belong to any particular people by divine covenant.
This interpretation of the Christian bible is wholly at odds with the view that many conservative Christians and Evangelicals hold; those who support Israel's right to the land of Israel by divine covenant, according to the Hebrew Bible, the law and the prophets. Vatican believes otherwise?
I wonder if it is also traditional Church teaching, since the Jews have, since the late nineteenth century, been regathering en mass, back into our ancient land.
Then there is this from Vatican II:
"True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ;(13) still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is THE NEW PEOPLE OF GOD (emphasis mine), the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures...."
That the Jews are no longer corporately held guilty for the death of Christ was and is seen as a positive step by many, but that the Church is the "new people of God," this is historic supersessionism (Replacement Theology), that's been responsible for so much anti-Semitism down through the centuries, is it not?
English / Catholic historian Paul Johnson wrote, it is a "grudging document."
It is grudging, yes, or can be read that way, but in any case you must also note that it says "the Jews should not be presented as rejected...," as apparently Cyril did at this Synod.
Duh-Swami,
Don't you think Ali Sina of FFI just would love to have Danios, anonymously as can be, debating with him on his website?! Robert can tell Danios to go there.
Any way, as you said, Danios, Dave742, they can always visit this website and not be censured and only banned for certain words, but never opinions. Ahmed Rehab and Danios have no case.
DANIOS: THE RAGING BULL
Danios is a crazed, frustrated jihadist without a sword who murders Spencer over and over in his mind. It is clear from his recent furious post that Spencer has broken his brain. Spencer's refusal to debate him makes him more unhinged with the passage of time. If Danios keeps it up he could suffer a massive stroke as there could be serious psycho-physical consequences to such rage.
Wildjew
Here you go
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/10/israeli-fm-catholic-bishops-synod-has-become-a-forum-for-political-attacks-on-israel-in-the-best-his.html
Cordially
Robert Spencer
I have had problems (on other blogs) where people denounce what they assert I wrote, but what I in fact never did write. They do not cut and paste me words in those cases because I never wrote what they think they read.
I am meticulous about citing posts that I take issue with, so that it is clear that I am responding to what was written, and not my interpretation of what was written.
Robert fights this battle every day and the fact that he links to his opponents' blogs and posts is testimony to his intellectual honesty.
What are the chances that Rehab would link to this thread and respond to it point-by-point???
Zero (you know, that number that the Arabs "invented.")
Good. Thanks. If these quotes are inaccurate, perhaps someone will offer a clarification.
When a Chief Rabbi or former Chief Rabbi in Israel offers a religious opinion that is clearly contrary to the Torah, as a Jew I have felt obligated to speak out in opposition.
Wildjew --
It's slightly absurd that Jews should be concerned about getting validation from the Catholic church or anyone else, anymore than the Catholic church is worried about getting validation from Jews or Muslims. If you understand and accept the Jewish tradition and the deep bond between G-d and the Jewish people you realize that it is unequivocal.
Just like the Muslims had to deal with the politics of invalidating all that came before them in order to have something special and better, the Catholic church had to do the same thing towards Judaism.
Too bad that the Catholics have decided to go this route at this time -- for me it is strictly political maneuvering -- they are hoping that this anti-Jewish interpretation might help their cause for Christians living in Muslim lands, instead of confronting Islam. That wouldn't work either I suspect. But I honestly don't think this is going to help Christians at all.
Looking forward to the scholarly analysis by Robert.
"Don't forget, in the twisted minds of mohammadan males they're not gay if 1)they're the top, 2)they take no pleasure from it and 3)the bottom looks like a girl."
No. As long as they're married (with children) they can't be homosexual, no matter how many boyfriends they have.....
Jamadagnii, thanks for your insight. You are right. Israel should Not be concerned about getting validation from the Catholic church or anyone else. I'm not concerned about getting validation. Nor am I concerned that nations and peoples recognize our right to exist. Were I advising Israel's prime minister, I would urge him to cease asking that the Muslim world recognize Israel's right to exist or her right to exist as a "Jewish" state. As you say, Israel already has validation.
The principle that applies here is the following law:
'You shall not hate your fellow countryman (brother) in your heart; you shall surely reprove your neighbor, and shall not incur sin because of him'. (Levitcus chapter 19)
I believe this is a moral obligation upon each and every one of us. Don't you?
Robert reproved his neighbor, though I am not certain where his statement will appear if it does appear. Maybe tomorrow?
Wildjew
Not tomorrow. Today. I posted the link above, but here it is again.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/10/israeli-fm-catholic-bishops-synod-has-become-a-forum-for-political-attacks-on-israel-in-the-best-his.html
Cordially
Robert Spencer
More on homosexuality in Islam:
Gays Forced to Marry to Protect Family Honor (BBC)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11613992
When the exorcism doesn't work, Muslim parents in the UK force their homosexual 'children' into heterosexual marriage. One victim recounts her ordeal.
Mr. Spencer:
It is a shame that you had to lower yourself to references about what you believe to be Mr. Rehab's sexual orientation, and by extension, his manhood in general. Was there not sufficient other information with which to refute his statements?
Perhaps out of ignorance of the complexities of human behavior and of history, in your mind and surely in the mind of many of your readers, being "metrosexual" is code being for less than a man.
You have repeatedly criticized the use of ad hominem attacks in the past especially when they were directed against you or one of your allies. Yet in this case, you engage in just that sort of name calling. It is also evident that you allow your commenters to go on extensively about Mr. Rehab's presumed sexually without any warning or deletion. (And all of this simply because the man is wearing blue sunglasses in some old photograph.)
Please remember that there are those of us who are unashamedly gay, pro West and wholeheartedly anti-Islam.
Kafir Nonbeliever
You're seeing things that aren't there.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Robert, this is one of the best articles on JW, that I've read to date.
This is a bit OT, but since "Loonwatch" and one of its authors, "Danios," is mentioned here in relation to talk about this or that person allegedly dodging debates, I thought I'd post another reminder/notice to some of Loonwatch's readers who sometimes check the comments section here. They can read my rebuttal of Danios' sweeping claim that the word "dhimmis in no way, shape, or form means “guilty” people." Here's the link to a brief selected summary of my rebuttal to Danios' sweeping denials about the meaning or meanings of the words dhimma and dhimmis (posted by Kinana of Khaybar | August 24, 2010):
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/05/egyptian-convert-endures-life-at.html#comment-701328
If you want to see one of the multiple examples of Danios simply making up allegations, read this:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/05/egyptian-convert-endures-life-at.html#comment-679781
Kinana of Khaybar | June 19, 2010
xenturion,
I had to look it up, too. My first thought was, "Oh! Like Boy George..."
I like days when I can add a new word to my modest vocabulary.
Oh, No!
MrsJ, I didn't think it could get any worse, but you burst my little bubble.
(And all of this simply because the man is wearing blue sunglasses in some old photograph.)
He's wearing more than blue sunglasses, KN ...he's also wearing foundation & lipstick. Sorry, but if a guy in his position allows photographs to be taken of himself where he's made-up to look like a fool, then he's fair game for such fodder. You seem to lack a sense of humor ...c'mon, this is funny stuff.
"The flower of Islam"---hahaha!
Rehab was on O'Reilly this evening and tried to talk over him and avoided answering questions.
He came off as angry, evasive and argumentitive. Fail.
I can see why he won't debate, he's no good at it.
Hasnt Muhammad said that his three most vavourite things were 1.Parfumes 2.Women and 3.Allah But Muhammad cant actualy be called metrosexual since he most surly was bisexual. (Sadly Father Zakaria Butros has missed Muhammads "foundness" for a 16 year old boy named Osama, when he talked about Muhammads perversions.
OK, so you heard it - Robert Spencer agrees to debate Danios, but it has to be in person. Considering all the tough talk from Danios, this seems like a reasonable request.
Here is Danios' reply:
Did you see that? He chickened out.
He can draw Hitler mustaches, and talk smack all he wants from the safety of a computer keyboard, even issuing challenges, but when the challenge is accepted he doesn't give satisfaction.
You got punked, Danios.